It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
increase the population, once it becomes critical is the only time we will actualy succed in finding the technology and managment we need, the more people we have the more efficient we will become, not vise versa
"only at the precipice do we evolve" we need the problem before our species is concerned enough to look for the solution, we do need the numbers before we will care to look for the method,
Actually the responsible sustainable thing to do would be to exterminate man kind. We are the only species that is incompatible with the local environment and literally have to build our own environment just for ourselves.
Originally posted by Chewingonmushrooms
That's interesting, and in the 50's they said we would be traving to mars by 1985. I am all for technology that helps solve the problems we are facing, but until I see that technology in use it is nothing but science fiction. How long will it take to replace our current 200 old technology with new technology? 20 years? 30 Years? Don't give me cp about it happening over night before we both know that is not going to happen.
I totally agree, but I do not see that changing anytime soon do you? Until we reach the point when this new techonology that you speak of becomes reality, we will continue down the path along with our 200 year old technology.
You clearly didn't read my post, else you wouldn't be asking such a question.
Here was the quote I was responding too -
for instance, the world may be able to comfortably hold 30 billion people if space is used properly...however its not.
Instead, we have incredible amounts of waste (food, energy, etc), and highly focused urban areas that causes a salted earth effect in the surrounding areas.
What you are talking about is better economizing and distributing of food by eliminating waste are you not? I simply said that is not possible with our current lifestyle. You also mention area density, aka megacities. See that's a problem isn't it because if you move people and spread them around you will need to build infrastructure to support it right? Again where will you get the materials from (please don't mention nanocarbons).
-hands you a shovel-
Time to take note from gimli and friends..
reread the post I made and restructure your questions to be relevant..but until you stop misunderstanding what was written, its pointless to answer.
Why do I need to restructure my questions? I wasn't the one saying 30 billion people could live on this planet now, and 100 billion people with unlimited energy source (which I also disagree with). Regardless of better distribution and elimination of wastes, without a change in modern lifestyle and our reliance on resources there is no way to support that population currently.
Our current lifestyle is focused around a petrolium product.
You ask a very broad question...choose one and lets go from there...transportation? food? jobs? water? each single topic you brought up does have a plan, but to try to answer them all would make a pagelong post that would be fairly unreadable.Our current lifestyle would automatically change globally with the new power source.,,overnight
Oh again I agree, yet the alternative you give is something that isn't even on the market. I like teleportation ideas to but I doubt people will stop building cars because there is a possibility that teleportation might come into the market once we have the technology.
Lets stick to what technologies we know can be implemented, and what we have at hand now.
Hemp has shown to replace many of the petro products now, but it is illegal. Whether it will become legal in the future or not is not something that I think we can wait for. Again unless we have a total revamp of our political, monetary (or currency, exchange form ), cultural, economical (separate from monetary), and power structure (TPTB), I doubt you will see any of those changes. Question to you would be can you see all those changes happening within the next 20 years?
I like your optimism, but lets stick to what doable now within the power structures that exist now and the technology that exist now (not in development). Without a realistic assessment on what's on the ground presently, then we will just be wasting precious time, because honeslty I don't think we can last another 20 years continuing our current lifestyle.edit on 23-6-2011 by Chewingonmushrooms because: (no reason given)edit on 23-6-2011 by Chewingonmushrooms because: (no reason given)
it is the stepping away from that and trying to sustain a living filled with gadets and possesions for the most part we do not really need, but people want them, or have been trapped in this way of living, that is the problem rather than man as a being.
man fits in perfectly when he lives in tune with nature, but due to his ability to think and problem solve he has moved out and away from nature into world where prestige and power is far more important than simple survival needs.
there are still tribes who live that way, i consider them to be fine, not a problem. i do wonder though why they have not moved forward themselves with technology and why they would only be aware of it via outside influence. you'd think with their brain power and same problem solving capabilities they would of advanced in their own way.
it makes me wonder how all this stuff even started, if tribes today have no need to change or a lack of desire to change and advance, what the hell happened in history that made some community take the first steps of advancement when tribes today seem to need outside influence rather than their own creativity sparking an advancemnt among themselves..
if we look at todays tribes and some in the recent past they only seem to advance once there is outside influence and they are exposured to things, rather than them just having a idea and then creating the new invention.
Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by lifeform11
Tribalism is not even in place. It's just like a zit on a teenager. It's a manageable infection.
Modern life is just that. Modern. Most people don't want to go back to the tribal way of life, where we die from every infection and every bacteria, where most children die before the age of 10, where women suffer at childbirth, and where art and architecture is limited to fruit dyes and wood and leaves.
This way is not the way forward. It is the way to nothingness.
Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by Aggie Man
Being responsible would not include sacrificing liberty for security. In fact that's quite the contrary to responsibility.