Resetting Population (The 7th Billion Baby Omen)

page: 1
1

log in

join

posted on Nov, 24 2011 @ 01:16 PM
link   
Welcoming all views.

It is the genuine top PTB, and a selected few, that will be ducked off safely in some other country outside the strike zones that will be impacted by the superpowers, deceivingly going at each other just to reset their countries' populations to LESS to ZERO.

Militaries deployed away from their countries' territories is "the" sign that they want some of them to survive WW3. Meaning, WW3 will be actually about depopulation as desired by the genuine top PTB.

The 7 billion population mark should be looked at in what it means. The 7 billion population mark it is said the world hit is the key in telling you why depopulation is a must to be headed by the genuine top PTB.




posted on Nov, 24 2011 @ 01:25 PM
link   
I think the world can sustain 7 billion.
I dont think you can control and manipulate 7billion easily.
500,000,000 sounds bout right.



posted on Nov, 24 2011 @ 01:34 PM
link   
There is enough resources (if managed correctly) on this planet for 7 billion to thrive.
There is too many people for the elite to control at 7 billion. They neither have the power nor means to control and make a sheep herd out of 7 billion people.

Georgia Headstones - "1. Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature."
500,000,000 is the most they can control comfortably. The headstones highlight their agenda.



posted on Nov, 24 2011 @ 01:37 PM
link   
Thats absolutely sloppy, if I wanted to wipe out an entire population I would put a vaccine in a few water supplies and use a genetically engineered super virus to wipe everyone out.

A war with nukes would destroy housing, it would destroy crops, it would destroy vital urban centers.



posted on Nov, 24 2011 @ 01:40 PM
link   
The earth can support 7 billion...but don't forget most of these live in abject misery. The systems in place are partly to blame, to be sure...but its more than that. There are real physical limits to certain things, whether people want to admit it or not. Fresh water, for example, already is a hair-trigger issue in many parts of the world. People are wasteful, people are selfish. There are multiple factors at work. Manipulation by global powers is one aspect...but not the only aspect.

For many years I have considered "depopulation agendas." On some levels it makes sense. It is beyond question to me that many powerful influences are at work to curb population. But I do not believe there is a grand conspiracy in place to institute a mass dieoff. I just haven't seen compelling evidence. If such evidence emerges I will gladly modify my stance, but until then I'm going to give this one the chop with occam's razor.



posted on Nov, 24 2011 @ 01:43 PM
link   
More depopulation lunacy- as the population continues to grow and grow. Our business/christian/party of life government worships growth, but human and economic. They want more people to make resources so scarce that we will all be poor and completely indebted to them.

They are trying to make America like the middle east (Israel/Gaza).



posted on Nov, 24 2011 @ 01:51 PM
link   
All those saying the world can support 7 billion... exactly what do you base that on?

Almost 2 billion live in absolute poverty right now. You're saying that's just because of ineffectual resource management?

It's nothing to do with numbers at all...?



posted on Nov, 24 2011 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by FOXMULDER147
All those saying the world can support 7 billion... exactly what do you base that on?

Almost 2 billion live in absolute poverty right now. You're saying that's just because of ineffectual resource management?

It's nothing to do with numbers at all...?


I don't believe it is. If resources were dealt out properly I believe we could sustain life on this planet. The problem is money, do you really believe Africa is in so much in poverty because we simply just don't have enough food and water etc to give them? Especially when we waste so much.



posted on Nov, 24 2011 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by FOXMULDER147
All those saying the world can support 7 billion... exactly what do you base that on?

Almost 2 billion live in absolute poverty right now. You're saying that's just because of ineffectual resource management?

It's nothing to do with numbers at all...?


I'm a FIRM believe it's not production, it's distribution.

Look at all these MAJOR Wal-mart super centres in our cities + all grocery stores. We can make as much food as need be.. What's stopping us is $ and Supply/Demand.

If we NEEDED to feed the whole world, we certainly could.



posted on Nov, 24 2011 @ 02:05 PM
link   
reply to post by FOXMULDER147
 


I base it on the fact that the earth is pretty much maintainting 7billion lives right now.

Yes I think numbers have role to play, but our behavior has a bigger role. I dont think our western definition of successful life can sustain this planet's 7billion people. So to redefine success and what it means to be human may look drab to the those of us living the dream, you know hot water for a shower, widescreen tv's.....but it is a way to solve not only the practical problems of feeding the planet, but the social problems of our inflated egos and death by boredom. I think there are alternate forms of energy emerging to power our homes, and if we get rid of the toxticity of our various manufacturing process we will have steady and clean water supply.

edit: if nothing else, mother nature will do her duty and take care of the population issue.
edit on 24-11-2011 by el1jah because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2011 @ 02:11 PM
link   


I base it on the fact that the earth is pretty much maintainting 7billion lives right now


The earth is not maintaining 7 billion people- millions die every year from starvation, disease and drought.

Africa especially has way to many people. If a continent can't sustain it's people without begging food from halfway around the world then it has too many people for it's ecosystem, duh.



posted on Nov, 24 2011 @ 02:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by CALGARIAN
If we NEEDED to feed the whole world, we certainly could.

You just hit the nail on the head.

If WE needed to feed the whole world, that implies the global population cannot sustain ITSELF.



posted on Nov, 24 2011 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by FOXMULDER147

Originally posted by CALGARIAN
If we NEEDED to feed the whole world, we certainly could.

You just hit the nail on the head.

If WE needed to feed the whole world, that implies the global population cannot sustain ITSELF.


I think there's a limit to how much Earth can sustain. It seems to me like we're reaching that.

And to the comment about if we "NEEDED" to feed the world we could, it should say if we "WANTED" to we could. It's ridiculous to think there are people starving and dying from thirst. That's certainly a need. I think the problem is a mix of both growing scarcity and problematic distribution.



posted on Nov, 24 2011 @ 03:17 PM
link   
I don't think the Powers that be want to kill off major portions of the worlds population. If they did, they would be getting less money from them and we all know how much greed affects their decision making process. The more paying customers the merrier. The ones that can't afford to survive will starve and die and thats OK. Then we don't have to feed them anymore.

If anyone wants to kill hundreds of millions, its the military. That dog is kept on a short leash to insure the slaughter doesn't get out of hand. Just enough force applied to keep subjugated countries under control and bring rebellious ones back into the fold.

It's a fine line calculated by the powers that be. Thats what they discuss when they have those secret meetings. Who gets aid, who starves, who's next for invasion and subjugation? Or "military intervention" as they call it.



posted on Nov, 24 2011 @ 04:16 PM
link   
Why is a lot of money going towards nations' defense on those pie charts?

I think they have been preparing to depopulate since defense gets a huge portion of money from taxes.

What say you?



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 04:11 PM
link   
I think tptb enjoy being the on top of the rest of us. They feel even more powerful with more people they can manipulate, they enjoy the current economic system where they have a lot and the rest of us share the crumbs... With less people there will be bigger crumbs and the gap could close.

So I guess why wud they de populate? They don't care if ten billion of us live in sewers lol



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 04:26 PM
link   
More people, especially of those more in poverty, is exactly what TPTB needs. Poor, uneducated, easily replaceable people are by far the easiest to control.

There will be no depopulation, nor population control (except in China).

People will continue to multiply until oil begins to run out, at which point the trend will finally reverse and billions will starve to death.



  exclusive video


new topics
top topics
 
1

log in

join