It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


DEPOPULATION - where would you start?

page: 7
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 04:12 PM

I see a lot of people are saying to rid the planet of CRiMINALS.

Do you really think that the few million around 4.2 million in the western world is enough.

I was talking about how the Elites were thinking. they are more than likely thinking 2 -3 billion.

So criminals is a no go.

Bill gates is an idiot. He and a few select others are the very people you lot describe as elite.

If you for one minute think he is not involved in the Elite war against the people then you are mistaken.

Plus, his shoddy Windows Seven release shows he does not give a damn anymore about Microsoft and is now concentrating his efforts of DEPOPULATION.

posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 04:47 PM
I'd do what they're doing now.

Step 1. Sequence the human genetic code.
Step 2. Identify all inferior genetic traits.
Step 3. Genetically modify the food/water supply to trigger cancers and other illnesses in those with the inferior genetic predispositions.
Step 4. Sit back and enjoy the show.

posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 04:50 PM
reply to post by c0ldPhr34k

IMO, genocide is not necessary.... at least not at the point we're currently at. I suggest simply hitting the breaks on our current rate procreation and we'll be fine. Also, if we weren't so densely compressed together in our wonderful urban centers, there wouldn't be such an over-crowding problem either. There's PLENTY of empty space on this planet. It's just that no one will ever want to move there because there's no Starbucks close by.

That being said, it doesn't quite answer the question you put forth which asked for my choices of who lives and who dies. Personally, I couldn't chose, because I could never in my life see myself in a situation where I had that right. That's why I would base a decision such as that it on a random lottery drawing. Everyone currently living on this planet has the right to be here, whether they're rich, poor, Islamic (your immediate statement about them was rather disturbing, I must say), Jewish, Christian, or whatever, so I would make sure there's absolutely no discrimination in the choice of who lives and who dies, regardless about how I feel about certain people. Sure I might rejoice if someone I dislike loses the lottery, but its still not for me to chose. I would also accept the consequences of my own name being drawn.

Also, I would only accept this scenario if it was indeed 100% known that the planet could not survive unless a certain amount of people were removed. The idea that the NWO would be pondering something like this is only because it would make it easier for them to control everyone... and not necessarily something imperative for the planet's survival. So, if it was ever suggested for something like this to happen, you can bet your boots there'd be heavy resistance.

I certainly don't follow Christianity the way I used to, but I'm still a firm advocate of the "judge not lest ye be judged" philosophy. "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" comes to mind here as well...
edit on 17-12-2010 by oaf21 because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 05:12 PM
We don't need to depopulate the planet. All we need to do is educate people to have children when they're ready. When more people understand what it takes to be a good parent, and when more people are careful about conceiving before they are ready, the population will drop over the years all on it's own. Nobody has to die, nobody has to be exterminated. The problem right now is that too many people have kids by accident instead of planning to get pregnant. There are too many unwanted children, kids in foster homes, mistreated, neglected, nobody cares whether they do well at school, nobody is there to give them hope, guidance and encouragement. All these things factor into poverty, high crime rate and immoral behavior. One doesn't have to be rich to be a good parent. I've met people who came from very poor but loving families, and they grew up to be outstanding people. It's those kids who seek guidance from gangs or bad people who take advantage of them by talking them into doing bad things that destroy neighborhoods, and in turn many parts of the world.

So, I guess as long as the human race learns to act responsibly and does everything in their power to reverse mistakes, we won't need to worry about overpopulation. Even accidental child birth can be made right when the two parents step up and do their best to raise a good citizen.

To believe that the only way to fix all this is to poison people or lead them to death through fatal virus outbreaks is very twisted and shortsighted.

posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 05:15 PM
DEPOPULATION - where would you start? go first!

Just kidding, of course.

In all seriousness, I would start by ullifting, economically and educationally, the peoples of the third world, instead of enslaving them in debt, so that the haves can continue to be deluded that to have there needs to be have nots.

Prosperity and education of course, leads to people having less, not more children.

Then, within a mere couple of generations or so, problem solved.

So, that Bill Gates program to sterilize through the vaccine programs? Utterly barbaric, and unneccessary, monstrous even.

That's my two cents on the issue for whatever it's worth.

edit on 17-12-2010 by NewAgeMan because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 05:23 PM
I would first make sure that anyone who wants one, can have one, with no restrictions or stigmas: Abortions.

I would make them easy to get.
I would make sure there are lots of facilities that do it.
I would make them cheap.
I would make sure that they are medically, spiritually, and legally safe.

I have one child. That is quite enough for me.
edit on 17-12-2010 by twelvepackterry because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 05:33 PM
I do not mean to offend anyone by these choices. This would be purely scientific with no regard for humanity. These people could be made sterile or killed in this order.

