It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Save the Planet: Have Fewer Kids

page: 3
17
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 03:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Sliadon
 


I do have misunderstood your point, probably because of my English(I'm a French speaking Belgian^^), I really thought you were one of those paranoiac NWO poster and did not read all then I apologise
.

If really they are behind this, I do have a good feelings in seeing those evil twisting their(if that is the case, what I doubt) murdering behaviour into a "green" evil, it is better to somehow educate people than killing them with chemtrails, mutated disease, etc...........

Also I don't think having more elderly people then younger ones is at their advantage, 50 angry young black block supporter will easily kick the ass of 200 old riot cops, even with guns, the time they get the weapon out, aim the guy and shot him, he'll get 5 Molotov cocktails on his head.

It is a bit exaggerated but at the end and if their plan is really to get more old than young people that is what will happen, and also the young will become an adult too and then not sticking to their plan.





p.s.: Does I understood your point this time?




posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 03:23 PM
link   
reply to post by ufopunx
 


Yeah,

And don't worry I didn't take offense before
I am to an extent, a believer in the NWO and think that there are some very powerful people running things that we don't see happen.

I really am more apt to believe that they would use biological agents. A thread recently of mine discusses this here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

However, I don't rule out any possibility. That being said, I don't rule out the possibility that this is an imaginative speculation. I have chuckled before to friends saying that knowing the government does get flags if certain words are within parameters of others they will read it. And that someday they may stumble across one of mine due to key words being said in an unrelated manner and laugh at my level of silliness.

On ATS we are all conspiracy nuts. I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess you like UFOs (geez Sliadon what gave that away?
) Some people would label you crazy for thinking life exists outside of our planet (Don't worry, I'm with you on it).

Regardless (tangent aside), the issue with wiping out the young is that the old can't procreate. My theory holds many "if's" to be true.

"If" the NWO exists, and "if" they were using Green Revolution to target the biggest threat to them-- the educated-- what could be done?

-Sliadon



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 03:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Sliadon
 


The emulation concept is a good theory, in fact I hadn't considered it yet at all. Actually I suspect scientists would target the affluent and intelligent because they more often than not have the power to mount larger campaigns to convey messages and ideas. They tend to be the ones in places of power who can make decisions that change the face of society or create laws.



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 03:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Helig
 


Thanks for the feedback!

I'm not hell bent on my theory, just tossed it out there. So previous human experience gives credence to the possibility of emulation being the main reason.

Only problem is it still leaves out why the researchers felt the need to explain themselves...


-Sliadon



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 04:15 PM
link   
OP is terribly mistaken, it is really a good idea to have fewer kids, there is no doubt about it.

One or at most two are enough, more and you are doing a disservice to the mother nature, to the country and to mankind in general. Too few people are able to understand it, especially the ones in developing countries, who are illiterate or still in the clutches of religion.

Think about the subhuman conditions in India, China and Africa. People in these nations are forced to live lives of animals, because of overpopulation. Human life has no value there (or anywhere) as that which is in plenty drops in value, a natural law.

Although it is not applicable in case of rich countries (where is population is actually declining or steady), but they are rich simply because they prefer quality over quantity.

It would have been alarming to see someone asking you not to over breed if there were a shortage of people, but earth is already full to its brim, now the only way is to limit the number of people else nature will automatically wipe us out. Balance is the essence....



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 04:15 PM
link   
double post

[edit on 4/8/2009 by rocksolidbrain]



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 04:25 PM
link   
reply to post by rocksolidbrain
 


Please go back through and actually read the thread and you will see that I am for moderation with people having children and what my actual purpose is in creating this thread as I am not going to reiterate my stance on it for the umpteenth time...

Thanks.

-Sliadon



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 04:25 PM
link   
This is nothing new, just a new wrapper. Population control of the underclasses has been the point of abortion on demand from day one. Planned Parenthood arose from the eugenics movement. Any 'green' wrapper is merely a new twist.

I do not see how 'false flag' in the title has anything to do with this however, as international conflict is not directly involved.



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 04:30 PM
link   
check out this article: Time for a reproductive tax?

here is a quote from the recent editorial "All we have to do is get the folks who are breeding like bunny rabbits to exercise a little restraint.

But how? We can round them up and sterilize them. We can ship them off to Wyoming and tell them not to come back until their kids are grown. Or, we can do the sensible thing for the sake of our schools, and our planet, and establish a cap and trade program on kids.

