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.

 

World Population projected to reach 7 billion in 2011

page: 3
2
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 15 2009 @ 04:40 AM
link   




posted on Aug, 15 2009 @ 04:50 AM
link   
This is an interesting demographic-related song (if there is such a thing)

Unfortunately copyright holder doesn't want to allow embedding so you'll have to link there.

Close the advertisement to see English subtitles




[edit on 15-8-2009 by VinceP1974]



posted on Aug, 15 2009 @ 06:17 AM
link   
Here in Australia we are trying to boost the population.
But personally, I like the notion of 21 million people in an area the size of the USA.


My point with this is that we could spaciously move the world population to a single continent(not just Australia)

No, not Australia... at all.


I just don't understand how you think NEVER implementing a birth control program is realistic? China has already done it. They had to. Who could say that they haven't saved themselves by doing so. This part of your argument is especially troubling for me.....I mean really it's a matter of cause and effect....what do you think will happen if people relentlessly reproduce......?

FYI, most of your arguments were spoken about 150 years ago, then again about 65 years ago, then again with WWF now. They were wrong - as population goes up geometrically, so does productivity. It's not that population control won't happen, it's that we DON'T WANT IT TO happen. If the worlds most powerful people wanted you to jump off a cliff then you would probably do it.


People want to blame selfish people for reproduction, because they know thats the reality.

People reproduce far more in developing nations. Either developing nations either have ethnicities that are selfish, or, these countries have social, historical, environmental, economic or technological reasons that cause these people to reproduce at such high rates. So instead of fixing these underlying problems, these people want to limit and CONTROL people while they live in mere poverty, blaming THEM (for being war torn for example) because they are "selfish"? If the billionaires of the world want to blame people for doing what god created them to do, then they have only themselves to blame.


It's not silly...I asked a girl once why she wanted to have a baby and she said....because she just wanted a little version of herself....that's kind of sickening really....

A girl... as in... a 9 year old? If not then the correct terminology would be women.


True. But it's because of selfishness too, especially in places like latin america, and the USA. Many places in asia too. Everywhere most likely....go take a look around...

The majority of industrialized nations have stagnant populations, actually.


But overpopulation is an issue anyways.p

As the Darwin family, Huxley family, the IUCN, WWF (lead by former S.S officer), 1001 club, and Eugenics Education Society also known as UNESCO, all said, decades, or even over 100 years, ago. The most scary part is that they even got attention, and then they managed to commit or play a part in all types off atrocities, forced sterilization using microwaves, for example, which are just examples of why government forced population control should not happen.


All that waste isn't coming from the repressed nations you keep referring to, it comes from first world nations. One child in the US will create far more waste than one child in rwanda.

Rwanda is not close to the Pacific Ocean? In any case letting first world nations populations collapse would well, collapse the country.


ah captain obvious, knew you'd show up in this thread somewhere....

+

so people who see selfishness as a problem sicken you?
you're saying you're pro selfishness then?

No, but Internet experts spouting off personal attacks bothers me.


[edit on 15/8/2009 by C0bzz]



posted on Aug, 23 2009 @ 01:29 PM
link   
reply to post by C0bzz
 





Here in Australia we are trying to boost the population. But personally, I like the notion of 21 million people in an area the size of the USA.


me too, which is why i advocate reducing populations all over the world. It just makes sense. It what a responsible society would do.



FYI, most of your arguments were spoken about 150 years ago, then again about 65 years ago, then again with WWF now.

and yet, china has been implementing population control for decades, which tells us, that times do indeed change, and that overpopulation is real. China is just ahead of everyone else.



as population goes up geometrically, so does productivity.

to a point, is there a downside to this? sweat shops? labor camps? I mean how many more assistant deputy director of interim operations(or other meaningless generic job title) can we have in the world?




It's not that population control won't happen, it's that we DON'T WANT IT TO happen.

point? I guess you agree with me then.



If the worlds most powerful people wanted you to jump off a cliff then you would probably do it.

what?



People reproduce far more in developing nations.

yep, perhaps you missed you missed THE VERY NEXT SENTENCE OF MY POST. it says..."Especially, in more industrialized countries." your very selective on which quotes of mine you use in your posts...I on the other hand dissect and respond to every relevant sentence of your posts....pwned.



Either developing nations either have ethnicities that are selfish

Ethnicities that are selfish? I hope this isn't a subtle attempt at making me look racist. That would be very uncouth.



these countries have social, historical, environmental, economic or technological reasons that cause these people to reproduce at such high rates.

captain obvious.....



So instead of fixing these underlying problems, these people want to limit and CONTROL people while they live in mere poverty, blaming THEM (for being war torn for example) because they are "selfish"?

be great if there were a magic wand we could wave to make all those problems go away, so all these poor people in busted nations could get to our level and start cranking out kids for truly selfish reason. Well since there's no wand yet, population control would seem to be the best way to avert a total social disaster that many of these nations are headed for.



If the billionaires of the world want to blame people for doing what god created them to do, then they have only themselves to blame.

what god created them to do? yeah, yer not the least bit selfish....






A girl... as in... a 9 year old? If not then the correct terminology would be women.


get real bro. sorry if my vernacular doesn't meet your nit picky standards. she was 20, a girl.



The majority of industrialized nations have stagnant populations, actually.

I been around the world, everyone's having kids. I live in the fasted growing industrialized nation in the world, you live in australia. I clearly have a very different take on this than you, I see selfishness. Take a trip to ikea if you wanna see what I mean. Consumers creating consumers to consume more garbage....





As the Darwin family, Huxley family, the IUCN, WWF (lead by former S.S officer), 1001 club, and Eugenics Education Society also known as UNESCO, all said, decades, or even over 100 years, ago. The most scary part is that they even got attention, and then they managed to commit or play a part in all types off atrocities, forced sterilization using microwaves, for example, which are just examples of why government forced population control should not happen.

so this is you response to one sentence you picked out of the middle of one of my thoughts... what are you new here? I agree with everything you posted. look I'm not here to argue who should or shouldn't be in charge of population reduction. But powerful people, many of which work within powerful governments will most likely be what reduces world populations for better or worse....I mean, thats just str8 logic.




Rwanda is not close to the Pacific Ocean? In any case letting first world nations populations collapse would well, collapse the country.

uh...exactly my point. and yes a country's population collapse would collapse their respective countries on many levels...read over my posts and find where I advocate a population collapse. or are you just stating the obvious again, captain?



No, but Internet experts spouting off personal attacks bothers me.

people who jump to conclusions about what I think and then then state obvious facts in attempt to sound bright bother me....

WAAAAAHHHH MOMMY!! Liquid called me captain obvious again!!!





posted on Aug, 23 2009 @ 04:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by liquidsmoke206
me too, which is why i advocate reducing populations all over the world. It just makes sense. It what a responsible society would do.


It's happening in every EU country, Russia, Japan. But for the immigration in the EU, the absolute population would be in decline.

Luckily they allowed millions of rapidly reproducing devout Muslims come to colonize them.

So the EUtopians have heeded your depopulation request. They will be followed by sharia-law imposing Muslims.

Happy?






and yet, china has been implementing population control for decades, which tells us, that times do indeed change, and that overpopulation is real. China is just ahead of everyone else.


That policy is going to self-destruct China because of the gender imbalance.

You seem very uninformed and totally oblivious to the consequences of what you're seeking.



new topics

top topics
 
2
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join