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.

 

Depopulation is probably the answer. Let’s face facts however as unpleasant as they be. What are t

page: 2
18
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 01:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Covertblack

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
reply to post by AzureSky
 


Actually, potable fresh water is going to be a huge problem in the future, it's actually one of the main concerns regarding overpopulation. The truth is, there just isn't enough Fresh Water to go around right now.

However, we do have the tech to convert salt water into clean, drinkable water, but it's expensive and most nations do not want to build the infrastructure to do such things.

But it can be done.

~Tenth


I live near Lake Superior, so I foresee myself selling expensive bottles of water in the future. Joking aside converting salt water into potable water also takes enormous amounts of energy, from what I have been told anyway.


No more than your average water processing plant. It's more like the equipment is ridiculously expensive from what I can gather, which was the only reason places like California weren't doing it already.

Clean energy like Tital or wind for example, in conjunction with water purification ( which you could turn into a turbine for extra power in the end) can mean a very sustainable living for everybody.

Sure not EVERY place will be 100% sustainable on it's own, there will still be the need to import and export certain things like today, but it would be relatively minimal.

It's the cost of re-configuring all of the infrastructure that's in place already that causes the most problems.

~Tenth




posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 01:29 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


Could be. I watched a program on desalination stating that using renewable energy would be the most cost effective, but as you said changing over the infrastructure would be the big money sink.


Large-scale desalination typically uses large amounts of energy and specialized, expensive infrastructure, making it more expensive than fresh water from conventional sources such as rivers or groundwater.[3]


Seems as though it's both possibly.


en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 01:31 PM
link   
reply to post by TDawgRex
 


You just voiced what my parents taught me, and their grandparents taught them. That war is a necessary evil. I don't know if that is the answer, but I do think it's the status quo.



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 01:33 PM
link   
reply to post by JibbyJedi
 


I'd like to see you on the panel that solves things.




posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 01:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
reply to post by AzureSky
 


Actually, potable fresh water is going to be a huge problem in the future, it's actually one of the main concerns regarding overpopulation. The truth is, there just isn't enough Fresh Water to go around right now.

However, we do have the tech to convert salt water into clean, drinkable water, but it's expensive and most nations do not want to build the infrastructure to do such things.

But it can be done.

~Tenth



Approx. cost to build desalination plant: $150 Million

Approx. cost of "War on Terror" over 12 years: $4 TRILLION

4 trillion / 150 million = 26,667 possible desalination plants

In other words, the United States could have single handedly ended water shortages, GLOBALLY, in just the past decade.

Can you imagine how that would have affected how the world sees the USA? It's mind boggling.



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 01:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by luciddream



War on a global scale. I find it as distasteful as you.
reply to post by TDawgRex
 


lol seriously? have you been in a war zone? have you seen your family members body parts fly in the air?

Anyway....

Even tho earth is not overpopulated like its been mentioned in news, media and rumors but some countries do need regulations. Best way is to limit childbirth. that alone will lower the population.


Yes...I have been in a war zone. Multiple times and I find it repulsive. I've grown up.

What is your solution, forced abortions?



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 01:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by HIWATT

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
reply to post by AzureSky
 


Actually, potable fresh water is going to be a huge problem in the future, it's actually one of the main concerns regarding overpopulation. The truth is, there just isn't enough Fresh Water to go around right now.

However, we do have the tech to convert salt water into clean, drinkable water, but it's expensive and most nations do not want to build the infrastructure to do such things.

But it can be done.

~Tenth



Approx. cost to build desalination plant: $150 Million

Approx. cost of "War on Terror" over 12 years: $4 TRILLION

4 trillion / 150 million = 26,667 possible desalination plants

In other words, the United States could have single handedly ended water shortages, GLOBALLY, in just the past decade.

Can you imagine how that would have affected how the world sees the USA? It's mind boggling.




NOW! THAT is the answer I like. Why can't we, as a race of humans, work toward a solution?

This I don't understand. It must be about profits and power.



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 01:41 PM
link   
There will be a depopulation so to say.

But not for any of those reasons.

Food and energy is not an issue.

Our right to exist is whats on the table. So far as a species we lose the arguement.

Its up to the individual now. Where in lies your unbiased compassion towards one another?

If you cant care for one another, how than can you responsibly care for others not of this species.

And do so without attempting to assert your false " im superior " mindset into your existance/interaction with others.

You people have got to learn to accept that maybe, just maybe you all are equal to one another.

Because there are superior species in existance.

There are some fighting as a voice unto you that you are a good teachable people ready to move forward into the future and into the universe's.

The other side of the coin are those whom think you should be treated as dogs/slaves. And only need point to yesturdays behavior because it looks the same as days, years prior. These people laugh and willingly bet all of everything that today is the day you wont change as a people. They would be right everyday.

The hardway or easyway......the same road none the less.



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 01:42 PM
link   
reply to post by TDawgRex
 


This is just wrong on so many levels.

Crops: can be grown in tiers increasing yield per acre and can even be grown and harvested anywhere on earth (or underwater) if the ingenuity and money were put into it

energy: suppression of technology not withstanding there is also wave generators and considering the majority of the planet is water (which can be broken down easily to hydrogen / oxygen) there was never a shortage of viable opportunity

war? man, you truly have the mindset they sought. We are all, each and every one of us our most precious resource. What I say to you can inspire you to find something that in turn inspires another who in turn could inspire me. What products we produce are useless without trading partners.
Why make killing your biggest industry?

In short, it is the limited viewpoint of people like you who are the biggest danger to humanity. Follow your leader, They too have sought to limit your outlook and keep the status quo. It was always about selfish greed not the possibility for all to live up to their full potentials.
edit on 13-6-2012 by anoncoholic because: typo



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by shaluach

Originally posted by TDawgRex


Just my opinion and I hope no one is harmed in the future...but I see it no other way. Until humankind can all get along, this is the way it will play out.



