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.

 

Create food and water in a lab using our current science. Solve the "overpopulation" issue.

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 10:50 AM
link   
Good day.

(This is gonna be a little long thread, and I hate when others publish looong threads, but the amount of text in this thread is necessary to share my idea, please take a few minutes of your time to read this. Thank you.)

- This is an idea that I want to share. I'm pretty sure that i'm not the only one who has come up with this, but I want to share my thoughts and see if someone else might pick it up and spread the word out to the world with me. (Sometimes ideas needs to be picked up and repeated.)

- I was sitting in my "spot" where I always, out of nowhere, start to make plans and think of different aspects of different subjects, and I had just watched an episode of Ancient Aliens, where they were talking of all these new technology that is very amazing. Then I started to think (and talk to myself), "When I think about all those new ideas, they are developing very rapidly, and over the few years the speed is increasing, and so is the population of the world, this must have some kind of link, and the rate of population is increasing, and so will the technology." (Now, this is nothing I take credit for, because there is probably a lot of people out there that has thought of the same thing, I just want to share it.)

- And I thought to myself: "Maybe the overpopulation subject isn't all that too bad after all, the biggest problem is to give everyone food and water, and for now that's about it, (and when it comes to living space, we will eventually develop technology to move elsewhere in the universe. If there only was a way to get people all over the world enough food and water to survive. Wait! They make human organs in the lab, and that technology is developing quite fast, why can't they start making muscle (which is meat) and so on? Then we can stop the killing of other animals just to eat and survive, we can spare the animals as well, and eat without feeling bad. What if we also made clean water? This would help the world, and solve most of the issues."

[UPDATE]
- When it comes to the population, i'm not saying that we should increase the rate of the growth, but rather think about how many we are now, should we decrease? How much? Or shall we stay right where we are? If we were to decrease, I take up a subject, that the chinese have done, but perhaps were not done good enough, and if the whole world would do the same thing at the same time, it may be more effective, the solution is not very popular, but at least we won't take any lives. Each couple may only have 1 child.
[END UPDATE]

- Now, what I started to realize is that there would take huge amounts of work and power to do such a thing, and loads of people would lose their jobs, on the other hand, new jobs would then be open for those people as well.
But the world powers don't want to focus too much on this, because it would cost too much money. But hey, isn't this a huge issue? I was thinking (and this may sound quite naive) that can't we just put the money part aside? Can't we for once set up a WORLD PROJECT to solve a huge issue, a world project where we all chip in and do our part, a world project where no money is needed, where all the resources needed is available for free to solve this ONE issue?

- It is possible to achieve, no doubt! All we need is the courage, all we need is the effort and the will to do such a thing. If we had such a project in this world, it would be an historic event, a huge milestone for all living things.

- All we need, is the willpower, the courage to do it, forget the money for once and let the whole world solve this issue together as a whole.

- I felt the need to share this with you, and I hope that I made some sense, and that you will take this with you to think about it, and share it with others. I would like to hear your opinions on this subject as well. Thank you for taking your time.

Kindest regards

|.SLO7H.|
edit on 12-6-2012 by SLO7H because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 10:55 AM
link   
As much as I see the good intention those ideas, it could go horribly wrong. You simply cannot trust major corporations to produce normal meats, so, imagine a lab grown meat with all the cheapest chemicals they can get their hands on replacing natural foods. I like the idea of creating water though I am not sure how possible that is?



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 10:56 AM
link   
reply to post by SLO7H
 


I hate coming in and leaving basically a one-liner but...

We don't need better technologies, we need less people. 90% of the worlds problems would disappear tomorrow if 3/4 of the population went to. (that's still almost 2 billion people here)



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 10:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by KnawLick
reply to post by SLO7H
 


I hate coming in and leaving basically a one-liner but...

We don't need better technologies, we need less people. 90% of the worlds problems would disappear tomorrow if 3/4 of the population went to. (that's still almost 2 billion people here)


Most of the worlds problems would vanish if we tore down all the banks, mega corps and governments in collusion to stomp on our rights and to destroy this planet for profit.

