Overopulation: An inevitable disaster an the verge of arriving

page: 1
4
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 12:58 PM
link   
The 20th century saw a rapid increase in human population due to medical advances and a massive increase in agricultural productivity. Currently, even with our exploding numbers, we’ve managed to keep pace with the worldwide population explosion. We’re almost certainly encouraging a dramatic increase.

The National Research Institute regarding Food and Nutrition conducted a study comparing the relationship between food, property, our population, and the U.S. Economy; compared to the maximum number of U.S. citizens we can maintain, considering the minimum sustainable environment. We only have a 200 million person (maximum carrying capacity). To achieve a sustainable environment and avert absolute disaster, the United States must reduce its population by at least one-third; at the same time, the entire world’s population will have to be immediately reduced by a minimum of two-thirds.

This relationship known as (the maximum carrying capacity) of a civilization is not a theory, but a fact. We’re exceeding the limitations of this equation. This agricultural crisis will likely begin to impact us as soon as 2020; although, it may not become critical until 2050. This will most definitely be the cause for our extinction as a species at some point in the future. The food crisis will start a chain of events in motion that will snowball into a metaphoric avalanche.

Do you think the government has a plan to save themselves?
Can anyone disagree, and claim it's going to be alright?
Why are we consciously allowing this to happen?
Are we an extraterrestrial crop; ripe for harvest?




posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 01:09 PM
link   
Good point. I was thinking about that we were discussing this world population thing in the 80's. It was that the world should have hit this overload already.

Why haven't we hit it yet?

Have we killed off enough of the poor people in third world countries where there is also a great need for charity?

We only want people with money. The poor people are a liability.



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 01:15 PM
link   
There is alot of conjecture in the overpopulation argument.
I used to be a firm believer in overpopulation until I did a bit of math and study, realizing that it appears more a myth to drive up food property prices synthetically by creating a false crisis.

I will say that there is a great mismanagment of resources in the world that is causing all sorts of problem, but that is not because of overpopulation verses corporatist greed and the nations corporations own to propagate both the false crisis, and the continued exploitation of resources.

As with all things...follow the money.

As far as a nice clear example of how this supposed crisis is, consider a quick example

3 people live in a lush forest with ripe fruit and animals.
3 other people live in a bone dry desert, with barely any food
over time, 1 person dies from starvation in the desert...
Does this mean the world cannot support 6 people...or does it suggest a desert cannot support 3 people, but the world itself could support potentially hundreds if the resources were not mismanaged? (example..simplified.)

Its not overpopulation, and its not even overconsumption...it is mismanagment and false crisis propaganda by the few that hold the worlds resources.



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 01:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Howtosurvive2012
This relationship known as (the maximum carrying capacity) of a civilization is not a theory, but a fact. We’re exceeding the limitations of this equation. This agricultural crisis will likely begin to impact us as soon as 2020; although, it may not become critical until 2050. This will most definitely be the cause for our extinction as a species at some point in the future. The food crisis will start a chain of events in motion that will snowball into a metaphoric avalanche.


Hmmm...'not a theory, but a fact'. I cannot agree with that. Almost every declaration of fact in this world is actually a matter of opinion - often a subjective one. Nature has taken care of this planet's needs for billions of years and will continue to do so without any assistance from us. If overpopulation is really a genuine problem nature dictates that some of us will die to rebalance the equation.



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 01:33 PM
link   
over population is suck a joke. IMO. I fly up and down the west coast on a privet jet and their is so much open land its crazy. the only reason you don’t see it is because you only travel on roads. the purpose of a road is to take your from one populated location to the next.

I don’t buy into this BS
edit on 9-12-2010 by camaro68ss because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 01:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Howtosurvive2012
 


The US and the rest of developed nations are NOT overpopulated, quite the contrary, underpopulation could be an issue for those (US is an exception, with population growing). Its the poor nations where people do not have easy access even to food, water, education, that are overpopulated, and where population numbers are rising.

