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.

 

World Population - The One Cause of All the Planetary Issues

page: 2
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 12:45 PM
link   
The planet can sustain more than this. Humans just don't use or treat the planet wisely, particularly not in the way they are greedy for "ownership" of natural resources that belong to us all, pollute, and mess with the natural food chain (thanks, Monsanto et al!) So while many look upon our sheer numbers as the root cause, I'd have to disagree. It's more our mindset, our collective carelessness and selfishness that causes the real issues.

That being said, I do think the places where population growth is out of control and their area cannot sustain it should take some action (and this can be a really long and explosive discussion that can take on many faces in and of itself) and not be selfish and certainly not impact (economically or pollution or otherwise) the rest of the world where the population to land mass balance is more under control. Their irresponsibility should be reigned in first before they should be allowed to join the rest of the world. A subset of the prime directive, if you will.




posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 04:16 PM
link   
Not to mention that nearly all future population models have us maxxing out at around 9 billion people, and then readjusting back down to 6-6.5 billion in time.

World population was 3.5 billion in 1980 - 30 years ago. We've doubled the amount of people in that time, mostly due to lack of education and the growing despair of the third world as the western powers continue to rape and pillage lesser nations.

Now that China/India/Brazil are starting to industrialize, more and more women are accepting careers and jobs, choosing to work instead of purely being baby-makers like in the past.

This problem just sucks in dumb people in that the surface realizations are all pretty much wrong. Like others have said, the issue with sustainability is our inadherance to the concept; we choose the paths that generate most profit rather than the greatest gain to humanity. If we actually tried to work with the planet instead of subjecting it to our selfish will, we'd easily have enough for everyone. As these population issues pop up, what is almost always the solution? Smaller communities banding together and providing for themselves.

The focus should be on efficiency and stewardship - not on profit and the hoarding of excess. You are just one of the lazy who see death of billions as the answer.

I'll tell you this much tho: you try to kill my second child and you'll have that karma bomb coming right back at you ASAP courtesy of myself. By that point, the resistance will have won anyways. The game's almost up as it is.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 04:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by JibbyJedi
reply to post by CB328
 





This is such a stupid myth, the fact that a person could buy into this shows how well dumbing down has worked. Texas barely has enough water for it's 25 million people and has almost run out several times. Not to mention that it would be logistically impossible to supply that many people in one place.

Myth? It's not meant to be taken literally, like we should throw everyone into Texas, it's about the MATH of the space available vs. the population. All 7 billion can fit into Texas mathematically, no one is suggesting we literally do that.

The point is, there's more than enough room for billions more IF we managed the space available efficiently, which we aren't. So TPTB would rather thin the herd than clean up their mess, and have convinced people that that is the solution.


edit on 4-3-2012 by JibbyJedi because: (no reason given)


I agree with you jibby. It's sad when I see a Carribean country like Haiti so exploited. At one time it was a lush, tropical paradise. It does seem that our country is over-populated, but that's because of a large number of people living in small areas. It's still all about survival, because we are not self-sufficient. I still think there should be population control for the benefit of future generations.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 04:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by ResistETIntervention

1 billion is said to be the world population sustainable by the Earth
[(1 billion)/(7 billion)]x100% = 85.7143% reduction of population needed to have a sustainable future

Approximate Population Decrease with One-Child-Plan is as follows: the total population will decrease from 7 billion in 2012 to 992 million in 2082. The percentage decrease will be 85.83% by 2082.


Would you kindly explain your math here? I would like to know how you arrived at the world population being at only 992 million by the year 2082. While I know I'll be dead before then, my children will not be, and my grand children will not be. Kids in their teens and younger will still be alive (barring accidents, disasters, illness, etc).

One child plan might reduce the number of humans produced.....but I do not see how your math allows for the population of the world to fall that low by then. Unless of course your plan also includes exterminating people.

Could we also please have a source link showing us how the Earth is only able to sustain 1 billion humans please?



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by ResistETIntervention
 


The "left" side of our country generally advocates "compassion," but believes it best to strangle the population into their ideal. The "right" side of our country generally advocates "power," but believes it best to neglect natural obligations.

I am not sure who, what, where, or when, but the pot is obviously boiling over and it will come to a head. Unless we, as individuals, increase in wisdom/godliness, it would not matter if the whole world was flooded and only a few survived, we would still end up wearing the same shameful garments we are clothed in now.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 04:59 PM
link   
Looks like the project bluebeam programming worked on this thread.

Next step...new messiah, aliens and one world government.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 05:02 PM
link   
Our planet could easily sustain 70 billion if each person were to be a good judge.

Our common problems are not brought about by our cumulative existence, but rather, by our cumulative chaos/pride.

