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.

 

Depopulation Plan Question

page: 2
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 08:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Skewed
 

The latest word on overpopulation




posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 08:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Skewed
 


What a silly idea, depopulation.
The simple solution is to study something.
Let's use math and geography!
In my sarcastically titled thread here, i explain that the whole of the worlds population, every man woman and child could fit into an area the size of australia.
Now with this idea, each person would get 1/4 acre.
I hardly see this as world overpopulation, as there would still be N America, S America, Asia, Europe, Africa and in a worst case scenario, Antarctica.
Thats ALOT of leftover land there.
So to believe the world were overpopulated would either be silly or terribly misinformed.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 08:47 AM
link   
Why am i concerned about depopulation ?
Becaust it affects all of us , Right now they are sterilising third world contries with vaccination , next it will be the muslim race in western countries THEN it will be us until there are only 500 million left on the planet .
500 mil which includes the elite and their family NOT US .

Its no different to a slow holocaust , they want to wipe the poor people out.
NEWSFLASH to them You are poor .
The wealth divide is getting LARGER by THEIR design .
Down with the elite .



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 08:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Skewed
 


This proposition isn't new. It's called Family Cap and is already in practice in some states in the U.S. Penalising the poor by withdrawing their welfare will do little but breed yet more generations of anti-social unproductive members of society who will likely contribute nothing and will themselves become dependent on the welfare state. You're one step away from suggesting we once again adopt the practice of forced sterilization of the more "undesirable" sections of society. It's called Eugenics.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 08:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by namine
reply to post by Skewed
 


It all sounds great in theory but I don't think people can help themselves making babies. "Accidents" are always going to happen, some people will choose to be ignorant and others just won't care. But cutting welfare will hurt the kids more than the parents, surely?


That, and how do I say this as lightly as possible. Society has come up with this mindset that childrens lives are more important than an adults, and to some extents, I do agree, but mostly one life is not worth more or less than another, regardless of age. But when it comes to survival, nature does not care one way or another about the age of a person, you either get it or you dont. I do also agree that accidents will still happen, but then again, there are also too many accidents when in all reality, instead of accepting the responsibility for themselves, they claim "accident" and so that makes it excusable. I mean, if I accidentally crash into someones car, I am responsible, claiming an accident does not release my responsibility and pass the expense off to the other taxpaying drivers. The answer to this is not simple and it will take a big paradigm shift in our thought processes, but at the same time society has grown accustomed to not taking responsibility. By cutting welfare, it would also force a shift back to the way families used to take care of families, and that is not a bad thing. All things considered, I wonder, back in our hunter gather days, what did the adults of the time do with their children that were born with disabilities that could never support themselves and must always be provided for. I am not suggesting we do exactly what they did, sure, technology can make some things different now, but we should at least keep using the same principals and ideas and incorporate those with our tech.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 08:52 AM
link   
reply to post by g146541
 


Yes exactly i made a similar thread about land wealth and resources distribution according to the calculations .
If wealth and land was distributed equally Each person would have 5 acres and 11 k a year .
However we found that resources ie food and water is something that Could be and Should be divided fairly .
Why is is not ?
Because of depopulation !
The destruction of anyone who isnt part of the elite
WAR is only about the destruction/depopulation of the poor.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 08:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Skewed
 


Depopulation if done ethicly is fine. Such as through education. Teach the kids that our population is reaching a braking point and to assure the survival of the humans we need to reduce the population by 5 Billion. If done right this should take sevral hundred years. But TPTB what to controle the population now. so the faster for them the better. That's were bottled water, fluoride, aspartame/neotame, vaccine "additives", purell and sooo many other every day things come into play. It's called slow kill. That's what we are against. But all that is besides the point and unnecessary because we are not over populated yet. They want controle. What is all the money in the world good for if you can't controle the people. The puppet masters are not interested in the rush of mountains of cash any more, being the puppet master is were it's at. But like it or not, nature will take it's course and the planet will cleanse itself of it's parasitic infestation...us.
edit on 15-2-2011 by XLR8R because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 08:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by g146541
reply to post by Skewed
 


What a silly idea, depopulation.
The simple solution is to study something.
Let's use math and geography!
In my sarcastically titled thread here, i explain that the whole of the worlds population, every man woman and child could fit into an area the size of australia.
Now with this idea, each person would get 1/4 acre.
I hardly see this as world overpopulation, as there would still be N America, S America, Asia, Europe, Africa and in a worst case scenario, Antarctica.
Thats ALOT of leftover land there.
So to believe the world were overpopulated would either be silly or terribly misinformed.


