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 randomname
the earth is not even close to max capacity.
go to alaska or any part of northern canada.
Originally posted by randomname
reply to post by SteveR
the earth is not even close to max capacity.
go to alaska or any part of northern canada.
northern russia, the pampas of south america, the jungles of the amazon are barely populated.
Originally posted by Annee
Good to know all we have to do is stand on a piece of land to live.
Originally posted by dusty1
reply to post by AnAbsoluteCreation
I read somewhere on ATS that the entire human population could fit and function in an area the size of Texas.
The idea that the earth cannot support the population is a myth.
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.
Originally posted by Starwise
This new Eugenics ideology is scary however......Our future generation will be the chosen ones to inherit the Earth?? Those with the most money wins I guess in this scenario....
Originally posted by AnAbsoluteCreation
Eugenics does not have to be as barbaric as what we already do to ourselves.