Humans Are NOT A Cancer!!

page: 8
8
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join

posted on May, 24 2013 @ 06:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Unity_99
 


Very well spoken Unity99, as usual.

Of course that if people are rightly distributed, they can have their backyards. Personaly, if I would have the choice, I would love a small 2 acre or something for backyard. Nothing, even not completely public spaces, beaches, and forests, can replace a backyard.


Yes, education and the ability to travel anywhere in a blink of the eye would be very beneficial to the society. In fact, every country interacting closely with everyone from around the world is the cure against misunderstanding, racism, intolerance... Look at the small example that is ATS. US citizens can speak within minutes to someone in South Africa. Jew, Christians, Buddhist, Muslims, Atheist, they can all debate with each other. No immigration restraint, no rules as to who can do what in which country.

Having the choice to pursue dreams and talents is also very important, and something I feel that has been taken away. Almost no one can afford to pursue their dreams, because all their energy is on making money to pay for the rent and the food. The old days of the 18th century are gone, where almost everyone was talented in many things like music, dance, arts, literature, or even science, philosophy, botany. I feel it must come back, that the desire for more knowledge and dreams must be pursued, not abandoned like our modern lives forces us to do.

So again, very well spoken, and I'll rather live up and help everyone else live up to the future's challenges and hopes than to abandon it all for a new Dark Age and despair.

PS: the Venus project is very cool, and if something similar to that could one day serve as either better cities, or as meeting/entertainement places, it would be great!




posted on Jun, 1 2013 @ 12:22 PM
link   
Everyone seems to forget about the real victims of this selfish and irresponsible behavior, the animals.
Animals die mostly because we take their water, plants and space. You cant really blame anyone but ourselves for that, those you would call innocent humans.
Is having more people really more important then the biodiversity?
If you see things from environmental perspective, its impossible to say that overpopulation is a myth as it continues to get worse because of our growing number which leads to higher consumption.
The pollution produced by the current population is murdering every ecosystem imaginable. Oceans are dying, coral reefs are dying, rivers are dying and rainforest's are dying. If the human population were small compared to the total carrying capacity, we shouldn't see the natural ecosystems dying all around us.

Thus, the argument that "the entire population of the world could fit inside the state of Texas" is complete nonsense. You can fit a dozen people in a phone booth, but if you leave them in there for too long, they will die. If you cut off Los Angeles from the rest of the world, it will die. If you cut off New York City from the rest of the country, it will die. To support life, people need far more land mass on the planet than their physical bodies occupy.

The Earth obviously has a finite amount of any given resource. The water volume is finite (but reusable if cleaned by nature). Oxygen production is finite. The amount of sunlight radiation reaching the surface of the planet is finite. Soil is finite. Rare earth minerals are finite. Oil is finite at any given moment in time, even if the Earth does produce more oil over long periods of time.

Given that all these things are finite -- and therefore not unlimited -- the global population that depends on these things for sustenance must obviously be finite as well. Anyone who argues that the human population can be "unlimited" even while depending on finite resources is being ridiculous.

Clearly, by all foundations of logic, there is a limited "carrying capacity" of the planet, meaning there is a finite number of human beings who can be supported by the biosphere.
The real question is this: Have we already exceeded the carrying capacity of this planet with finite resources, or is it still far off?

Those who say overpopulation is a myth insist that the current human population -- over 7 billion people -- is nowhere near the carrying capacity of the planet and that we can continue to double our population every few decades for the foreseeable future. If that were true, then the current population would need to be living in harmony with the planet, with an excess buffer of fresh water, food, topsoil, ocean life, watershed areas and so on. Today, we are as far away from living in harmony as it possibly can get...

With every new person adding to the world’s total population the quality of life goes down for us and the competition for resources goes up. Everyone seem to believe that enough food, water and space is all thats necessary in order for someone to have a good standard of life. Over 70 % of Indias population lives with under 2 usd per day. Sure they can afford food and water, but is that a life worth living?

On a finite planet, the optimum population providing the best quality of life for all, is clearly much smaller than the maximum, permitting bare survival. The more we are, the less for each; fewer people mean better lives.

Agent Smith was right,



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 09:23 AM
link   
reply to post by trancedanne
 



Animals die mostly because we take their water, plants and space. You cant really blame anyone but ourselves for that, those you would call innocent humans.
Is having more people really more important then the biodiversity?