Overpopulation has nothing to do with it, this planet can supply and feed 10 billion people (and our death/birth rate will level out around there too), its all a lie. We already grow enough food for 10 billion people, its just wasted.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 11:00 AM
link   
reply to post by SLO7H
 


with our " current technology " vat grown ` meat ` would have no immune system - so it would need to be grown in sterile reactors - [ with the associated cost - plus danger that a breach in bio-containment would render entire batches unfit to eat ] OR be treated with anti-biotics [ with all the risks inherent ]



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by KnawLick
reply to post by SLO7H
 


I hate coming in and leaving basically a one-liner but...

We don't need better technologies, we need less people. 90% of the worlds problems would disappear tomorrow if 3/4 of the population went to. (that's still almost 2 billion people here)


You first.
In fact, maybe the governments should set up a volunteer "die so that others might live" program, donate the organs/bodies for food/fuel and set up the volunteer's families to receive extra amenities while living out their lives on earth. Maybe we could promise the volunteers "70 virgins" in the afterlife too. I don't know, it's worth a thought.
edit on 12-6-2012 by Gridrebel because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 11:04 AM
link   
reply to post by OwenGP185
 


They are already making meats out of wheat. Seriously.

Here.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 11:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by CynicalDrivel
reply to post by OwenGP185
 


They are already making meats out of wheat. Seriously.

Here.


Mcdonalds already has a hold on that,
Humans are not supposed to eat much wheat, but its in everything.
Most fast food burgers are mostly wheat



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 11:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Gridrebel
 


I wish there was still undiscovered land on this planet. I'd love to be one of the old west explorers. Just keep traveling until couldnt see civilization anymore and set up my home. No other people besides my family for 10 miles in any direction. Sign me up.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 11:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by CynicalDrivel
reply to post by OwenGP185
 


They are already making meats out of wheat. Seriously.

Here.


Now that is interesting


|.SLO7H.|



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
reply to post by SLO7H
 


with our " current technology " vat grown ` meat ` would have no immune system - so it would need to be grown in sterile reactors - [ with the associated cost - plus danger that a breach in bio-containment would render entire batches unfit to eat ] OR be treated with anti-biotics [ with all the risks inherent ]


Hi.
I'm not so sure about this, if we create human organs now that is implemented in humans, how hard can it be to create muscle tissue that can be fed to the population? Even though i'm not a scientist with all the required knowledge, I believe that a lot can be achieved, and I personally don't believe that it is that problematic.

|.SLO7H.|



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 11:23 AM
link   
reply to post by AzureSky
 


Bollocks!

Overpopulation is not a lie.

How many species do we loose every year as a testament to that fact, the earth was not put here for us to exploit. We share this planet with millions of other living things, it's a simple fact that humans use up resources, destroy habitats, and polute everywhere they go, leaving other species with little or nothing to go on.

Only a fool would believe the earth can sustain more humans.
edit on 12-6-2012 by seabhac-rua because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 11:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by seabhac-rua
reply to post by AzureSky
 


Bollocks!

Overpopulation is not a lie.

How many species do we loose every year as a testament to that fact, the earth was not put here for us to exploit.


You are correct. Its not.
Most of the species dropping off the planet is not all our fault, it would have happened either way. Species die and are discovered on a daily basis. We're obviously killing more than the earth can create to offset the destruction we are doing. Im not disagreeing with you there..

That doesn't mean we are overpopulated. We are just doing it wrong. Very wrong. We don't need to use oil. We don't need to have millions of acres of farmland either. We also don't need war. These are solvable things, all the things that make 'overpopulation' a viable option are fixable.

If we had less restrictions on science and technology. We could have free (new) energy, like cold fusion (see: Heavy watergate: the war on cold fusion). So that solves a lot of the issue right there.
edit on 12/6/12 by AzureSky because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 11:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by SLO7H
"Maybe the overpopulation subject isn't all that too bad after all, the biggest problem is to give everyone food and water, and for now that's about it, (and when it comes to living space, we will eventually develop technology to move elsewhere in the universe.

That's where your plan goes off the tracks. Food and water are a problem, but not the only problems resulting from overpopulation. We could eventually lived stacked on each other like mice and eat each other. (Yay.)

Yeah, it's nice to think that someday we'll all fly off into space and there will be plenty of room, but there are a lot of problems with that. It's far more difficult and expensive than simply controlling our population here on Earth. Space is huge, and we are nowhere near having the technology to travel safely in it to other habitable planets, while the population is growing very fast. It's expensive to send stuff into space, particularly people, who have to bring all their own food and water with them. Human beings don't do well physically in space; we're just not built for it. And probably the biggest thing of all is that even if we were able to colonize Mars, for instance, it's not like the Martian colonists aren't going to breed. Of course they are. And it wouldn't be long before they start limiting immigration. Space colonization is a horrible thing to hang your hopes on. So get used to the idea of taking care of Earth as the number one priority.

