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.


Over population is a serious issue that must be dealt with.

page: 5
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 12:14 PM

Originally posted by USarmyFL
If over population is a problem for you then please lead by example. Do your part by leaving this world, show us how its done.


And this is reasonable and godly for any viewpoint.
I strive to live "gently" so that there can be "room" for more and so that I am not a plague on my home. We should do so societallly so that the world is cared for rather than ravaged. What a place this would be if the caretakers took care.

posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 12:18 PM
When you look at what segments of the population breed the most then it is not a very large leap of logic to conclude that we can do without them. In Africa, the average childbirth rate is seven kids per female, and in majorly catholic and muslim societies, its just as bad if not worse. These people have taken common sense and thrown it out in order to breed more children that they cannot possibly afford to feed or care for, leading to sad faced kids on commercials during christmas. I'm not heartless, but I am a realist. Two or three kids is ok, but when there is more than four, come on people, cut it out! I mean it! Cut the tubes, for crying out loud. Its a vagina, not a clown car, ladies. And men, if you can't keep it in your pants, get fixed so your mistakes don't end up a burden to the rest of us. When a population of any species grows to much, something always happens, and since we've hit a new threshold on population, and we have 2012 coming up, perhaps something WILL happen and reduce the population in a big way to more manageable levels. When that happens, please take note of what brought it on. Please spay or neuter your religious fanatics and idiots. If you can't afford your lifestyle, don't have kids.

posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 12:59 PM
Over population is as fake as Santa Claus. I love when people believe that kind of stuff.

Are you serious? We can fit all 7 billion people in the U.S.

Have you been out of your house lately? Road trip perhaps? Have you seen how much un-used
land we have? There is so much land to still be used it's crazy.

Over population is garbage. Maybe cities like NYC are getting over populated but that's rare.

It just get's harder for the elite to control the people when the numbers are as high as they are.

Developed and rural residential make up 139 million acres, or 6.1 percent of total land area in the U.S.

The U.S. alone has 1.9 billion acres of land. Plenty of room for many things.

posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 01:16 PM

these stones are also named americas stonehenge and the 1st rule is to maintain earths population to 5 billion.
most people find the first rule to be very ominious and the person who commissioned the stones used a false name. If you research these stones further you will find they seem to be tied with a one world government, and many have speculated tied into the illuminati.
edit on 5-12-2011 by Foxy1 because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-12-2011 by Foxy1 because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-12-2011 by Foxy1 because: spelling

posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 01:25 PM
Over-populationists are so busy preaching the problem to nations that are already on board.

They then follow up this act by encouraging immigration policies in those same nations, to replace them with groups who do not believe in limiiting their reproduction.

So basically, over populationists want everyone in the Western nations to stop breeding so that they can replace them with people who aren't so suicidal.

Go preach to the people who are over-breeding. They aren't here.

posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 01:37 PM
reply to post by davereality

Yeah, I can't wait to live in a world with no natural resources and no open spaces. Sounds great. By all means, let's keep breeding like mice and bringing about our own extinction. Plenty of room to shoehorn in a few billion more people.

posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 02:13 PM
One way to curb the ever growing power hungry group of controllers population is to get a really good water filter that will separate rain water and water from all the contaminates and radioactivity and give them their chemicals back. I think we should do that to our soils too. Just filter out their crap and send it on their doorsteps, in dump truck loads, because we don't need this "gifts", return to sender please, and we know who they are. All the corrupt leaders share the karma of murdering earth's citizen's.

But the best way of dealing with over population has always been, SOCIAL JUSTICE. Equalizing. Raising the standard of living and ensuring world wide equality, bringing out the clean free energy and frequency cures for radiation, that they already have, and having the corrupt leaders disband and step down for counsels of citizens, half men and half women, and a completely equal highly educated advanced humanity, with no monopolies and corporate military rulers.

World wide health care, medical, dental, redistribution of land and resources to the people, redistribution of heritage seeds on the earth and high levels of education with no one falling through the cracks, all accounted for and all progressing, and those in need treated equally, and looked after.

You can always tell when the spyware kicks in for some reason, slows everything down.

