Senario that can result in World War III

page: 2
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 21 2013 @ 11:22 PM
link   
Erle C. Ellis, a biologist and professor at Univ. of Maryland just wrote an opinion article in the New York Times titled "Overpopulation Is Not The Problem". In it he says:




...these claims demonstrate a profound misunderstanding of the ecology of human systems. The conditions that sustain humanity are not natural and never have been. Since prehistory, human populations have used technologies and engineered ecosystems to sustain populations well beyond the capabilities of unaltered “natural” ecosystems.
...
The world population is now estimated at 7.2 billion. But with current industrial technologies, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations has estimated that the more than nine billion people expected by 2050 as the population nears its peak could be supported as long as necessary investments in infrastructure and conducive trade, anti-poverty and food security policies are in place. Who knows what will be possible with the technologies of the future? The important message from these rough numbers should be clear. There really is no such thing as a human carrying capacity.


He finally concludes:



Humans are niche creators. We transform ecosystems to sustain ourselves. This is what we do and have always done. Our planet’s human-carrying capacity emerges from the capabilities of our social systems and our technologies more than from any environmental limits.
...
There is no environmental reason for people to go hungry now or in the future. There is no need to use any more land to sustain humanity. Increasing land productivity using existing technologies can boost global supplies and even leave more land for nature — a goal that is both more popular and more possible than ever.

The only limits to creating a planet that future generations will be proud of are our imaginations and our social systems.


I've met a lot of people, typically liberals, who think "the world has too many people" and we need to reduce the population. They are eugenicists, and they have the audacity to think they have the moral high ground. If you meet these people, set them straight.

Regarding WWIII, I think the war profiteers are quickly losing the political capital necessary to start it themselves. Let's keep it that way.




posted on Sep, 22 2013 @ 07:48 PM
link   
Actually Eugenics was an issue with the Nazi's.

The extreme position to the Liberals are the Communists, the extremist position for the Right wing altogether are Nazi's.

Your article simply repeats what another member stated. The question of technology historically, is that inventions became a part of the system as soon as they were created (cars and planes as an example).

The problems today are "special interests" and as has also already been brought up. There is no real reason for people to be starving today, but they are.

Ayn Rand is an example of the Conservative Agenda while Martin Luther King an example of the Liberal Agenda in the US.

While actually a moderate my impression of your article is how can we not worry about malnutrition and death by starvation, when it is already happening?

Quite frankly is the real problem with our world greed?

Is there such a thing as Psychotic Greedy people?

Any thoughts?



edit on 22-9-2013 by Kashai because: (no reason given)
edit on 22-9-2013 by Kashai because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 22 2013 @ 08:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Kashai
 





there are ,,316,668,567 million Americans,,


List of Top 10 American Billionaires

— Bill Gates, $72 billion

— Warren Buffett, $58.5 billion

— Larry Ellison, $41 billion

— Charles Koch, $36 billion

— David Koch, $36 billion

— Christy Walton & family, $35.4 billion

— Jim Walton, $33.8 billion

— Alice Walton, $33.5 billion

— S. Robson Walton, $33.3 billion

— Michael Bloomberg, $31 billion

thats about 410.5 billion $$$$$$$$$ i think they just hate Americans.


anyone wanna do the math? its called trickle down,,



posted on Sep, 22 2013 @ 08:29 PM
link   
reply to post by BobAthome
 


What about the rest of the worlds Billionaires outside the US???

About a decade ago the wealthiest man in the world resided in Mexico.



edit on 22-9-2013 by Kashai because: Added content



posted on Sep, 22 2013 @ 09:10 PM
link   

Kashai
reply to post by BobAthome
 


What about the rest of the worlds Billionaires outside the US???

About a decade ago the wealthiest man in the world resided in Mexico.



edit on 22-9-2013 by Kashai because: Added content

Actually Carlos Slim and Bill Clinton,just,,, started a Haiti Foundation,,,,so ya they hate America it seems.



posted on Sep, 22 2013 @ 09:39 PM
link   
reply to post by BobAthome
 


Hatred is an extremist position, are you implying that the husband of what potentially could be the next president of the United States, hates the US?

Do you really think that makes sense??

Any thoughts?



posted on Sep, 22 2013 @ 09:51 PM
link   

Kashai
reply to post by BobAthome
 


Hatred is an extremist position, are you implying that the husband of what potentially could be the next president of the United States, hates the US?

Do you really think that makes sense??

Any thoughts?





"Hatred is an extremist position," except in Business the Corp. kind,, then it's, only good business, after all workers trained, in your own,,schools,and or camps,,, too work for 60 cents an hour,,?,,
is a better Business deal than investing in Detroit i guess.



posted on Sep, 22 2013 @ 10:08 PM
link   
reply to post by BobAthome
 


The only response I can give is GFY.

Any thoughts?



posted on Sep, 22 2013 @ 10:12 PM
link   

Kashai
reply to post by BobAthome
 


The only response I can give is GFY.

Any thoughts?


yes,, "are you implying that the husband of what potentially " she is a who not a what.


go find yourself too



posted on Sep, 22 2013 @ 10:15 PM
link   
reply to post by BobAthome
 


That only proves we can agree on something.



posted on Sep, 22 2013 @ 10:19 PM
link   

Kashai
reply to post by BobAthome
 


That only proves we can agree on something.


ya,, and like she said,, hey there dead,, get over it,, whats the big deal:???



posted on Sep, 22 2013 @ 10:25 PM
link   
reply to post by BobAthome
 


The big deal was if it was your mother.



posted on Sep, 22 2013 @ 10:36 PM
link   

Kashai
reply to post by BobAthome
 


The big deal was if it was your mother.




ya surprised u could go so low,, but thats keyboard warriors.
u broke the code.



posted on Sep, 22 2013 @ 10:47 PM
link   

BobAthome

Kashai
reply to post by BobAthome
 


The big deal was if it was your mother.




ya surprised u could go so low,, but thats keyboard warriors.
u broke the code.


