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.

 

I support the so-called depopulation agenda

page: 7
33
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 07:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phedreus
I Do believe that you have it bas ackward. The problem right now is the poor marginal people of the world population who are reproducing like rabbits; while the more advanced and superior cultures are seeing their birthrates fall. The problem is not that there are too many people in the world, but rather that there are too many nonproductive people in the world trying to live off a dwindling producing class. ....

Thanks Phedreus, I think your post deserves a star, though I’m not totally agree with details.

We have large scale experiments conducted around us, we can lear from them. Speaking of Chinese, once they declared a war on sparrows, killed them off, to improve the grain harvest or something. In the end they ended up worse off.

The problem is not in population control but who controls it. All you need to do is to leave people alone, or at least have a fair system, and all will be well. Give some credit to our ecosystem that existed for some time before we claimed it as ours and will exist for some time after we're gone. Instead of jumping to conclusions about overpopulation, global warming and other global nonsense we really should take time to learn and understand our environment and ourselves. There are so many things that could go horribly wrong by our messing about with population in any direction, over- or under-. Any alarms of this sort usually come from vested interest groups who intend to control the movement if it picks up for who knows what reasons.

No little group should decide how the bulk of the system should behave. We are too stupid for large scale control of anything, besides there is no need for it. It has been tried with financial systems and markets, politburo planning of production, mass centralized farming and who knows what else. Just to put things into perspective, physicists cannot directly describe interaction between more than two items ( n-body problem (n ≥ 3)), it is only done by using math tricks. We don’t understand beyond two! In other words, the best of us have no clue how the large system behaves and self regulates. My point is, don’t try to break things you have no clue how to fix unless you have a lot of those things and you're breaking them in order to understand them, and the price is not too high (morally, financially or otherwise).

We live in a self regulating system which will work ok as long as 5 arrogant bastards are not allowed to direct the evolution of this system. Anyone who coded wolf and rabbit simulation ( see one of numerous examples here ) in their first year can tell you the answer to this moronic obsession with control. Once the system wobbles around the equilibrium (which in our case it is) it will sort itself out, unless asteroid hits the planet or 5 stupid fu&£rs think they are so smart that the world needs their help. I am of course talking about none of the participants of this forum. Some people here just explore the idea and were duped into this fallacy. Just don't fix it if it aint broke. Listen to wise men throughout the ages, they say, one should mind his own business and any changes he wishes to do must not go outside his realm.

Make somebody happy today. Mind your own business. ~Ann Landers

Just remember, there's a right way and a wrong way to do everything and the wrong way is to keep trying to make everybody else do it the right way. ~M*A*S*H, Colonel Potter

Practical life teaches us that people may differ and that both may be wrong: it also teaches us that people may differ and both be right. Anchor yourself fast in the latter faith, or the former will sweep your heart away. ~Augustus William Hare and Julius Charles Hare, Guesses at Truth, by Two Brothers, 1827




posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 07:09 PM
link   
I feel that the earth does have the capacity to carry us all. When I drive past huge houses that only two people live in, vacant parking lots, land that is just fenced off that has nothing on it but grass, prisons, ect, I always ask myself why all this wasted land?

Not to mention the money being spent on war, weapons and other items that we don't particularly need right now, we could be using that money to fund colonization on the moon and other bodies in orbit. Granted humans are a destructive species but its past the point of destruction now. Now its Greedstruction, yes i just made that word up. I can't stomach being near huge houses, they are just so unneccesary to me. I mean the land that those houses take up could be broken down to several nice houses with enough land for a garden.

Depopulation isn't a solution, it's trying to put a band aid on a severed arm while your doctor watches and snickers at your futile attempt.



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 07:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Iamherefornow
 


Blame that on the socialists and the government handouts that encourage it. As long as they reward people for bad behavior they will keep breeding to get their Mothers Day Checks.

That does not change the fact that the US population would be shrinking if not for the people pouring over the borders. The overpopulation problem has nothing to do with the Western World.

If you care, really care, pack your bags and sell everything you own and go to where the problem is and help them. Otherwise?