You get two children free. But if you want a third, it's going to cost you. You'll have to buy a child credit and show your proof of purchase at the delivery room door. " ~Casey Jones



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 04:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
Great Idea


Only it won't work because certain groups of people breed like rabbits

and will never listen to the voice of reason

When the population doubles again to 12 billion people will be looking for more drastic measures

Maybe we can ship them off world to the colonies


Moon? Mars? Epsilon Eridani?


Sadly You're right,

I've been arguing to cut our breeding down for over 25 years. And yeah, I've never had any desire to produce more humans. And never will. And I don't really understand why people want children? Unless you're mega rich (in which case you don't care about anyone else, your children or any other life on the planet)



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
Great Idea


Only it won't work because certain groups of people breed like rabbits

and will never listen to the voice of reason


You may have inadvertantly stumbled upon the conspiracy angle here... assuming there is one.

It's the "green thinking" middle and upper classes who would consider having fewer kids through this rationalization, and by "certain groups of people" I assume you're referring to the uneducated/lower income populace (aka: uninformed, easily manipulated, and without the leisure time to consider questioning authority). This is the exact populace that tptb arguably desire. By curbing the middle-upper class birth rates, and letting the uneducated/lower income populace continue to breed like bunnies, we'd end up with a much easier to control population. A populace far too focused on putting food on the table to worry about what tptb are up to!

I knew if I waited long enough FF and I would finally agree on something!


[edit on 8/4/09 by redmage]



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 04:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sliadon
On ATS we are all conspiracy nuts. I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess you like UFOs (geez Sliadon what gave that away?
) Some people would label you crazy for thinking life exists outside of our planet (Don't worry, I'm with you on it).


People call me crazy because a lot of things but your guess is good, I'm a witness of the Belgian triangle and since this day, which I'll never forget with 3 others case of unknown flying stuff, I know we are not alone, few strange things happened to me since this day so I can tell them what have seen and have people to back me up as their where with me ( my mother, my brother and 25 peoples at a neighbour's birthday party who alert us by screaming all together 'LOOK THE UFO IN THE SKY'.
This event is gold for ufology and this is one I can say is TRUE, so at the end they think I'm crazy but not that much, it give a better image of myself




And that someday they may stumble across one of mine due to key words being said in an unrelated manner and laugh at my level of silliness.


ROFL, I thought I had an imaginative brains but yours seems to be fine too
,
anyway, I do believe in NWO but I don't think everything said on it is true, I don't believe the evil part with Satanism and stuff but they sure have murderous behaviour, that's why if those theories are true then I would be glad to see them turning in a kind of eco-terrorist than keep their traditional genocide Muslim terrorist style.




Regardless (tangent aside), the issue with wiping out the young is that the old can't procreate. My theory holds many "if's" to be true.


Forget clonage sliadon

One less if



Now about your theory, if they have more educated people than dumb people, educated people will start to think and realise the bad things happening in our world which means the mess the NWO is doing, and this it's happening right know, to counter that they'll need to control somehow the educated one to be sure they keep fighting for them but this is very dangerous, maybe too dangerous for them, when the educated will see they are stronger mentally and physically that's gonna be the NNWO (new new world order^^).
With that in mind I don't think it will be better for us maybe at start, but we know what human kind do with power when he get it, especially when it's the king of the highest power you can get on earth, the control of the planet and its population, I just hope you are wrong there, please tell me you are always wrong



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 04:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by brodyism
check out this article: Time for a reproductive tax?

here is a quote from the recent editorial "All we have to do is get the folks who are breeding like bunny rabbits to exercise a little restraint.

But how? We can round them up and sterilize them. We can ship them off to Wyoming and tell them not to come back until their kids are grown. Or, we can do the sensible thing for the sake of our schools, and our planet, and establish a cap and trade program on kids.

You get two children free. But if you want a third, it's going to cost you. You'll have to buy a child credit and show your proof of purchase at the delivery room door. " ~Casey Jones


You beat me to it, only I didn't know there was an article on it. I was going to say that I predict a child tax in the very near future. Anyone with over 2 children will be taxed.
These kind of things always start out as a "suggestion". They are actually softening us up for the kill.



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 04:59 PM
link   
reply to post by brodyism
 


Star for you my friend! Excellent connection made right there.

The fact that it is suggested sends shivers down my spine. I said it earlier, and I will say it again that I am for us doing something about the population growing so rapidly and the issues we will face, but taxes like that are not the answer...


reply to post by Daz3d-n-Confus3d
 




They are actually softening us up for the kill.