The only code I broke is the Bar code, it means if you want to step outside and discuss this like men; I am volunteering.
The bro code in no way has been broken the question is if you want to take the attitude to PM.

I mean honestly do you know of two bothers who are not ready to kick each others @$$ in relation to a difference in opinion???

Any thoughts?
edit on 22-9-2013 by Kashai because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 22 2013 @ 10:59 PM
link   

Kashai

BobAthome

Kashai
reply to post by BobAthome
 


The big deal was if it was your mother.




ya surprised u could go so low,, but thats keyboard warriors.
u broke the code.


The only code I broke is the Bar code, it means if you want to step outside and discuss this like men; I am volunteering.
The bro code in no way has been broken the question is if you want to take the attitude to PM.

I mean honestly do you know of two bothers who are not ready to kick each others @$$ in relation to a difference in opinion???

Any thoughts?
edit on 22-9-2013 by Kashai because: (no reason given)



ya i will only say this once, a man disrespect's another man's ,,ok thats man too man,, brother too brother,, but u disrespect a person's mother, by bring a person's mother too the table, u better show how it relates,,and im not your brother,, its just a code. keep that in mind as well.



posted on Sep, 22 2013 @ 11:09 PM
link   
reply to post by BobAthome
 


You are suggesting that it is wrong if this happened to a family member of yours. But in reality today 800+ million. Could very well be subject to severe malnutrition and it seems you really do not care.

This despite the fact that could be resolved today.

I can hit the hind end of an over weight rat at 100 yards with an AR-7 ( I do not need a scope to compensate).

Any thoughts?



posted on Sep, 22 2013 @ 11:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Kashai
 


ya,,,

"1 billion people live in the Western Hemisphere."

thats a lot of bullets,,

This is not a joke....

Any thoughts?


Of course if you are gonna eat that rat, well ,,id use a scope ,cause,,every bullet counts,, when playing for real.


please no more ,,,Any thoughts? ,,,k



posted on Sep, 22 2013 @ 11:26 PM
link   

BobAthome
reply to post by Kashai
 


ya,,,

"1 billion people live in the Western Hemisphere."

thats a lot of bullets,,

This is not a joke....

Any thoughts?


Of course if you are gonna eat that rat, well ,,id use a scope ,cause,,every bullet counts,, when playing for real.


please no more ,,,Any thoughts? ,,,k


That means 6 billion today live in the Eastern Hemisphere, that is a 6 to 1 advantage.

What about 10 to 1????

This is not a joke and to be honest I do not miss with an M-16.
I mean if the both of us were in a fox hole????

I have no interest in eating rat and even in a war zone. Before I ate any you would have some as well.


At least we are not eating what???

You sound like you are upset because you have never been in the $#!!^

While I have....

Any thought?
edit on 22-9-2013 by Kashai because: Added content



posted on Sep, 23 2013 @ 07:41 PM
link   
The solution isn't to grow artificial meat and other foods.
The solution is to create equality and actually give a damn about other human beings.

I bet most people in this thread will say they care about others..but how many actually donate or do anything at all to help others who they don't know, have never met, etc?
90% of us at least.


The amount of food that is wasted and thrown in the bin is amazing.

We don't need to eat huge amounts of food to survive.
What we need is three meals a day with all the nutrients, vitamins etc that keep us healthy.

In the west we are in a culture, in a society where we have massive amounts of food prepared for us, but we waste much of it.


There is no will to feed the poorest people on the planet.
There is no political will, and no will from the people of this earth.
It's a problem that isn't in our faces, isn't on our door step, in our streets, so we shut it out of our minds because it's convenient to forget about it and ignore it.


Where technology can come into play is by creating more sustainable practices.
By creating technologies and practices where droughts and storms have limited effect on crops.

Technology for food production exists.

Israel has turned large parts of it's desert into farm land.

Why isn't that technology being used in Africa on a large scale to feed the poorest people on the planet?


Australian scientists have created crop variants that are resistant to drought!
WHY?

Why do we need to genetically alter our foods? When we can create sustainable practices/technology?

Glass houses get smashed by hail storms and strong winds?
Why not create or use new materials that are resistant to the elements?

We can dig tunnels for subways and underground bases and so on, we can create skyscrapers with car parking systems that pick your car up and stack it neatly, we can create skyscrapers that literally twist and turn and move(see Dubai), we can create man made islands in any shape we want(see Dubai), and many many other technological advancements...yet we are expected to believe the only solution to feeding the world, is to accept genetically modified foods?



posted on Sep, 23 2013 @ 09:56 PM
link   
reply to post by iBallinU
 


The truth is, in a manner of speaking we are all in the same boat. But there does in reality seem to be a percentage of our worlds population that does not seem to see it that way.



In consideration the technologies you have mentioned generally are related to as "in the cusp" so to speak.

Though I do agree with you we do not seem focused on the correct priorities.

A world government is not the answer. As for me anyway it is difficult to believe one person can actually deal with every problem.

A council of sorts could very well make things worst as they muddle through. The way things are today governments are crafted like individuals; the rule is trade, diplomatic relations and sovereignty.

History is replete with examples where entire civilizations were wiped out. If 800 million people suffer from clinical malnutrition today on earth. We are effectively out doing whatever rotten behavior prior
civilizations did in relation to numbers.

For the record I am talking about the world not some part of it that is to blame for these problems.

Any thoughts?
edit on 23-9-2013 by Kashai because: Modifed content





new topics
top topics
 
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join