You are missing some points. It is not the fact of there being enough room for each person to have 1/4 acre. Sure, saying it that way makes it sound all good. You statement must also account for the livability of those 1/4 acres, what if you were the one to receive your quarter acre in the middle of the Sahara or even in Antarctica. So, if you take all the landmasses that are "unlivable" then, how much room does each person have?



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 09:02 AM
link   
reply to post by g146541
 


Thanks for that thread g14541. It caused me to really look into whether the world is overpopulated. I agree with you that the World is NOT overpopulated. Everyone repeats that the world is overpopulated, but never seems to research it. It is an assumption repeated so many times that it is assumed true.

There is a case to be made that ecosystems are being taxed. This results from HOW we use our ecosystems, and not how many use it. If economic and political systems that did not claim the majority of the resources survival would not be a problem. Mass starvation is not a result of too many people, but by specific actions powerful people make. Check out this thread. It is about the third world. Scroll about 2/3 down to crimevelvets post. He or she describes the forces at work that lead to starvation. That post, and the ones later in thread should at least raise an eyebrow to how starvation happens.

If the planet was overpopulated humans would stop reproducing. They would not have a choice. There simply would not be enough resources. Instead, people keep reproducing and finding ways to get the necessary resources. This is because there are sufficient resources. Sadly, a few powerful nations, and more specifically elites at the pinnacle of those nations, control resources. That unwashed mass of human beings do not give up easily. We find ways to survive regardless of systems that make it very difficult. These economic structures that bring profit to the few threaten the lives of the many. It is not overpopulation that is the problem, but a tiny blight of powerful people leeching the rest of life.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 09:05 AM
link   
reply to post by XLR8R
 


What? To ensure the survival of the species doesn't require the gradual death of 5 billion people. It requires the haves to give a crap about the have-nots. It requires the minority to adopt the mindset that greed is destructive. Breaking point? Don't make me laugh. Its artificially propagated by those who waste and squander while the masses go without, generating resentment and tension between classes. Your solution simply replaces the current way of things with a society haves at the expense of individual freedom. In other words, you're spouting the rhetoric of the Elitists.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 09:08 AM
link   
reply to post by quackers
 


Yes...I know....humm?? Didn't you read my post? Or Only the first few lines? Read it again. I think you missed the point.

edit on 15-2-2011 by XLR8R because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 09:10 AM
link   
reply to post by fixedworld
 


Absolutely brilliant video fixedworld!

I wonder how many will be too put-off by a length of 10 minutes?

Everyone should spend that 10 minutes! The video says it all.

Depop mongers shouldn't even bother to comment unless they've first seen your vid.

JR



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 09:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Skewed
 


Therein is where your math fails you, we are continents of people away from "HAVING" to populate the tundra areas or deserts. so it seems as if we have another 7000 years and we'll have another australlian continent filled up, so we got roughly 30k years to find another planet or a better solution.

But in case we needed to, greenhouses grow ANYTHING in any environment.
The real issue is war, the men with guns taking food from the peoples without guns, and logistics, how to get food to the peoples in the remote areas.
It is not my job to feed the world, it is however my job to feed myself and mine.
Therefore i do garden and preserve foods, and it pains me that i cannot save the world so i accept it and start where i can with my circle.
Now, let's look at depopulation from another standpoint, just "what if" this worlds overseers have been asleep at the switch and have let the target population get out of hand.
Now when the "aliens" come back the population will be way over target and Niburu or whichever planet the aliens, reptillians Etc.come from will not be able to cull us nearly as well as they thought.
Overpopulation will help in case of an alien invasion!!