How could a country with one of the highest living standards be overpopulated? Thats nonsense. Mayben only some regions, with high concentration of people and low concentration of wealth are locally overpopulated in the western world (immigrant camps, gypsy camps in Europe etc..).
edit on 9/12/10 by Maslo because: (no reason given)
edit on 9/12/10 by Maslo because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 02:56 PM
link   
reply to post by win 52
 


Haven't we? Look at our economy; look at the mini-pandemics every few months; look at the reality of our current conditions. One it's too late, it'll be too late; the signs are on the wall.



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 03:04 PM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


Brother your right on; however, consumption is what it is. You cant change the equation and expect the same answer. Consumption at this point isn't a variable; it's a constant. Overpopulation is apparent because of excess and waist. Whats easier to change, behavior or reproduction? I'd settle for either. At this point, we are overpopulated due to our current behavior. (consumption) It's all the same situation.

I like the creationism implication.
edit on 9-12-2010 by Howtosurvive2012 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 03:07 PM
link   
reply to post by christina-66
 


I'll agree about "facts" on principal;still, if you put your hands in the flame of a fire, will they not burn? Without silly hypothetical conjecture, is that not "fact". There is a response to every action. Pushing the population (especially the dependent part of society) will result in an unfortunate outcome. Nature will prevail; I just hope we're a part of that outcome.
edit on 9-12-2010 by Howtosurvive2012 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by win 52
 


I could not disagree more. The poor, third world country inhabitants are not the problem we are. By that I mean you and me, people who have everything and then some!! How many pairs of shoes do you have? How many cars have you owned in your life? How many changes of clothes do you have? Starting to get it now? The so called civilized countries are the one that are doing the most damage to the planet, not the starving third world minimalists that barley have a pot to piss and definitely do not have a window to throw it out of!



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 03:17 PM
link   
reply to post by maxpower88
 


Max, you're right on; consumption is the key factor in this equation. If we're twice as efficient, we could possibly support twice the numbers. I only wish that was the case.



posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 11:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by Howtosurvive2012
 


The US and the rest of developed nations are NOT overpopulated, quite the contrary, underpopulation could be an issue for those (US is an exception, with population growing). Its the poor nations where people do not have easy access even to food, water, education, that are overpopulated, and where population numbers are rising.

How could a country with one of the highest living standards be overpopulated? Thats nonsense. Mayben only some regions, with high concentration of people and low concentration of wealth are locally overpopulated in the western world (immigrant camps, gypsy camps in Europe etc..).
edit on 9/12/10 by Maslo because: (no reason given)
edit on 9/12/10 by Maslo because: (no reason given)


Well when the pandemic breaks out, and our population promotes disaster because we're confined in close quarters, we'll see how you feel about the "underpopulation theory".



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 02:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Howtosurvive2012
 





Well when the pandemic breaks out, and our population promotes disaster because we're confined in close quarters, we'll see how you feel about the "underpopulation theory".


If the pandemic (what pandemic?) breaks out, there will be little deaths in developed countries, and millions of deaths in the third world. Also, population density in the US is low compared to the rest of the world.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 03:24 AM
link   
Overpopulation is not a fact and to state so is to be ignorant of the fact that the real cause is that we badly manage our resources. Consider this, every man, woman and child could if standing side by side fit into County Roscommon in Ireland. If they were allocated a 100m2 living area they could ALL settle comfortably in Texas. That shows how much of the world is left to support the population. For some reason we can’t get our sh1t together to provide a managed and sustainable environment to provide for this equation.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 04:03 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 06:15 AM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


Absolutely, mismanagement is the key word here!



There is no food shortage. Even though an estimated one in six people is going hungry, there are more people suffering from obesity than from starvation. The food shortage that does exist in certain parts of the planet, including in some of the wealthiest areas, has to do with what food is being produced, how it is being produced, and what is being done with it.
Over ten percent of the food grown on U.S. farms is plowed under to help control pricing. In the cities, supermarkets often lock their trash bins or use trash compacters to discard food that has expired, is slightly blemished, or damaged. Much of this food is trashed even thought it is still edible. Some stores throw bleach into their dumpsters to discourage people from “dumpster diving.” More than ten percent of food purchased for home use also is thrown away.


