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.

 

YOU decide when there are too many people.

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 06:23 PM
link   
For the moment, forget religion, atheism; forget about government, forget about what's right or wrong.

You live in a two bedroom apartment. You and your spouse have one bedroom, and you have two children sharing the other. Your sister left her husband and ends up at your door with her three kids. You don't have the money to pay for a nursing home for your senile dad - he has to stay with you too. A recession makes it hard to find a job, so your 18 year-old is evicted from his apartment and comes a-knocking, with his girlfriend, a cat and a German Shepherd.

It's noisy! People are always arguing. With your pay you can't feed everyone; and personally, you're starving! You've reached the point where you scream, "SOME OF YOU PEOPLE HAVE TO GOOOOO!"
---------------------------------------

Now, planet Earth is our home. Disease and catastrophes are not killing enough of us off. Wars aren't doing it either. Our population is at 7 billion and rising. What is the number that would have you screaming, "SOME OF YOU PEOPLE HAVE TO GOOOOO!"




posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 06:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by jiggerj
Our population is at 7 billion and rising. What is the number that would have you screaming, "SOME OF YOU PEOPLE HAVE TO GOOOOO!"




I think the population around the year 1900 was about right. Somewhere near 1.7 Billion.

And people dont have to GO anywhere. If people would just reduce the number of babies they have, it'll work itself out naturally over time.



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 06:45 PM
link   
reply to post by jiggerj
 


Some interesting statistics, facts, and projections can be found here regarding the population issue. And some interesting facts about how much space we would need to house us all based upon population density

Basically we could all live in a New York style city the size of Texas and leave the remaining land for food production/atmosphere healing/etc.

I think, barring some unpredictable rapid depopulation, future models will have to be based less upon the possession of land, and more upon the conservative and wise usage of all available resources. Our paradigms will have to become less suburban.

~Heff



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 06:51 PM
link   
Honestly, if it is my home, then it is my choice.

But since it is everybody's home, then you run into the problem of "Who is worthy to be here, and who is not?"

Hence the birth of Eugenics....A few people decided who is worthy to be on this planet, and who is not. I like the idea of the poster above, who states that people should not breed uncontrollably.

Religion tends to run headlong into this idea and stops it dead in its tracks. There are a whole lot of people on the planet who feel that every conception is from God. They are some of the biggest breeders, having 6 or more kids.

There are so many variables and conflicting morals with this question, it's almost impossible to come to a concensus.

The earth herself may decide that there are too many people, and shake us off like a dog shakes off fleas.



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 06:52 PM
link   


future models will have to be based less upon the possession of land, and more upon the conservative and wise usage of all available resources. Our paradigms will have to become less suburban.
reply to post by Hefficide
 


Re: Agenda 21?



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 06:58 PM
link   
reply to post by jiggerj
 


I don't really know what that number should be where we, as a population, say enough people already. But the scenario that you described sounds remarkably like my house, and at my house- somehow, some way- we always make room for one more.

I think over population wouldn't be such a big issue if people would only have as many children as they know they can afford. I would have personally loved to have a large family but knew that two children were all I could afford. Good luck getting the rest of the world to think about it in those terms though!



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 07:04 PM
link   
reply to post by FissionSurplus
 


I'm thinking past UN terms. If we don't paradigm shift in a few more pressing ways, and quickly, there might not be seven million of us, much less seven billion to worry about.

And the paradigm shift that will solve it? Ironically is to lose our paradigms.




~Heff



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 07:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hefficide
reply to post by jiggerj
 


Basically we could all live in a New York style city the size of Texas and leave the remaining land for food production/atmosphere healing/etc.

I think, barring some unpredictable rapid depopulation, future models will have to be based less upon the possession of land, and more upon the conservative and wise usage of all available resources. Our paradigms will have to become less suburban.

~Heff



I've been thinking that way for a while. We need to stop building out, and start building UP. Goodbye single family homes.



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 07:44 PM
link   
reply to post by littled16
 





I think over population wouldn't be such a big issue if people would only have as many children as they know they can afford.


If only over-population were the only problem.
No exaggeration, I feel a sense of desperation about figuring out how to get off this planet before we reach the point where something would have to be done about the population. Before some huge rock slams into the earth and kills us all. Before the Earth itself cracks open (I forget the term for when the plates move apart and causes a miles-wide volcanic eruption that lasts for years).

We are just sitting ducks for ANY catastrophe.



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 08:06 PM
link   
Negative Eugenics (Selective NON-Breeding) would have worked wonders about 50 years ago.

At this point De-Population is Humanity's only hope.
I believe that Mother Earth will accomplish that in Her own natural irrefutable way.

~



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 08:25 PM
link   
I've read the book "Behold A Pale Horse" by William Cooper.

In it he claimed that around the year 2000 there would be a massive depopulation event by tptb.

So far it's failed, but i think we really need one. There are far too many people on the planet right now. We really should only be about five hundred million people.

So come on Captain Trips, I'm rooting for ya.

Yes I know the standard crap responses to my belief, but they can't help themselves.



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 11:26 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Oct, 11 2012 @ 01:28 AM
link   
I remember reading a while back that if the entire population of the planet stood shoulder to shoulder they could fit onto the "Isle Of Wight" in the UK.

I just wish they would.



posted on Oct, 11 2012 @ 07:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by jiggerj
reply to post by littled16
 





I think over population wouldn't be such a big issue if people would only have as many children as they know they can afford.


If only over-population were the only problem.
No exaggeration, I feel a sense of desperation about figuring out how to get off this planet before we reach the point where something would have to be done about the population. Before some huge rock slams into the earth and kills us all. Before the Earth itself cracks open (I forget the term for when the plates move apart and causes a miles-wide volcanic eruption that lasts for years).

We are just sitting ducks for ANY catastrophe.


I'm in agreement with you on that. If you figure a way out of here let me know- I need a ride! I promise I'll pack light and get out at the first habitable rock planet or moon you run across!



new topics




 
3

log in

join