Understand and Express Understanding; In that we would manifest the mercy and grace of Life.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 05:33 PM
link   
Wow, the depopulation supporters are rolling full force on ATS lately, I just debated another depop proponent last night.

Well, OP first of all overpopulation is not the "cause" of all the worlds problems, the fact is humanity as a whole being shortsighted grasping greedy procrastinating morons is the cause of all the problems, overpopulation is just fuel on the fire; amplifying the pre existing condition.

Now, lets deal with the fantastical idea of the one child policy. The fact is it will never work, sorry. China has had a one child policy since the 70s and they can't even enforce it; sure they are able to limit children among the urban populations, but what about the countryside, the mountains and the villages?
The fact is they can't and don't even really try, mainly because they know they can't. So if China with their power and control over their citizens can't actually enforce the one child policy; except in the most limited fashion,in their own country, what makes you think any government body could enforce a one child policy globally? Furthermore, what makes you think that you could get the majority of seven billion people on the planet to willing give up their "Primal" right to procreate, especially without a fight? Frankly you can talk until your blue in the face, the fact is the idea is fantastical and convincing the majority of seven billion people to go along with sterilization; which is what it would actually take to enforce it in any means, is an almost insurmountable obstacle, for the depopulation supporters.

And, personally I find the whole idea of depopulation to be shortsighted and somewhat ignorant.For one it only addresses one problem humanity is facing; in a shortsighted and inefficient manner; ie overpopulation, and doesn't really address the host of problems humanity faces in our continued quest for long term survival; super volcanoes, ice ages, magnetic pole shifts, asteroid and comet impacts and solar flares, just to name a few.

The fact is humanity is at a crossroads, we are like a small tribe living in a valley, who has now grown large enough that the valley can no longer support them and they are faced with two choices, either go over the hill to the next valley our start slitting the throats of some of the tribe members. Depopulation proponents may want to limit the number of people to try to find some fictional garden of eden type balance, people like me want to go over the next hill; the next hill is space, my friend.

The fact is we have developed manned space flight in the sixties and since have had forty years of scientific advancements under our belt; even our electronic baubles of status and entertainment are pretty powerful now, far more then the giant computer banks that made up mission control in the sixties. We have new materials, new fuel mixtures, better computers, better communications systems, better ideas for propulsion etc; we have everything we need to begin taking the next step, which is to go to space and we actually need as many of the 7 billion we have and maybe even more to really pull it off full force.

And, truthfully, humanity should have been steadily building the foundations of the future space civilization since the moon missions, but the masses being shortsighted procrastinators, humanity continues to sit on it's collective rear and squabble with their siblings over ever diminishing resources, while their leadership continues to hold their collective throats pinned to the ground under an iron boot. The sad thing is the United states alone spends 520b on war and 16b on space exploration; can't you see the real problem with humanity? We continue to live like that then the whole human race kind of deserves to become extinct.If NASA had received even half of the yearly DOD budget since the sixties, we wouldn't just have colonies on the moon and mars today, but probably even whole cities and factory complexes as well.

And, I know you and others will say, space colonization is a fantastical idea and your right, but no less fantastical then a global one child policy and depopulation. And really; like I said in the other depop thread last night, I wager I would have a far easier time to get people to go to space, then the depopulation proponents will have trying to get people to willingly give up their "primal" right of procreation, especially since my fantastical plan doesn't advocate sterilizing and or killing people.

Anyway, goodluck convincing humanity to follow your fantastical, short term and short sighted depopulation solution.


edit on 4-3-2012 by prisoneronashipoffools because: typo

edit on 4-3-2012 by prisoneronashipoffools because: typo

edit on 4-3-2012 by prisoneronashipoffools because: typo

edit on 4-3-2012 by prisoneronashipoffools because: typo



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 06:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by ResistETIntervention
World Population: The one cause of all the planetary issues, the Great Waves of Change

  1. Growing economic hardship and political instability
  2. Declining energy and natural resources
  3. Climate change and catastrophic weather
  4. Loss of arable land and fresh water
  5. Pandemic disease
  6. Escalating worldwide conflict


Ok, let's stat at the start...

It is not the cause of all planetary issues, period. This statement is not founded with reason nor supported by fact. The real cause of all planetary issues is the idea that there are a few people who feel the rest of us should work to support them. Now, this means the top of the chain AND the bottom of the chain. The problem stems from the fact that in general, we as a species have been convinced that this is an acceptable pursuit, to keep up with the Jonses.

The growing economic hardship and political instability is a direct result of a planet and species that has operated on a debt-based economy for far too long. The economic infrastructure of this planet is based on the military industrial complex. It is the ONLY thing that has kept the entire system from melting sooner than it has, and it is THE reason that the system will melt, or alternatively, the entire planet will go up in smoke and radiation.

