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.
Originally posted by thehoneycomb
So I got bored and figured out how many square miles a person would have to themselves if land was distributed to all of the approximate 7 billion of earths inhabitants equally. Each person alive would have about 12 square miles all to themselves.
So is the world overpopulated?
No.
Total land area of the world 57,308,738 Sq. Miles
Total Population around 7 billion. (I used 7 billion)
Originally posted by 13th Zodiac
Originally posted by thehoneycomb
So I got bored and figured out how many square miles a person would have to themselves if land was distributed to all of the approximate 7 billion of earths inhabitants equally. Each person alive would have about 12 square miles all to themselves.
So is the world overpopulated?
No.
Total land area of the world 57,308,738 Sq. Miles
Total Population around 7 billion. (I used 7 billion)
Yes you are correct,over population is a lie.The problem is fat mismanagement at the top,and these bloated maggot's blame you and I for their unsustainable practices.
The entire human population can fit into the continent of Australia.Giving every man, woman and child a half acre block each and still leaves half of the State of Queensland Available
Originally posted by Tw0Sides
reply to post by thehoneycomb
Its ok if your 12 miles is a Bread Basket area.
Would suck if its above the Artic Circle.
Jokes aside, its not room thats the problem, its Resources.
The world is Over-populated.
Take into account that quite a few people enjoy living in cities and condos and such...
Globally, there are about 1.9 hectares of productive area per person, but the average ecological footprint is already 2.3 hectares. So we would need 1.5 Earths to live sustainably. The largest footprint belongs to citizens of the US, at 9.57 hectares. Five Earths would be needed if everyone in the world consumed at that rate.
Secondly, we have the technology to turn sea water into drinkable water.
We are not overpopulated and have plenty of resources.
Originally posted by Numbers33four
reply to post by g146541
Only if you jam people into mega cities, chip them all and make them totally dependent upon technology and government. That is the only way it works because most of the dry land is not arable. and that is what counts. And of that arable land much of it must be used to produce non-food raw materials.
You have not looked very deeply into the matter. Maybe you were in a hurry to get your government cheese and check.
Originally posted by SaturnFX
Originally posted by 13th Zodiac
Originally posted by thehoneycomb
So I got bored and figured out how many square miles a person would have to themselves if land was distributed to all of the approximate 7 billion of earths inhabitants equally. Each person alive would have about 12 square miles all to themselves.
So is the world overpopulated?
No.
Total land area of the world 57,308,738 Sq. Miles
Total Population around 7 billion. (I used 7 billion)
Yes you are correct,over population is a lie.The problem is fat mismanagement at the top,and these bloated maggot's blame you and I for their unsustainable practices.
The entire human population can fit into the continent of Australia.Giving every man, woman and child a half acre block each and still leaves half of the State of Queensland Available
Care to show the math that supports this.
Originally posted by OrchusGhule
reply to post by thehoneycomb
There are mountains, tundra, deserts, land covered with ice, volcanic areas, etc. Adjust your calculations to subtract those areas from your original number, unless you're the one who wants to live in the middle of the Sahara, attempt to grow grapes on the side of Mount St. Helens, or cultivate wheat in the Antarctic. Your "debunking" also assumes that we should remove all wilderness to accommodate farm land for humans, which involves killing most species of plants and animals that are not food for humans.
In short, your so-called debunking is lacking substance.
Also, your math is a bit...off.edit on 19-6-2012 by OrchusGhule because: (no reason given)