First world nations have very low birthrates, some are negative numbers like Canada has been often.
edit on 5-12-2011 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 02:29 PM
reply to post by muse7

One of the most serous threats that we face is over-population, with 7 billion people and counting we are running out of space.

We are no where close to running out of living space. We're running out of space for factory farming to "sustain" our unsustainable culture. With that, we are running out of limited resources.

Nothing on earth is infinite, every resource is finite on this planet.

We could easily stuff every living human within the borders of the USA and still have plenty of personal space, its the food production that we are running out of space for. And because we've allowed this factory farming industry to rape the land, places once good for growing become deserts (nutrient wise)

posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 03:27 PM
reply to post by muse7

Uh , no?

Where did you get that from?

I said that overpopulation isn't the problem, the problem is that we aren't living in harmony with each other. Don't you think there are better ways to live on this planet? Without sucking it dry of everything it gives us and never giving back to the planet or eachother?

Call me a tree hugging hippie, but it's the truth. We need to start respecting eachother and the planet better. That will go a much longer way than anyone thinks.

If we lived this way, a ton of problems would fall away.

Now i'm gonna go outside and hug the tree in my front yard/

posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 03:28 PM
reply to post by muse7

Oh and really, tell me how you got that question from what i said. It makes no sense.

posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 06:53 AM
reply to post by muse7

One of the most serous threats that we face is over-population, with 7 billion people and counting we are running out of space.

We are not running out of space, that's freakin absurd. Every man, woman, and child on the planet could stand shoulder to shoulder in Jacksonville County Florida with plenty of room to spare.

posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 07:10 AM
People go on and on about over population, about drastic measures to reduce the numbers, if you are so concerned about it, lead by example and start the depopulation with yourself and your loved ones, I will leave myself and my loved ones till last thank you very much.

The world is not over populated, and our resource capabilities are more than enough to ensure that everyone eats well and has warmth and shelter.

What the real problem is, that the land and the resources are owned by far to few people, who profit by scarcity and restricting those resources, we as a species are hunter gatherers and although we have developed socially and technologically those core elements of being hunter gatherers are still with us and manifest themselves as greed and nearly everyone is greedy at heart. How many of you would give half of your earnings to a poor unfortunate family who due to current circumstances cant find employment to support themselves? I will tell you how many NONE, how many would say oh I will divide my work with someone else, so they could at least have employment? NONE, The world is the same, look after me and mine.

I am not saying that makes anyone here a bad person, it is just human nature, we are tribal. But it pisses me off people saying depopulate this or that, because it is always someone else's family, someone else's city, someone else s country that needs to be depopulated first, someone else is always the problem, well you what we are ALL the problem

Besides the way things are looking no one needs to worry, WW3 will solve the population problem anyway

posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 07:11 AM
Im so sick of these scum posters that hate their own species and call for mass genocide. And this trash is not only aloud on ATS, but it makes it to the front page! Explain to me the difference between Hitler and what the OP is calling for? Hitler targeted one group of people and the OP targets the poor. Whats the difference? This garbage has no place on this site and its a damn shame that the mods let it continue.

OP if you think over population is a problem and you hate your own species that much then why dont you be a part of your own solution and walks yourself off a bridge?

posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 07:20 AM
There is the human methods and the inhumane methods when it comes to population control.

I don't care much for inhumanity.

The humane methods are as follows in order of effectiveness:
1. The education of women. This is proven to work for a number of reason. The principle reason being women have choice. The second reason which is just as powerful is that a door opens besides just being a mum. Women can enter the workforce and have a career. In the western world, women start having babies later in life and will generally have less babies simply due to the time they choose to become mums.
And that is the secret to population stabilisation.

In this person's opinion, the military have it wrong. Trillions are spent on learning how to kill people and the weapons of war, instead of spending billions on world wide education programs for women and the peaceful proven methods of population stabilisation.

2. Cultural change. This is going to be a big one and requires great thought. Take India. The culture is geared towards big families. The sons live with the parents. I'm not sure if this has an impact, I really don't. An Indian I spoke to seem to think it did impact on the population? Who knows.