But this is not only due to stores throwing food away and not redistributing it, also the western diets are a big part of the problem!



“Hunger afflicts more than 800 million people worldwide and kills 24,000 per day. Three fourths are children under five. Chronic hunger causes stunted growth, poor vision, listlessness, and susceptibility to disease. A major factor is the waste of foodstuffs fed to animals raised for food, rather than to starving people. This was documented in Frances Moore Lappé’s 1972 classic Diet for a Small Planet and was reaffirmed at the 2002 World Food Summit in Rome. A meat-based diet requires 10 to 20 times as much land as a plant-based diet. An acre of prime land can produce 40,000 pounds of potatoes, 30,000 pounds of carrots, 50,000 pounds of tomatoes but only 250 pounds of beef.” – Citizens for Healthy Options in Children’s Education, CHOICE.USA; 2006

Most food grown on the planet is fed to farmed animals. Over two thirds of the agricultural land in Central America is used to grow livestock feed. About two thirds of the grain in Russia is fed to farm animals. Grain grown for livestock is the primary crop on every continent.

Link

Sure enough much damage is done by the mismanagement of the international corporate agricultural businesses, yet also the consumption behavior of the individual needs to change in order sustain and supply a larger number of people. If we keep on the way we do, a food crisis will be inevitable.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 09:11 AM
link   
Howtosurvive,

If America has an overpopulation problem why did Barrack Obama give +1 million foreigners US citizenship last year?

Broke all records.

President Obama won't secure the border....is giving free healthcare to all the people that broke into our country with the EMTALA Act, free welfare, free section 8, free school for their kids, free college....

- 60%/+ of all the Vietnam Veterans are DEAD.
- 70+ million Baby Boomers are retiring .........dieing

Where's the census data?

The Cold War resulted in our runaway idiots in this country poisoning our water, land, air and they destroyed the DNA of Americans. We're dieing and fast. There never were 300 million Americans. There were 245 million Americans with 70 million Baby Boomers who are all going to die in the next 5 years. Plus our dioxin/toxin caused diabetes/obesity epidemic is dropping americans like flies...from their DNA being destroyed.

Now China is having a diabetes/obesity epidemic. Why? Dioxins and Toxins contaminating their water/soil/air.

There is no overpopulation problem....We can't handle the death problem in america with no replacements coming online to replace people...hence open doors for anyone that wants to come in.

China will be at our stage in 40 years. We've destroyed their DNA too.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 04:38 PM
link   
i do have a comment thats directed to overpopulation , our population should be decreasing not increasing.. what i mean by this is look around you .... teenagers wanting to be with other woman .... lesbians etc. our society as it is today , is by far decreasing dramatically , i think this is a subject that people need to see clearly on .



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 04:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by camaro68ss
over population is suck a joke. IMO. I fly up and down the west coast on a privet jet and their is so much open land its crazy. the only reason you don’t see it is because you only travel on roads. the purpose of a road is to take your from one populated location to the next.

I don’t buy into this BS
edit on 9-12-2010 by camaro68ss because: (no reason given)


You, much like others assume this is only about having enough space.

That entire argument shows ignorance, and a lack of giving real thought to this subject.

It isnt about space, it's about carrying capacity.

On a national level, the U.S. simply cannot absorb the projected 100 million additional people in the next 40 years.

The infrastructure isnt there, the financial resources arent there, and the will to stop the flood of people certainly isnt there.

The U.S. is dying, and no one is willing to do anything to stop it.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 04:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Howtosurvive2012
 


Wlel mroe leis ocne aigan. We msut bleeive ervehintg we raed. Bcaeuse no one wloud eevr lie to you.

Oevr plpoutatoin is a mtyh. No one can pvore tihs utinl it hppanes. Werhe is the geart fmaine of the 70's.

Geerd is waht sartves a plpoutatoin.



new topics
top topics
 
4
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join