10 billions people will take 0.035 to 2.4% of Earth's land surface. Everyone, with our current production, has 1 kilogram of wheat/oats/rice, plus the potatoes, per DAY. That is without all the other vegetables and fruits. We have now the technology to transform sea-water drinkable, so animals can have all the non-sea water in the world for themselves.
The space needed for plants and housing would, at the maximum, take 5% of Earth's surface, IF, the distribution would be better planned. The ressources are there just unequally distributed.

So that means, animals will have all their space and food needed.


The pollution produced by the current population is murdering every ecosystem imaginable. Oceans are dying, coral reefs are dying, rivers are dying and rainforest's are dying. If the human population were small compared to the total carrying capacity, we shouldn't see the natural ecosystems dying all around us.


It's the corporations that are doing all the pollutions. Because polluting coal mines are more profitable than solar cooker. Because they don't care how much chemicals they put in the water, as long as they get the profit on fish. They're draining the rivers for water instead of concentrating on the nearly unlimited supply that the ocean is. They are the one cutting the rainforest.


To support life, people need far more land mass on the planet than their physical bodies occupy.


How much land you need?! 1000 acres per person?! A 10 000 square feet house?
As for land for food, have you ever visited a commercial greenhouse? I did, and in the space of 10 000 square feet, there was literally thousands of mature plants. Now put greenhouses on the top of towers, in-between them, or undeground, and you'll see that we wouldn't take as much space as the media pretends.


Given that all these things are finite -- and therefore not unlimited -- the global population that depends on these things for sustenance must obviously be finite as well. Anyone who argues that the human population can be "unlimited" even while depending on finite resources is being ridiculous.

Clearly, by all foundations of logic, there is a limited "carrying capacity" of the planet, meaning there is a finite number of human beings who can be supported by the biosphere.


Water is infinite, because everything we drink goes back in Nature after being assimilated by us.
We "only" just have 5 billions years of solar radiation left.
The air you breathe is composed of 73% of nitrogen which isn't even used by human respiration. You can only recycle the air. So technically, it is infinite.
Sure, in the far far future, we will become over-populated. But by the time this happens, space travel and planet colonizing will be well underway. It is estimated that the ressources of the solar system can support 10^16 individuals.


If that were true, then the current population would need to be living in harmony with the planet, with an excess buffer of fresh water, food, topsoil, ocean life, watershed areas and so on. Today, we are as far away from living in harmony as it possibly can get...


Because of whom? Do you hear about sea-water being made drinkable? Do you hear about greenhouses being built to protect crops instead of letting them at Nature's mercy? Do you hear about towers being build for housing? No. Everytime you hear a new technology appearing, it goes all to the military. I agree with you, we do need to live in harmony, but you don't see the corporations and the Elite give us the means to do so.


Over 70 % of Indias population lives with under 2 usd per day. Sure they can afford food and water, but is that a life worth living?


No, it is not worth a life living. And why do you think they lives with under 2$ per day? Because they're expendable to the Elite's eyes. They can't give troubles, because it will lower their income. If one day they all die, it's a land more for the Elite, and a land less to control. So why give them an actual salary, and an actual life? Why care about the 3rd world population? It's been more than 30 years that people donate money to help the Africans. By now, amelioration should be more than underway for their lives. Yet, we are still donating, and they are still homeless, education-less, and hungry.
Again, our fault? No, we tried for 30 years to help them. And the money always went elsewhere.


Your youtube link doesn't work, btw.



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 10:34 AM
link   
It has nothing to do with the population. Certainly developed countries with good health systems and equality, ie better living for women and children, have very low population growth, and even negative numbers at times, such as Canada. So equality and ethics, good abundance principles would solve increasing growth amongst third world and theocracies.

However, the only problems with earth have to do with PTB mismanagement teams abuse of humanity, nature and resources and not bringing out the real tech! So shame on them. They also love to cast the blame to those they try to enslave. To abuse the world, be enriched by their corrupt practices, yet blame the powerless. Its their satanic ego talking. Humans, miserable humans......We're way above them. Being evil and corrupt doesnt make us toddler, no no, it makes up so sophisticated and grown up!!!