Declining energy and natural resources... wow. You really do support your local congressman don't you? There are enough alternative and proven alternative energy sources to eliminate oil, coal and all fossil fuels within a 10 year transition. Solar, Geothermal, Wind, Tidal, Pneumatic are all proven, plus we have eCat, Rodin/Vortex plus a slew of other emerging technologies that will be more than adequate.

Climate and catastrophic weather is a varied and always changing issue. While I cannot speak to the multitude of causes, I assure you that while we do have an influence on our environment, if everyone acted responsibly to the environment, I am sure through technology and decreased direct influence, Mother Nature would share the planet.

Loss of arable land fresh water is of course always an issue, the lack of efficiency in our daily lives is spectacular. The lack of efficiency in our industrial lives is so far beyond what is reasonable it is not even close to sustainable, you are right. SO, is it that there are too many people or too many people wasting? Definitely the latter. Arable land is also something that can be influenced through technological advancement and implementation of current technology. Once again, the causes are not the size of the population, but the way in which we live.

Pandemic diseases are a result of too many people living in squalor with a lack of environmental standards. They are also the result of laboratory work getting out, they are also a result of lack of diligence in our hospitals and health care places. You cannot say that these happen because of MORE people.


Escalation of worldwide conflict is a result of the leadership of people, not the quantity of people being led. The economic reasons for the worldwide conflicts are mentioned previously. Conflict is the only thing that pays right now. Until we change our attitudes and stop believing in the mythical money fairy handing out an existence, we will continue to have these problems. If the population was the cause of the worldwide conflict, why did the Mongels kill nearly 20 million people back in the 13th century when there hardly any of us around?

The problems we have as a species are not as a result of the number of us, but the number of us willing to allow this existence to transpire.

Change starts with the way you think. Please, help yourself and everyone else on this planet and foster change.


edit on 4-3-2012 by EarthChilde because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 06:23 PM
link   


there's more than enough room for billions more IF we managed the space available efficiently


We don't have enough food and water for the 7 billion we have now, why the hell would anyone except a psychopath want to add more people to the problem? We are running out of fresh water, running out of fish, running out of rare metals, running out of food in many parts of the world. Millions of people die every year from starvation, dehydration, dirty water, or fighting over these resources. In India there are so many people begging in the streets that people cut their own childrens' arms off so that tourists will feel sorry and give them money. Americans are so ignorant and selfish it makes me sick to live here sometimes.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 07:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by CB328



there's more than enough room for billions more IF we managed the space available efficiently


We don't have enough food and water for the 7 billion we have now, why the hell would anyone except a psychopath want to add more people to the problem? We are running out of fresh water, running out of fish, running out of rare metals, running out of food in many parts of the world. Millions of people die every year from starvation, dehydration, dirty water, or fighting over these resources. In India there are so many people begging in the streets that people cut their own childrens' arms off so that tourists will feel sorry and give them money. Americans are so ignorant and selfish it makes me sick to live here sometimes.


China has 1.3 billion people.
India has 1.2 billion people.
America has 312 million people.

The topic was about WORLD population, but you somehow decided that "Americans are so ignorant and selfish" that it "makes you sic to live here sometimes.", even though we only have 1/4 of the population of the top 2 contenders of the world.

Well shucks sir. No one is keeping you here. The US signed the Human Rights charter of 1948. If you're so sick of living here, my all means: immigrate to the country of your choice (if they'll have you that is).

In case you haven't looked around here on the ATS forums, you'll find that a VAST majority of people on here really don't want the US doing anything else with the rest of the world.



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 12:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by XelNaga
pretty sure most of those issues would be solved if we put our resources towards colonizing space.

we just have to take them away from those greedy, hoarding folks who want to rule us all.


Don’t presume that the universe is a vast space waiting for us to explore, exploit, and colonize. We live in a well-inhabited region of the galaxy, which has long been established. There are no place the humanity can explore and colonize. There are no resources humanity can exploit. Any human attempt to venture out of this solar system will be scrutinized by races that will thwart human beings in their quest for resources or colonization of other planets. The humanity will find the universe rather unfriendly. It’s an error to assume that when we deplete our resources of this planet, we can acquire what we need or want from elsewhere in space.

Surely, humanity does need to cooperate and distribute the resources equitably in order to survive. That can begin with each one of us. The richer will have to help poorer, and the poor will have to help each other.



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 12:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by eXia7
Last I heard you could fit everybody inside the state of texas, giving each a 36x36 space. Over population is a myth, and a farce. There is plenty of land for every person to have for their own, but it's all locked by government.


It is not a matter of how the Earth is going to accommodate living spaces for 7 billion or more people. It takes a lot of arable land to grow food to feed the population. Not all land is arable. It is said that raising one cow requires 10 acres of land. It takes a lot of resources, energy, and water for that many people to merely survive. However, many people insist that they maintain certain life style which require a lot more resources, energy, and water to accommodate them. There are finite amounts of resources and we are, indeed, squandering them at an alarming rate. That is just what is required to sustain that many people.

