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.

 

Furious Reaction to Sick Editorial Calling for Global One Child Dictatorship

page: 3
14
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 24 2010 @ 07:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shere Khaan

Originally posted by Deny Arrogance
The absolute highest birth rates in the world are around 50/1000 or 5/100 or 1/2 child for every 10 people. The world average is around 20/1000.

en.wikipedia.org...


What you mean is net population increase through birth rates. incidentally a 5 per 100 rate equates to a doubling of the population every 14 years. The average world growth rate of 2% means in 35 years the population will have doubled and we will need twice as much food as we produce now.

Imagine if we actually made it equitable and every person on the planet lived like a westerner. No amount of resource use effiency is going to make that consumption possible. As it is we are burning through non renewable resources.

There's really only two options. Stop unchecked population growth or cut down on consumption.


Could you please break that down for me. Did you factor in annual death rates?




posted on Jan, 24 2010 @ 07:26 PM
link   
Well why don't they just engineer a virus which could only be spread through sexual intercourse and distribute it across poor nations which cannot afford birth control and prison populations ???


oh they did ?? .... k, I got nothing.



posted on Jan, 24 2010 @ 10:04 PM
link   
Preemptively: I am not trolling. The following is my sincere opinion, negative reactions be damned.

I agree with them. There should be global population control. There must be unless we want our grandchildren (not that any of them will be my descendants if I can help it) to drown in human filth and choke on poison gas.

The human species has become little better than a locust swarm, lost and purposeless, perpetually embroiled in provincial tribal disputes and meaningless assertion of their monkey egos. We will never grow into a mature species, fit for freedom from our prison planet, unless we can undermine the sovereignty of nations and align under the banner of a single global society. And that will never happen unless we can learn to control our biological reproduction. At some point, we must take responsibility for the genetic future of our species and accept that conventional reproduction will eventually turn us into a race of weaklings. The answer is wholesale genomic engineering and controlled artificial gestation. The idea of an accidental pregnancy would be a thing of the past. Every new human being would be created with a purpose and a place in society. To me that is a beautiful idea.

And of course, there is massive potential for misuse of such technology for political and ideological ends. But that is a chance we will have to take. Every new technology has a dark side. Imagine how it would be if the harnessing of electricity had been outlawed early on because of the possibility it might be used to power weapons. No technology is inherently evil. Case in point, nuclear power vs. nuclear weapons.

Global population control is the first step toward humanity taking responsibility for itself not as a directionless mob of naked apes, but as the collective steward of a living planet. Technology has gotten us into the mess we're in today, and it can get us back out... but only if we take sufficiently bold steps in pursuit of that solution.



posted on Jan, 25 2010 @ 12:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Deny Arrogance

Originally posted by Shere Khaan

Originally posted by Deny Arrogance
The absolute highest birth rates in the world are around 50/1000 or 5/100 or 1/2 child for every 10 people. The world average is around 20/1000.

en.wikipedia.org...


What you mean is net population increase through birth rates. incidentally a 5 per 100 rate equates to a doubling of the population every 14 years. The average world growth rate of 2% means in 35 years the population will have doubled and we will need twice as much food as we produce now.

Imagine if we actually made it equitable and every person on the planet lived like a westerner. No amount of resource use effiency is going to make that consumption possible. As it is we are burning through non renewable resources.

There's really only two options. Stop unchecked population growth or cut down on consumption.


Could you please break that down for me. Did you factor in annual death rates?


Here is the net population growth rate as of 2008 from your glorious CIA factbook.

www.umsl.edu...

Here is the birthrates

www.umsl.edu...

You will find some countries with negative growth rate but you'll find the average growth rate is 1.2% or a doubled population in 58 years.

How many centuries do you think our arable land and easy mineral resources will last even with the current population as economic equality spreads? Not to mention the dreaded "oil" word which is used in far more than cars.



posted on Jan, 25 2010 @ 02:23 PM
link   
The only place you could pass laws to this effect are first world or total dictatorships like China was when it passed.

The places that are having problems with population growth will not get on board.

So essentially, they are debating killing off - us. And only us.

The UN is debating a law that would only be enforced in nations that already have population that isn't replacing itself.

They are debating getting rid of you.



posted on Jan, 25 2010 @ 02:36 PM
link   
Ok, fine.

But leaders should set an example, so every upper-class family with more than one child should pick one and execute the others.

Every minister who condemns birth control should be immediately shot.

John & Kate Plus Eight should be be downsized to plus one.

This should be retroactive to be truly effective so if you currently have a brother or sister, get them before they get you. You can keep one niece or nephew of course.



posted on Jan, 25 2010 @ 03:50 PM
link   
reply to post by apacheman
 


I generally enjoy witticisms, but I find myself asking: is (even black) humour really appropriate to this topic? I can only reiterate what we are dealing with here:



Originally posted by pause4thought


Holdren follows mentor's lead

...As recently as 2007, Holdren gave a speech to the American Association for the Advancement of Science in which his last footnote included Brown as one of the "several late mentors" to whom Holdren was thankful for "insight and inspiration."


Source article

So where exactly are we going with this?-


Holdren has echoed Brown's call for global government by advocating the United States should surrender sovereignty to a "Planetary Regime" armed with sufficient military power to enforce population limits on nations as a means of preventing a wide range of perceived dangers from global eco-disasters involving Earth's natural resources, climate, atmosphere and oceans.

On page 260 of his 1954 book "The Challenge of Man's Future," Brown concluded "population stabilization and a world composed of completely independent sovereign states are incompatible."


(source as above)

And here's the crunch:


Brown even contemplates infanticide as a permissible solution to overpopulation in extreme situations, writing that "if we cared little for human emotions and were willing to introduce a procedure which most of us would consider to be reprehensible in the extreme, all excess children could be disposed of much as excess puppies and kittens are disposed of at the present time."


(same article)


I'm sorry, but I fail to see the funny side of this issue.



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join