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 07:12 PM
link   
Overpopulation is probably the greatest problem on earth. Earth can sustain a human population of 6,8 billion people. More people could live a happy life on this planet, but we would have to alter our values, expectations and standard of living. With our wasteful consumption and mindless exploitation humans are diminishing the quality of our ecosystems.

The ecological footprint is a method of measuring resource consumption and waste output compared to the renewable capacity of nature. It represents the amount of productive land area needed to produce the resources (food, energy and materials) and to absorb the wastes produced by an individual. It is usually measured in hectares needed. Here a table in which countries are ordered in correspondence to their ecological footprint. If we want to leave future generations a healthy planet, we have to reduce our ecological footprint.

But to do that, we have to abandon our new gods - Money and Greed. As long as their most fervent worshippers rise to the top, humankind will be a parasite. Currently we spend too much money and resources on wasteful pleasures, which fail to bring happiness. Edible food, untouched, unopened amounting to dozens of billion dollars is discarded each year, while in other parts of the world more than a billion people are malnourished. Planned obsolescence is a perverse way to increase consumption.

I have nothing against voluntary sterilization. But when sterilization is combined with incentives, or it is enforced, it becomes ugly. Already government sponsored sterilization programs have been conducted in countries like Peru and Thailand even the USA. You won't find those people, who propagate birth control programs in the line to get their own sterilization. Ethnic culling always targets the weak, not those who inflict the most damage with their greed and luxurious lifestyle.

Goatflesh Gnosis plan to offer anyone free food for life, if they agree to sterilization may possess a humane aspect, but it is an empty promise. If you pay now, you will be rewarded in the future is a promise used by scammers. Those “benevolent” eugenicists, who have convinced poor people to get sterilized have rarely kept their part of the bargain. Here is one example from Peru:

Secret sterilization in Peru





posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 07:14 PM
link   
reply to post by PayMeh
 


your post is ludicrous. with current known technology we can support at least 10x more. so want, that artificially grown food is maybe twice expensive, it's food nevertheless. so what, that "synthetic" food does not taste as good, as natural, it contains similar properties and value as natural. so what that life in megacities, "concrete boxes" is not that comfortable and pretty as in a countryside house, you have a roof over your ., and warm pillow. is that not enough? millions don't have even that, nowhere even near that.
stop whining that our world is overpopulated by giving stupid excuses, just admit that you are greedy poor ignorant fat bastard, who would like to continue eating cheap burger, buy cheap # made in china by poor half alive chinese workers who have to work 18h a day, 6 days a week, just to feed their families, quietly enslaved by "free market", and your greed, lust and gluttony.
there so many ways to make world better place for everybody, but no..
"oh it's too hard.. oh it hurts.. oh this and that.." whining crying and there is nothing else. when you think about it, you are one of those who are just wasting oxygen pointlessly and polluting atmosphere with CO2..
I apologize for some words I did use to express my opinion, but without those expressions it wouldn't be my opinion, that would be just another politically correct propaganda.
have a nice day



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 07:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Blaine91555
 


I don`t care, I did not have any kids. So when I am gone thats it. I won`t have to worry what kind of hellhole my kids or grandkids will be left with because I did not have any. Thats a choice I made long ago, I saw where things were going.



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 07:16 PM
link   
I already do support this idea in a way. I've been married for 15 years and don't have kids and don't plan too. Mostly due to the way I see most children acting these days. Way to violent, ignorant of many things and spiritually devoid. I said spiritual not religious. So I have no problem not participating in the You have to have kids idea.



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 07:24 PM
link   
reply to post by AGENTJa
 


I don't think the arguement to not have kids because of "the way kids are acting today" is a very valid one. You blame that crap on the PARENTS. Parents are the examples. Parents are the real teachers. I mean, I guess if you believe you would make a bad parent and allow your kids to behave like that then you have point and maybe you should not have children. Not all children are little demons.

Not trying to pick a fight, that statement just popped out at me.

