Am I The Only One Who Agrees With The Georgia Guide Stones?

You don't have to "sacrifice yourself" or your family to get humanity to a reasonable population.

It's no secret that with the population going the way it is that it is a crisis waiting to happen if it isn't already. I've got news for you, there isn't enough plastic, glass, petroleum, and whatever else for everyone on the planet.

The thing fetish western civilization has imposed on the planet is causing devestation to the environment and ecosystems. Hell the entire biosphere.

Here are a couple of options:
A) Continue on the current course. Blindly just stumble forward until famines/disasters/crisis hits and everyone lives at the level of extreme poverty.

B) Each couple is allowed one child for their generation. If one generation can do this, the world's population will effectively be cut in half. With a population cut in half, you could just let it blow up to the current 7bil mark and do it again. Or maybe you can last two generations of that, and cut the population down to 25% of current level.

You can either ignore the issue, or accept the inevitable. I don't think human beings are responsible enough to agree to a one child policy, so I guess we'll have 8-10 billion people suffering massively instead.

Originally posted by liquidsmoke206
reply to post by artistpoet

 

Enlightened person? The stones are common sense, nothing too deep on there....it's very disturbing to me that vast majority of people can't see that. We're definitely doomed as a species, but most of us are too self centered to notice, the fact that the population portion of the stones is what is consistently most attacked is evidence of that i think.

Explain how lowering the population is an arrogant statement.

I can't tell you how to achieve it, I would hope that it wouldn't be through mass genocide or something, which is always the first and only conclusion that all the dimwits on this site ALWAYS jump too. Like I said the guide stones are a guide for modern culture, and if you follow the guide a part of modern culture will be for WAY less people to reproduce, not because they're forced but because culture has changed. Look, there was a time when it was OK for people to crank out as many kids as they wanted, in fact it was beneficial. Those times are past. Deal with it and get out of the way of progress. As far as reducing populations solving problems....VERY SIMPLE....is more or less easier to manage and care for? less obviously....every time....in nearly every possible case.

Dimwits? You see what you want you to see
Like I said your choice to praise these stones
But to call others dimwits ok again your choice
I stand by what I have posted my choice but I am certainly not a dimwit

reply to post by artistpoet


why would you stand by something that is obviously wrong?
if the best you can do to counter my argument is to say...."your choice...see what you want to see"
then that's pretty weak...you can't deny that?
Why are you so set in your ways that you can't admit whats true and whats right? And you called me arrogant?

The truth is I don't see what I want to see....I see what IS. What I would like to see would be that we're doing just fine and we shouldn't even think about things like overpopulation, or changing global culture...we should do what ever we want everything will be fine. And everything goes bad...I guess God will just intervene and save us....

absolute complete lunacy. the guide stones are totally 100% SANE, it's current culture that isn't. Maybe not an easy thing to own up to, it requires becoming, LESS arrogant, LESS self centered.....blah blah blah..who do I even try....whole world is full of dimwits....what a buncha suckers....can't see or admit to the simplest, most obvious stuff in the world....ok rambling now...end post...now.

reply to post by artistpoet



Why do you look for something sinister? These are "guide" stones. Not," I am going to annihilate you" stones. You are so dramatic.
Read them as an individual, as if they were written to you personally. Try not to see them as if they are commands to the current ruling class, and they may not seem so ominus.

overpopulationisamyth.com...
www.treehugger.com...
www.prospectmagazine.co.uk...

In the first link it explains how over population is a myth
It is due to peak in 2025 then decline - also note the number of children percentage wise per mother has dropped and is dropping
To find the roots of this myth study who perpetuates this myth

Originally posted by ALOSTSOUL
So I was recently reading an article about the Georgia Guide stones, the article was bashing them saying that they are part of the satanic NWO etc etc. But I find myself in agreement with all but the first "rules" the stones set.

Anyone else feel the same?

1. Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.
2. Guide reproduction wisely -- improving fitness and diversity.
3. Unite humanity with a living new language.
4. Rule passion -- faith -- tradition -- and all things with tempered reason.
5. Protect people and nations with fair laws and just courts.
6. Let all nations rule internally resolving external disputes in a world court.
7. Avoid petty laws and useless officials.
8. Balance personal rights with social duties.
9. Prize truth -- beauty -- love -- seeking harmony with the infinite.
10. Be not a cancer on the earth -- Leave room for nature -- Leave room for nature.

ALS

ETA: sorry pressed enter by mistake thats why this thread is so rushed.

edit on 4-3-2012 by ALOSTSOUL because: (no reason given)

edit on 4-3-2012 by ALOSTSOUL because: (no reason given)

Well....you are the only one I know of.

To be fair it's the first two that are the most objectionable.