I don't get it. First you say that depopulation is PROBABLY the answer which implies you think we should depopulate the planet. Then you go on to say you hope no one is harmed. Which is it?


I truly don't wish harm upon anybody...the days I did are past, and maybe in the future.

I just wish that people, TPTB or corperations would acknowledge that there is a sustainable energy/food source.

Right now it is about profit.

The sooner that ALL realize that, the better.



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 01:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by anoncoholic
reply to post by TDawgRex
 


This is just wrong on so many levels.

Crops: can be grown in tiers increasing yield per acre and can even be grown and harvested anywhere on earth (or underwater) if the ingenuity and money were put into it

energy: suppression of technology not withstanding there is also wave generators and considering the majority of the planet is water (which can be broken down easily to hydrogen / oxygen) there was never a shortage of viable opportunity

war? man, you truly have the mindset they sought. We are all, each and every one of us our most precious resource. What I say to you can inspire you to find something that in turn inspires another who in turn could inspire me. What products we produce are useless without trading partners.
Why make killing your biggest industry?

In short, it is the limited viewpoint of people like you who are the biggest danger to humanity. Follow your leader, They too have sought to limit your outlook and keep the status quo. It was always about selfish greed not the possibility for all to live up to their full potentials.
edit on 13-6-2012 by anoncoholic because: typo


Not a limited viewpoint, but a realistic viewpoint at what is offered.

This is the world in which we live. Take the rose colored glasses off for a minute and observe the world in which we actually live in. It's nothing nice.

I do wish it were otherwise.



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by AriaStarr
reply to post by TDawgRex
 


You just voiced what my parents taught me, and their grandparents taught them. That war is a necessary evil. I don't know if that is the answer, but I do think it's the status quo.


It's a status quo I'd like to break.

But to break that status quo, you would have to go to war.

Which side is right?



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 02:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
reply to post by TDawgRex
 


Nope.

Overpopulation is a myth. There is PLENTY of a arable land to grow the food we need to sustain our current population growth. There is PLENTY of renewable energy sources that can be used in order for each nation to achieve energy independance.

This myth is perpetuated by eugenecists and globalists who want you to believe that we need to fight amongs each other for a piece of the pie, when there's plenty of pie to go around, if it's split up properly.

The problem with these two areas is that they are currently controlled by big corporate entities who have no interest in making food or energy cheap, renewable and available to all.

There's no money in that. So they perpetuate these lies to keep the status quo the way it is.

~Tenth


I believe that you make my argument. Human laws have put us into this scenario.

Until profits are made moot, then you will not have a...win.

But at some point, the common law of averages dictate that we will run out of resources.



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 02:09 PM
link   
Jacques Fresco has estimated that the carrying capacity of this planet is ten billion people, assuming we radically redesign our infrastructure. My own practical experience with automation strongly implies that that is the case. If we were able to move off the planet's surface, that number could also increase.

It is genuinely true that overpopulation is a psychopathic myth. We don't need to reduce our population at all; what we need to do is change the way that we provide for said population.
edit on 13-6-2012 by petrus4 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by TDawgRex
I believe that you make my argument. Human laws have put us into this scenario.


You're not going deep enough, TDawg. Capitalism and the legal system are not the problem, fundamentally. They are symptoms; they're not the disease itself.

Our central problem has two main causes.

a] 4-7% of our population are inherent psychopaths.
b] The other 93-96% of the population are excessively willing to believe and accept the false beliefs and ideology which they are given by said 4-7%, including (perhaps most importantly) the belief that it is necessary for them to relinquish their sovereignty to third parties.

Because of these two problems, no single political or economic theory yet devised, has been able to provide for human wellbeing, on a long term basis. Everything else...law, whatever economic system you want to name, etc...is secondary to this fundamental dynamic.

If humanity is to survive, the psychopaths must be dealt with; and in order to do that, we must first remove our willingness to believe what they have told us.



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 02:18 PM
link   
I thought the following link might be of use concerning this thread...

EcoFuture

It's not only about quantity, but QUALITY of life as well. Depopulation is not good for anyone other than elitists seeking superior crowd suppression capabilities.



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by TDawgRex
reply to post by JibbyJedi
 


I'd like to see you on the panel that solves things.



Just how many people do you think belong on this "panel" to "solve things"? Would a dozen man "panel" fairly represent more than seven billion people? Would 100 be better? 1000? 10,000? Just how many people belong on this "solve things" "panel"?



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 02:29 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


Who will be paying for all of the new infrastructure needed to support all of these new people?

Roads, power generation, water desalinating, etc etc.

If you think its simply about space, lets take a look at Bangladesh. It's roughly the same size as Illinois, but the population is exponentially greater. Think you want that kind of living standard?



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 02:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


Jean... Ya got me.

That is a question I had not thought of.




posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by TDawgRex
 


My altruistic outlook is bred of my Faith in God not man. Things are as they were meant to be on a learning curve that culminates in a morality of justice. War is the biggest industry because that is all we are exposed to and yet there was never a bullet made that wasn't meant to kill. We are an ingenious species and God gave us diversity to teach us acceptance (if we can't accept the variations of our own species we will never ascend into the cosmic realm of other species and my personal slant on that is that I would love for nothing more than to visit the library of all beings. The amount of wisdom to be found in an interstellar community would exceed even our wildest dreams I'm sure.

And yet man has his own ingenuity and we do perfect that which we put our collective wills to. We have perfected the art of killing - not just one at a time but now have the capability to kill all at the push of buttons.

Rose colored glasses... maybe, but also common sense that tells me that divided amongst ourselves humanity is destined to fail




top topics



 
18
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join