EDIT TO ADD:
Not that there aren't exceptions. Sometimes you can give a kid the best upbringing, but they may still be a**holes. But a majority, (I believe) are not raised well.



[edit on 5-1-2010 by angrymomma]



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 07:37 PM
link   
What a stupid idea, the whole world could fit in the state of texas. The problem with the world is that people are isolated to certain areas that have become over crowded.
Death and rebirth are part of nature and is needed for evolution. The notion stopping people from having children will not work because more than likely it would be a third world country that is sanctioned first. The best way to combat over population is to make those places on earth that are not liveable populated. The truth be known if the free energy technology was released we could turn deserts green. We could turn the most harshest conditions into a place that could nourish many.



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 07:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by felonius
Considering that the majority of population is in 3rd world countries that are too stupid to use birth control, too "macho", or have "religious" issues, I suggest that we start there.

In some of these places the morons think shagging a virgin will cure aids.

European countries are already on the decline due to societal degradation and food additives. WE need to increase, not decrease!
!
hahahaha... you shouldnt have children! go to germany get a Lethal injection lol dont they do that with your kind??



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 07:52 PM
link   
In my humble opinion from researching this a bit:
1. Starvation is a political issue. There are numerous solutions for this so-called insurmountable problem offered by "outsider" scientists who are not taken seriously or allowed to offer up their solutions by the powers that be.

2. Global warming is a lie and climate change is documented as normal throughout history.

3. There is plenty of land available. Ever drive across the U.S.? People need to get out of the cities for the most part.

4. In the end, I have no problem with personal choice regarding population but when the government gets involved...

Just my 2 cents
Cheers



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 07:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Goatflesh Gnosis
 


I agree but i think it's down to Geographical location!

You can have billions living in China coz the land is big enough but try putting 1/4 of that into Britain and you have over-population... its over populated already here in England IMO and it's getting heavier...

How about shifting people elsewhere? To a Country with low population but with big land mass which could support the hordes?

Or

2 children per couple in populated areas... 3 or 4 per couple in under populated areas.... i think this could work....

Or

Giving out contraceptives to those who don't use them or refuse to use them but keep an eye on them to make sure they use them....

About the cash issue.... couldn't the banks just keep printing notes?

EDIT: There are kids being born into poverty which is a big problem and if this was to stop then maybe the world wouldn't look so bad

2nd EDIT: To answer one of the posts up above.... we need more green areas not buildings!! Especially in small Country's!!

[edit on 5-1-2010 by TruthxIsxInxThexMist]



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 08:08 PM
link   



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 08:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Cantthinkofaname
 


Besides beating children, you're point really has no logic. What defines love? Everyone is different. Some people define love as buying stuff. But I wouldn't. So who is right? You can't simply say "if they can love them" because that's not only subjugating your own moral code on others, but also going against what anybody considered differently. My dad considered buying me anything I want love. I don't. I didn't feel loved as a child, and in fact was quite depressed. but you still have no right to not let me live. You should do what works, and stay out of it. until there's some form of physical abuse, it's none of your business nor right to force any conditions on others.

[edit on 5-1-2010 by Gorman91]

[edit on 5-1-2010 by Gorman91]



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 08:25 PM
link   
Regardless of whether its a eugenics agenda or some covert vaccine agenda, or some sterilization agenda, its all criminal in an evil way. If it ends up killing people who trusted those that believed it was going to do something it wasn't, then we have mass murder. A crime of planetary proportions done solely for profit and for reducing the worlds population .

I mention the above because no eugenics or depopulation of the planet is needed if indeed we don't have a resource issue. Current resources of food, energy, and medicine exist in sufficient amounts to feed the world but yet the control of such resources ensures those that need it do not get it.

Now, you may wonder why I believe we don't have a resource problem, but let me explain why I think a disclosure of secret technology would end most world depopulation agendas.

Secret technology that can create free energy with no pollution will put all oil giants, nuclear corporations or basically the energy industries out of the regular business of robbing the public for energy. Every industry that currently pays money for these resources would not have to be a slave to some public utilities company just because there are those that prefer to keep the secret technology hidden from the benefit of the public in order to protect their business interests at the expense of the public's right to know the truth.