Kind-of funny how the "coincidences" keep piling up and its hard to write them off after a certain amount of time... That or we are all just losing it


-Sliadon



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 05:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Daz3d-n-Confus3d
 



On one side I don't think people need more taxes BUT on the other people are getting money by making children, now if we tell them "if you want more kids you are going to pay for it" they sure will think about it twice before get the third screaming midget, not a bad idea but depend how it is applied.

[edit on 8/4/09 by ufopunx]



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 05:08 PM
link   
reply to post by ufopunx
 


To be completely honest, my mind overlooked that angle of cloning. I never thought to bring it into the equation, I was simply addressing it from an issue of having less of a young population to deal with.



I just hope you are wrong there, please tell me you are always wrong



Haven't been around here long enough to have statistics either way about being dead-on or cold as ice. I sure hope I'm wrong on my Swine Flu threads and say so in there. Same goes for here. Sadly, only time will tell for both.

Hopefully in 6 months time you can make a thread called "Remember the time Sliadon said..." and we can all post in there times of my silliness and have a good laugh!


-Sliadon



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 05:10 PM
link   
reply to post by redmage
 


I agree with you. That is why I was stating earlier my skepticism as to why they would target this at the people who are already educated and less likely to reproduce "like bunnies."

I mentioned earlier in a reply to FlyersFan to check out "Idiocracy" if you have not before. That is how much we are regressing as a society.



A populace far too focused on putting food on the table to worry about what tptb are up to!


That is a good maybe. I still think my statement earlier stands ground as a possibility too.



Whether it be "Green Products," or the next Miley Cyrus album, or the next tabloid sensation, they will keep us busy and occupied while they twist their dark narrative.


Maybe it will be both? Who knows what "it" is and I'm sure that TPTB don't care, so long as the masses are pacified they can't interfere...

-Sliadon



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 05:15 PM
link   
more population control in the Utah news today:
By Mary Richards

SALT LAKE CITY -- A Salt Lake Tribune editorial says three or more children should be taxed extra to pay for school funding. Oregon State University statisticians say limiting a family to two kids keeps down your carbon footprint.

Sutherland Institute spokesman Jeff Reynolds says hogwash.

"There are so many benefits for having a husband, wife, children, that our society benefits as a result," he said.

The Tribune editorial writer called his two children accidents. Reynolds says that's sad.

Reynolds says he doesn't think Utahns will agree with the editorial. He also doesn't believe the Oregon State arguments for limiting family size.

He says, "For the environmental argument to even make sense, you would have to believe that climate change is taking place, and that's clearly debatable."

Other studies show that countries controlling their populations are suffering. Russia, England, Japan and others are not replacing their current populations, leading to a glut of older people with no incoming workforce to support them.

Numbers from the University of Utah's Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR) show that Utah, once the leader in the nation for fertility rates, is trending now toward the national rate. Utah is now a 2.4 or 2.5. The nation is at a 2.1 fertility rate, which is a replacement level. In the 1960s Utah was in the 5s and 6s.
Click on image to make larger.

The BEBR says Utah's population is still very young, but this will change because people born when fertility rates were higher are living longer. We are set in just a few generations to see more people over the age of 60 than school age children, and a minority/majority change-up as well.

E-mail: mrichards@ksl.com



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 05:16 PM
link   
reply to post by ufopunx
 




Hehe I had a little chuckle at your comment (don't worry not at your expense) just at people getting money to have kids. There definitely are those out there who have sensational amounts of children and get endorsements and benefit from it, but for the majority of people having kids is not a money making enterprise.

In fact those little Rugrats cost a lot

You can go on google and find a bunch of calculators that will tell you approximate costs based on how much you want to spoil them vs being frugal, but it seems about $250,000 through age 17 is the average...

moneycentral.msn.com...


-Sliadon



posted on Aug, 4 2009 @ 05:50 PM
link   
I do agree to an extent that Birth Control may be a good idea to fix some issues. But our problem isn't running out of land, the problem is not enough resources to sustain our increasing population. I believe its our way of living that is the problem we rely heavily on oil and coal for energy which is running out, we need to switch to alternative / renewable energies.
IMO That would take away control from the PTB so they don't want that, an increasing population means we have no choice but to find alternative energies and methods, so the PTB want to keep the population capped so they stay in control.

Maybe the whole "Climate Change" and "Economic Crisis" plays a part in the way of people not being able to have kids??







 
17
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join