Then consider the point of having a lot of people around. Not too long ago before we had machines (and soon robots) to do the farming and earth moving, and when people used to die younger, yes, people were important to have around. The more the merrier. But just look at the rampant unemployment we have today. Just what are people supposed to do? You know, there is a supply and demand curve for people, too. Too many people, not enough for them to do, their value goes down. They become a drain on the people who do work.

Now, maybe you believe that each human being has value no matter what they do, just by virtue of their capacity to feel and love. Unfortunately, looking at it from a purely objective standpoint, people have value according to how much they're able to contribute to society and the species. And we already have more than enough people who feel and love.

The thing is, contraception is very cheap. Sterilization or condoms or whatever. And it makes more sense to efficiently control the population now, rather than having to scramble and come up with expensive new technologies to keep all the extra people alive later.

There's going to be a tipping point, and we're running up on it very soon. A point at which the sheer number of people and their impact on the environment is going to outpace our ability to technologically and economically deal with it. Knowing this, the only smart thing to do is start aggressively working to control our breeding so we can at least get an accurate idea as to the optimum (not maximum) carrying capacity of the planet.


edit on 12-6-2012 by Blue Shift because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 11:38 AM
link   
reply to post by seabhac-rua
 


1. These creatures did not die off because of overpopulation, but due to poor animal husbandry. When we take the time to be CARETAKERS, the creatures don't die off.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 11:38 AM
link   
reply to post by AzureSky
 


Well call me a defeatist or whatever, but we're never going to be that organised, that effective in our management of resources etc. It's a pipe dream as far as I'm concerned, world peace is more likely and there's no chance of that ever happening either.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 11:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by CynicalDrivel
reply to post by seabhac-rua
 


1. These creatures did not die off because of overpopulation, but due to poor animal husbandry. When we take the time to be CARETAKERS, the creatures don't die off.


We shouldn't have to be 'caretakers', the power of nature should be left alone, we should keep our numbers down and live our lives less wastefully.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 11:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gridrebel
You first.
In fact, maybe the governments should set up a volunteer "die so that others might live" program, donate the organs/bodies for food/fuel and set up the volunteer's families to receive extra amenities while living out their lives on earth. Maybe we could promise the volunteers "70 virgins" in the afterlife too. I don't know, it's worth a thought.

Nobody has to be killed. All we have to do is stop breeding so much. As it is, approximately 131.4 million people are born per year, while only 55.3 million people die each year. All we have to do is bring the number of people born down to around 55 million people a year, and we'd already at least buy ourselves some time to figure out just how much land and water we need for everyone on Earth to live well -- not just pack every square inch of Earth with people.

Seriously, do we really need those extra 75 million people being born every year? I know I wouldn't miss them.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 11:48 AM
link   
how wide spread is this wheat meat as my friend has celiacs disease and she has been getting sick more and more and this might explain it can i get any links relevent to products and brands that use these substatutes



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by seabhac-rua
reply to post by AzureSky
 


Well call me a defeatist or whatever, but we're never going to be that organised, that effective in our management of resources etc. It's a pipe dream as far as I'm concerned, world peace is more likely and there's no chance of that ever happening either.





Only because we allow people other than ourselves to make decisions for us. We have corrupt governments and mega-corps and a banking system that was entirely based on control of entire countries.
War these days is a scam, its not war, its acquisition of resources.

Resourced based economy.

"We dont have enough resources" really means "We don't want to waste our 'hard earned money' on people who are 'lesser'", They'll try to justify it by any means they can do. That doesn't make it true. What comes from the earth, eventually goes back to the earth.

When you drink water, you pee it out.
That pee eventually ends up back into the ecosystem to be flushed and cleaned and back out as fresh water again. (If it didn't, we'de have huge lakes of nothing but pee all over the place).

Yes, if we were around 15 billion, i could see an issue. But we're not. And won't be. As it stands right now the world birth rates are declining, and the death rates are increasing (old age, sickness, etc). Populations are self regulating and will regulate itself on a sustainable number when the birth/death rate is directly even.




top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join