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 09:19 AM
link   
reply to post by namine
 





Even if the number was 25, it would be insane...by the way, I was being sarcastic in my first post in case ya missed it.


No I did not miss the sarcasm. I just wanted to pull the sheepskin of these wolves aka Eugenics promoters. They bleat about mass starvation being CAUSED by a "population explosion" when in actual fact they caused the starvation with malice afore thought!

Manufacturing food crisis

As Food Riots Continue, Finance Ministers Criticize Ethanol Subsidies

Clinton, a Rhodes Scholar (as in the Fabian Socialist Society) even admits it.



Today's global food crisis shows "we all blew it, including me when I was president," by treating food crops as commodities instead of as a vital right of the world's poor, Bill Clinton told a U.N. gathering on Thursday. UNITED NATIONS, Oct. 23, 2008



President Bill Clinton, now the UN Special Envoy to Haiti, publicly apologized last month for forcing Haiti to drop tariffs on imported, subsidized US rice during his time in office. The policy wiped out Haitian rice farming and seriously damaged Haiti’s ability to be self-sufficient. www.democracynow.org...


Unfortunately the blind sheeple listen to the bleating about the "population explosion" and "global warming" and "evil capitalism" and nodding their heads are lead into the cage created by the elite wolves.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 09:25 AM
link   
reply to post by stephinrazin
 


No the thanks go to you, as you are educating yourself with the most basic and true of theory which is hard to debunk
If i reach 1 person i win so, thank you.
Now what we need to do is find a way to tell people of the real problem that humanity faces, and make them agree of their own logical thought, then we all need to grab shovels and start to dig our way out of this pit we have created.
I do think a NWO system could work if it were done ala Star Trek universe, but as we cannot fix the war and starvation problem, i will have no part in it
WE NEED MORE DILITHIUM CRYSTALS CAPTAIN!!



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 09:26 AM
link   
I think this sort of thing works itself out. It always has, population breeds conflict which breeds war. War eliminates the population. Disease also eliminates quite a bit and just for everyone to know, we are due for another plague of soem sort. Influenza at one time killed a third of the population, I dont think we need to do anything, just sit back and let mother nature do her thing.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 09:40 AM
link   
reply to post by pyrodude
 


I hate your logic, but one would be a fool to deny it's credibility.
We do naturally and or assistedly depopulate.
There will be bugs and skirmishes to curb our numbers.
If only we could do away with both, we could conspire a way to care for each other.
Then maybe man as a whole could make the next step toward enlightenment.
Until then we are just chest pounding apes, unworthy of further knowledge.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 09:44 AM
link   
According to this chart, which was originally aired on History channels Prophets of Doom show that the worlds population remained relatively steady up until the Industrial Revolution and the discovery of how to use fossil fuels. Once these discoveries were made, the earths population literally exploded.





Blog Article.

Note: By posting this does not mean I agree or disagree, I am just using the image as the reference, the article is strictly for courtesy. I saw a better bar graph for this, but cant find it now.



edit on 15-2-2011 by Skewed because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 09:47 AM
link   
reply to post by pyrodude
 




population breeds conflict which breeds war


Not quite. However, concentrations of populations, more precisely, can certainly create aggravations, that might be fanned into war.

You owe it to yourself to watch the video posted above. Covers war too!

Most of our problems are manufactured ones.

As far as the pandemic that is "due"...well, maybe, maybe not. The problem is that you have people like the British royals who will make it happen, if nature doesn't beat them to it.

That's suggested in the video too!

JR



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 09:53 AM
link   
I do not support depopulation.

If people would quite effing with nature, we would all be fine. If the plants and animals were allowed to reproduce naturally the growing human population would have enough resources. The only potential problem I see is water supply, however salt water can be converted, it's just too expensive for anyone to seriously invest in. So why not take the money from gm foods and place it into water conversion? Problem solved, no?



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join