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 09:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Unity_99
 


lol what a load of rubbish you are spouting. The ptb as you put it are only there because we the people have allowed it and buy into their ethos. To say we need to get rid of the ptb is to say we need to get rid of capitalism and what do we replace it with? Communism?
WE live in the here and now and as it is Humans are a cancer. Sure you like to think we are not if we get rid of this and replace it with that but thats not how it is ,is it? Wake up and smell the coffee......
edit on 5-6-2013 by minor007 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 6 2013 @ 02:55 AM
link   
reply to post by minor007
 


Really? Do you think 1 billion could stand up, unified, and stop them? They would take the planet out before they would give it up by the way, and they control everything and have for thousands of years. History is full of whole groups of people disappearing, and what you are saying is very shallow. Do you think we have a democracy here, and everyone is ever so empowered when they vote for one of 3 kings who can do as they please, nor did they choose these bloodlines.

I spoke 100% truth!



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 06:04 AM
link   
reply to post by minor007
 



To say we need to get rid of the ptb is to say we need to get rid of capitalism and what do we replace it with? Communism?


As if that's the only other option.
Never heard of socialism, in fonction for years now in Brunei? Food, medication, education, and gas are all free. You don't hear a complaint from Brunei's citizens. There's no headline on big media about an evil Brunei corporation, or revolution by the citizens.
In case you aren't aware of it, there's more way to lead a population other than Communism and Capitalism. Like Egalitarianism.


WE live in the here and now and as it is Humans are a cancer. Sure you like to think we are not if we get rid of this and replace it with that but thats not how it is ,is it? Wake up and smell the coffee......


And that philosophy of yours is why nothing gets changed around here. People always saying "This is our life; aspiring for more is useless". That is why nothing change: because nobody wants to change. They prefer continue to whine about how unfair life is instead of thinking "Yeah, but what if soon all of this could change?"
You guys claim to want a better society, but you cower when it comes to start considering things differently from what the media told you all your lives. You prefer agreeing with them, starting to find it ethical to call your family and friends "cancerous", and "unuseful to the greek deity Mother Earth", instead of hoping and aspiring to be better.



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 06:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Unity_99
 



So equality and ethics, good abundance principles would solve increasing growth amongst third world and theocracies.


Exactly. The reason why the third world population are having childrens all the time, is because everyone gets killed younger there. With almost no medical help, these guys dies from things that we can survive easily. Malaria has been for long cured in our countries; in theirs, it's still a bane. No water and no food, well, you all know what that does to a human body.
So give them our lives, and they wouldn't need to procreate as much. Now, it wouldn't be necessary for the population's survival, but a personal choice for a family, like us.


However, the only problems with earth have to do with PTB mismanagement teams abuse of humanity, nature and resources and not bringing out the real tech! So shame on them. They also love to cast the blame to those they try to enslave. To abuse the world, be enriched by their corrupt practices, yet blame the powerless. Its their satanic ego talking. Humans, miserable humans......We're way above them. Being evil and corrupt doesnt make us toddler, no no, it makes up so sophisticated and grown up!!!


Well said. And yet, that is exactly how they think of themselves.
-"Hey Joe, look at that civilian, look how stupid he is trying to buy a decent supper after his work. Us, we sit on our butt in Victorian sofa, call our servants, and everything is served on gold plater, and straight from the ocean and the guy's farm. We're great, aren't we? So much worthy of Mother Nature, much more than this poor and hard-working farmer. Let's eliminate a few, I'm sure they'll accept if we tell them it's for the good of Earth and that they're the ones destroying it instead of us; plus, it will make less people to control, less excuses of why we're taking even more money from them, you know, just make life better for ourselves."
As for mismanagement of ressources... 1 pound of rice/corn/wheat and 1 pound of potato EACH day, per person, is what it should be given to everyone with our current production of these crops. Tech? Only ultra-rich guys in Dubaï can afford to build the towers necessary to house at least millions of people. They're holding off the production of solar cooker, and solar seawater desalinization tech, because it will mean cheap water and energy, instead of making us pay for the travel cost requirements of coal from costly coal mines, and for the scarce water coming from rivers and Rocky Mountains's spring water.
I don't see how we can be blamed for all the catastophes the corporations and the Elite creates; nor do I understand how some people accept humbly the blame, and tries to convince everyone else that it's our fault when it's clearly the Elite's.





top topics
 
8
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join