1. Violent Criminals
2. Mentally handicapped
3. Disabled people
4. People on welfare/government assistance
5. People with genetically transferred health conditions
6. Then by IQ, leaving the top 10% of earth's population
edit on 17-12-2010 by jackal5671 because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 05:34 PM
I would Nuke Mexico, the U.S.A, the UK and Germany. /end

posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 05:39 PM

Originally posted by jackal5671
I do not mean to offend anyone by these choices. This would be purely scientific with no regard for humanity. These people could be made sterile or killed in this order.

1. Criminals, all of them.
2. People with HIV/AIDS.
3. People on welfare/government assistance
4. Old People.
5. Religious people.
6. Then by IQ, leaving the top 10% of earth's population
edit on 17-12-2010 by jackal5671 because: (no reason given)

I fixed this for you.

posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 05:55 PM
reply to post by jackal5671

This is not offensive, except in relation to your own self as a mentally challenged individual. Don't worry about the rest of us.

posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 06:10 PM
I would start by making western countries addicted to cheap luxuries and fast food,and when the populous has become too self centered to share "me" time with another generation birth rates in the west should fall.

I would also start a foundation to tackle disease and poverty on the African continent,and genetically modify mosquitoes to transmit a "vaccine" against "malaria".

Hang on,Ive just been told that this is already happening...

posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 06:17 PM
I'd off myself so I won't have to share the world with people who are thinking of ways to justify the murdering of others.

I believe we were created by a creator, even if we evolved from fly crap.

I believe the creator has a plan. Why allow prejudices one has dictate this or that? We don't have the clout to impress upon others ideals.

posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 06:18 PM
Remove and outlaw all warning labels on things, then let simple darwinian reduction take place.

eventually, you will get rid of people that thought it was a great idea to make toast while taking a bath, operating heavy machinery while flat out drunk, etc.

posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 06:29 PM
A lot of the replies seem to imagine "depopulate now" as the answer. No, it is depopulation as a trend - lowering the birthrate. Everyone alive today will be dead in 110 years or less. That means the population should be zero without new babies. But the issue is birth rate - if ladies only had 2 children each for 100 years, the population should be under 4 billion (just round-down guessing). If we make it so having babies and making house is not the only thinga woman can do (in many countries, this is still their only choice) - then they have other interesting things to do during their day. The birth rates in the US and other western countries is dropping now since women's liberation. But Asian and middle-Eastern countries seem to treat their women like they have for hundreds of years - subserviant to the man. Once men stop thinking they are worth 2x a woman in such cultures, their birthrates will slow down.

Cultures change and education can help lower birth rates. Education does come at a cost and the rich countries have to foot the bill to help educate those who just don't see the big picture yet.

Remember when missionaries and religions used to go and try to help these lost people to learn how to "go forth and multiply" - we have to look at religious teachings across all our religions to see that they may have been a partial cause for the earth's population explosion once ease of travel occurred in the early 20th century.

The term depopulation is dumb. It has nothing to do with chopping our current population - it has to do with slowing down and reversing the growth curve.

Two "packed" places, Macau and Hong Kong are at the bottom of the birth rate charts - they're highly populated now. And who's at the top of the list? Impoverished African nations - some which use rape as a weapon.
edit on 17-12-2010 by bonaire because: add link

edit on 17-12-2010 by bonaire because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 06:32 PM
Pretty scary how many people would be willing to implement a Final Solution. I see Hitler and his cromies have plenty of fellow travelers. If I had to choose, I would start with anyone who actually believes they have the right to choose life or death for another human being.

posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 06:35 PM
I just asked my husband this question and his response was "If I had the power and I HAD to depopulate the earth, I'd start with myself".

posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 06:41 PM

Originally posted by oaf21
IMO, genocide is not necessary....

Genocide is always necessary.

posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 06:52 PM
Wow, where to start..... ( I better put on the asbestos undies )

People in the cities flying gang colors..

People who have been on state welfare for more than 1 year without positive proof of job seeking...

People who are in ANY country illegally...

People who are in ANY prison with a life sentence...

That's good enough for starters.... get back to me when all those are gone.

posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 06:53 PM

Originally posted by ldyserenity
I'd start with all the criminals: you know the prisons, of course, then the bankers, then the politicians, come on you knew it was going to be said!

Excellent idea, however I believe you have the order reversed. Get rid of the ones capable of doing the most damage first. The ones in prison are "on hold" they can't do any more damage while they are in there. Start with the politicians and banksters then start culling the dangerous repeat offender prison population.

posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 06:53 PM
reply to post by MaximumTruth

Could you please change your name to MinimumTruth..? Otherwise, it's offensive, given your position, a lie.

top topics

<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in