Some of the replies to this thread are quite ludicrous. Others are homicidal. How can a person honestly say that it is just the system. The quantity is a HUGE part of this problem. Do they stop for a second and reflect on the sheer number of animals that are slaughted daily as part of the machine to keep us all alive? Each person in the Western world for instance will consume 10 cattle, umpteen caged chicken etc. Do you stop and think of what is required to support a population base of 7 billion. Isn't it more responsible to breed less??

Granted we need to eat. A thriving civilisation is a wonderful thing to be apart of. However I can't help but think of the obvious question. Should we not limit the extent of our impact on the rest of the planet who are along for the ride?
edit on 6-12-2011 by superbuker because: spelling and logic

edit on 6-12-2011 by superbuker because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 07:23 AM
reply to post by muse7

My solution is to embrace zero point energy the same way we went to the moon. Set a global goal to completely get off fossil fuels and anything that creates toxic byproducts within like ten years.

posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 07:27 AM
reply to post by muse7

1. Where did you get the figure of 7 billion, from the eugenics extremists at the UN?
2. We have the technology to easily populate the oceans why not?
3. 85% of the worlds food is on the sea bed not on land
4. We have the technology to grow massive food resources on the sea bed.
5. You can put everyone in the wolrd in Austalia alone with room to spare.
6. Ex Skunk Works director says we have the tech to go to the stars, but will take an act of god to get the tech public.

7. Maybe you shouldnt believe everything you hear at the UN or in MSM. And if population needs to be stemmed we can just introduce new laws that benefit everyone, and that people agree with. Things appear over populated because you probably live in a city, I live in the country, there are about 50 people in a 10 mile radius where i live.

posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 07:34 AM
reply to post by PrinceDreamer

It comes down to a definition of overpopulation.

Is it an equation like 1 person needs x amount of water, x number of meals in a lifetime, x number of other resources such as wood for houses and paper, x number bricks and cemenet, x amount of coal and ironore to produce steel, x number of plastic containers (which are created from oils), x number of medical injections, x number of products from the supermarket. etc etc etc.

OR is it something more fitting of an advanced civilisation?

I'd like to think less is more. And that we have the intellect and the willpower to overcome a challenge greater than the space race.

posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 07:34 AM
reply to post by e11888

We just need to focus on getting RP into office. It's the only chance we have. If that all happened and he was elected and allowed to start making the types of changes he talks about I think a lot of things will just fall in line in a self-correcting way. I truly believe once we crack zero point energy

(for those who want to debunk this idea watch the Tom Valone lecture on the internet or just google him and then you can argue with him about the details)

there will be a death of most of the current methods of energy production which would demand many kinds of jobs in not only making the new infrastructure but cleaning up the old one.

posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 07:41 AM
reply to post by superbuker

this book was written in the 80's and basically says how everything needs to be decentralized and approached in a more holistic way. It's the old "balance is everything" idea which I agree with. If we had a completely different way of making and using energy on this planet we would never have to worry about overpopulation.

from the first chapter:
"None of them, however, identified the real problem that underlies our crisis of ideas: the fact that most academics subscribe to narrow perceptions of reality which are inadequate for dealing with the major problems of our time. These problems, as we shall see in detail, are systemic problems, which means that they are closely interconnected and interdependent. They cannot be understood within the fragmented methodology characteristic of our academic disciplines and government agencies. Such an approach will never resolve any of our difficulties but will merely shift them around in the complex web of social and ecological relations. A resolution can be found only if the structure of the web itself is changed, and this will involve profound transformations of our social institutions, values, and ideas. As we examine the sources of our cultural crisis it will become apparent that most of our leading thinkers use outdated conceptual models and irrelevant variables. It will also become evident that a significant aspect of our conceptual impasse is that all of the prominent intellectuals interviewed by the Washington Post were men. "

edit on 6-12-2011 by bottleslingguy because: add quote

posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 07:41 AM
reply to post by TheMindWar

5. You can put everyone in the wolrd in Austalia alone with room to spare.

Australia?? Try Jacksonville County Florida. Every person in the world could stand shoulder to shoulder with room to spare.

new topics

top topics

<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in