What about other consequences: the water and air pollution, trashes, environmental degradation, loss of arable land, climate change, lack or insufficient amount of jobs, ….. Everything will become more expensive including food and gasoline. Everyone will become poorer.

Do you still think it’s just about living spaces to accommodate 7 billion people?



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 01:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by SimontheMagus
We could turn the entire planet into a lush paradise and each person on the face of the earth can have several acres of land to call their own.


The idea is not to live a better life than now, but rather a life more sustainable into the future.



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 01:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by purplemer
There is nothing wrong with this amount of people on the planet. The real concerns are resource distribution. There really is no need for people in the world to starve for example. There is plenty of food for everyone.


Surely, food is not being distributed equitably. However, we are, indeed, losing arable land due to climate change and other natural disasters. So, it isn’t true that there is plenty of food for everyone.



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 01:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by justwokeup
The planet can support many more of us, just not all of us behaving as we have in the first world in the 20th Century.

We are an inventive species. We'll engineer our way out. But only after things get so bad theres no alternative but to invent and change or die.



We do need all of our innovativeness and cooperation to work our way to resolving all the planetary issues. However, it is not correct that the planet can support many more of us. All of the issues the humanity is facing arose due to overpopulation.



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 01:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by tagasbob
You are just one of the lazy who see death of billions as the answer.


Are you responding to my main post? That is precisely it. I don’t see death of billions as the answer, though that will be a consequence if we continue to contribute to overpopulation. In order to reduce the population ethically, all of us must make conscious decisions to have no more than one child in the future.



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 01:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by eriktheawful
Would you kindly explain your math here? I would like to know how you arrived at the world population being at only 992 million by the year 2082.


I tried to include a table of computation, but it became all misaligned and unreadable. If you can make it out, here it is. We assume one-child plan and procreation by one age group, say, 22 to 32. It is a very crude model which doesn’t take many factors into consideration.


Approximate Population Decrease with One-Child-Plan

Age group-- 0~10-- 11~21 22~32 33~43 44~54 55~65 66~76 Total---- % dec
Beginning-- 1000.0 1000.0 1000.0 1000.0 1000.0 1000.0 1000.0 7000.0 0.00%
10th year-- 500.00 1000.0 1000.0 1000.0 1000.0 1000.0 1000.0 6500.0 7.14%
20th year-- 250.00 500.00 1000.0 1000.0 1000.0 1000.0 1000.0 5750.0 17.86%
30th year-- 125.00 250.00 500.00 1000.0 1000.0 1000.0 1000.0 4875.0 21.25%
40th year-- 62.500 125.00 250.00 500.00 1000.0 1000.0 1000.0 3937.5 43.75%
50th year-- 31.250 62.500 125.00 250.00 500.00 1000.0 1000.0 2968.8 57.59%
60th year-- 15.625 31.250 62.500 125.00 250.00 500.00 1000.0 1984.4 71.65%
70th year-- 7.8125 15.625 31.250 62.500 125.00 250.00 500.00 992.20 85.83%

% dec = % decrease of population from the original population
Population in millions
(Zeros are added as place holders for the alignment of the data)

edit on 6-3-2012 by ResistETIntervention because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 01:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by prisoneronashipoffools
Depopulation proponents may want to limit the number of people to try to find some fictional garden of eden type balance, people like me want to go over the next hill; the next hill is space, my friend.


Space colonization is, indeed, a fantastical idea stemmed from human ignorance about life in the universe.

I’m not trying to promote one-child policy or depopulation in this discussion, but rather awareness in people so that we can educate each other of the one ethical way to reduce the world population gradually. Adopting one-child plan as a policy and enforcing it upon people is unlikely to succeed. We need to gain a greater understanding of how overpopulation impacts the world. It will take many of us to truly desire to resolve the planetary issues and dedicate ourselves for a few decades in accomplishing the goal. If we give up because one-child plan seems impossible, then we’ll just have to wait for the Nature to take its course while we continue to overpopulate the Earth.

True resolutions of this magnitude must be founded upon true understanding and immense cooperation.



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 01:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by eriktheawful
The topic was about WORLD population, but you somehow decided that "Americans are so ignorant and selfish" that it "makes you sic to live here sometimes.", even though we only have 1/4 of the population of the top 2 contenders of the world.

Well shucks sir. No one is keeping you here.


I didn’t post this topic to incite blaming and fury, but rather understanding and cooperation. However, U.S. with less than 5% of the world population is using about 25% of world resources including oil. We need to promote a greater understanding regarding planetary issues and we all need to change in the way we live, so that we can all help create a better future for the humanity.

To prepare for the Great Waves of Change



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join