With technology that provides free power those that use power to grow food could grow on a 24/7 basis for free. While labor would be required, any demand for labor in America is a good thing. With the ability to grow food on a unlimited basis, the areas of the world that are without water and so forth could desalinate sea water without energy concerns and then irrigate the fields with water produced from free energy. The homes would be lighted with free energy and could truly become part of the 21st Century by advancing areas to produce their own food and water. The private industries that would sprout as a result of such technological advances would be in demand for a long time. It would be an opportunity to provide food and water to those in parts of the world that currently die before the age of 30 because resources, food and contaminated water resources contribute to so much to disease and early death.

In the area of medicine, if the secret technology disclosures included the secret cures for aids, cancer, leukemia and a thousand other medical diseases that induce death at an early age and feed the corrupt system of insurance companies, health care providers and pharmaceutical companies then its no wonder that the government and major corporations have turned genocide and human depopulation agendas into a money making venture.

Only by the release of such secret technology can we feed and provide for the planet. To overcome the ignorance and lack of intelligence found in many cultures we would have to revamp our educational system but that's an easy challenge. Once people are educated to the real truths of our world and are encouraged to educate themselves to be able to function in a world where secret technology could allow for us to visit other planets, become part of off world projects and become full time students to what our universe can teach us. With the ability to move people off world to other planets by means of teleportation devices would be the same teleportation devices could move a human from Paris to LA,CA in the blink of an eye with no discomfort or threat to others. Travel by bus, air and rail would be a thing of the past. The benefits to this alone would negate airlines and airports. With the ability to move people and resources anywhere in the blink of an eye we could develop areas thought to desolate to develop and or too far to supply.

Without the secret technology we face issues that will be used to justify eugenics agendas. I just believe that this issue is a deception and a lie.



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 08:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Tim00
 


well observed, Tim00.


Originally posted by unicorn1
reply to post by Tim00
 


So all aid is loans is it? The UK government put £70 million pounds into Uganda alone last year and not in loans or for returns. I don't call that pennies.
Please do your research before you make blanket statements.

unicorn1, 70 mil IS pennies.
£70million five-year deal with a firm to run clinics for cataracts and other eye ops using South African surgeons
Police spend £70,000 a day on hiring cars, that's over 25mil a year
MPs milked expenses system for £10 million in months before reforms
And I don't even have to say anything about footballers

Can you provide a link to your claim about 70 mill of real money went there? no point accusing someone of "blanket statements" and doing exactly the same a sentence above. There are so many ways to "give" money which is not a credit, for example in a form of a debt relief, that's not credit that's real cash, sort of
hell, even the money honest people collect doesn't get there.



"The Britain's total program in Uganda in 2007/08 is 70 million pounds. Of this we will allocate 35 million pounds to budget support to poverty for poverty reduction and at least 15 million pounds will meet humanitarian needs and recovery efforts in the north, including water and sanitation, health and emergency food aid as required," Vadera said.

what is poverty reduction?
35+15=50, where did 20 mill go from the promised 70 mil?
What Uganda promised in return? contracts? mineral rights? coffee?
or perhaps UK will threaten to cut the aid if Uganda doesn't play the ball...

15 mill is the only real support, even that doesn't mean squat, who do you think will build sanitation and stuff? for how much? is it a good value? Listen, I promise you a financial aid of 1 million in a form of a good advise, I charge 1 mill for this: do not get hang up on numbers, real money will never reach Uganda. You're welcome; you just got 1 million richer



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 08:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Goatflesh Gnosis
 

I disagree the point that this country is over populated,Cape cod is some where around 350 millon square feet so you could fit the entire population of the USA on Cape cod if everybody stood strait with there arms down shoulder to shoulder.The problem is theres to many people in one area and not enough people in another.This is how they maintain control over people by putting them all together in one area,its all about control.



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 08:31 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 08:32 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 08:38 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



new topics

top topics



 
33
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join