1. This 500 million number...where does it come from besides someone's ass? This is roughly the world population c. 1650. What was so wonderful about 1650 to make this number "just right"? I'm like...REALLY good with numbers and statistics...as far as I know there is nothing "magical" about the number 500 million which should make us think this is an ideal number. Did the asshat who developed this "formula" do his math correctly? I sure hope he didn't forget to carry a one. Do we get to all crunch the numbers ourselves...or should we just blindly accept that because the anonymous party who erected these things is presumably wealthy that they simply MUST know what is best for us all.

2. "Reproduce for fitness and diversity"-- OK...but please tell me how does one maintain BOTH "fitness" and "diversity" when implementing controlled reproduction in a human population? The only way to bring about "diversity" is to KEEP populations from screwing and the only way to breed "fitness" is to breed for desired traits. Think about populations of dogs. Purebred dogs typically have lots and lots of genetic problems which plague a breed due to excessive inbreeding and a slow degradation of the genetic code. Labs, Golden Retrievers, and Chesapeakes all share a common lineage...and all are plagued with hip displasia. Irish Setters frequently lose their marbles and just start running around in big elliptical circles around 8-9 years old. Great Danes have a particularly nasty problem where they actually vomit their own stomachs up and it comes out of their mouth inside-out (My uncle had a show-dog this happened to).
In years gone by this problem of inbreeding always naturally worked itself out due to the natural migrations of people and...sadly...warfare. There is nothing like a bit of rape, pillage, and plunder to give the ol' genome a shot of much needed diversity. However...in Georgia Guidestone Land...such things do not not ever occur.
By the way....who decides where I get to insert my genitals again? Is it the same guy who did the math in #1? What if I happen to think Sally is really, really hot and she thinks the same of me...but our Guidestone Overlords decide that our offspring wouldn't be "fit" and "diverse" enough? Can we still screw if we agree to abort any "undesirable" offspring? Are we really comfortable with the idea that we understood enough about the human genome to be able to intelligently calculate all of this in 1979 when the guidestones were erected? If it's such a hot idea...why all secrecy surrounding who paid for it?


It all sounds peachy-keen until you actually think about it. Do we REALLY have to wipe out 6.5 billion people to have a sustainable existence...or are we just being LAZY?? Are we sure 500 million is enough? Those Einsteins, Nikola Tesla's, and Feynman's don't come around so often. I'd hate to think that right out of the gates on this thing we inadvertently wiped out all the Da Vinci's but preserved three too many Vlad the Impalers. Hell...at 500 million all it takes is three maniacal dictators and we might be right down to 250 million in a hurry....let's hope some new virus doesn't hit, huh?

In the end our species is doomed unless we get off this rock called earth. We know this because in about 4 billion years the sun will explode. Therefore...THE MORE shots we have at those rare geniuses who will advance human understanding...the better our odds for survival.

In the meantime...why don't we just get off of oil and nuclear power? Solar panels and biodegradable plastic from corn sure would solve a whole lot problems.

Seems easier too.

Originally posted by jeepers1958
reply to post by artistpoet

 

Why do you look for something sinister? These are "guide" stones. Not," I am going to annihilate you" stones. You are so dramatic.
Read them as an individual, as if they were written to you personally. Try not to see them as if they are commands to the current ruling class, and they may not seem so ominus.

They are not written to me as they do not reverberate with me as they do for you prehaps
At worst they are perpetuating a myth of over population see links above
at best they are misguided ramblings of a concerned mind

LOL - as long as I am one of the ones who get to survive then SURE!

Originally posted by MidnightTide
LOL - as long as I am one of the ones who get to survive then SURE!

And if you do survive the cull you will be told err mean guided how to reproduce wisely
Expected to go to the gym or maybe take part in some mass exercise as in China and also as in Nazi Germany - yes they too had similar ideas
Learn a new language
Keep your passions controlled
Be ruled by a government that is ruled by a world court
Do what this envisioned new world goverment deems as your duty etc

This reminds me of the old Babylonian story.
One religion, one language, one society.
Maybe none of us are in it but the people who made these rules?
Does the guide stone say anything about a really big tower?

reply to post by artistpoet


No offense but those are some of the worst links I've ever seen...I only got through the first 2....

The first one is the most asinine video I've ever discussing population growth....it simply says that a billion people is less of a percentage of the population when you have a population of 7 billion. No #$%* Sherlock! It fails to notice that a billion people is still a lot of effing people. It does mention that some jackass statisticians somewhere have a crystal ball that says our population will begin to slowly decline, one can only hope. So hopefully that does begin to happen in time and we can get down to manageable numbers, JUST LIKE THE GUIDE STONE SAY TO DO. I think reigning in the population is something that anyone capable of reproduction should give some thought to. In 2012 there's a lot more to do with one's life then just live some lame ass traditional lifestyle.

In the second link the rebuttal against overpopulation makes WAY MORE SENSE then the first part of the article saying that it's a non issue.
2 of your 3(probably all three) links seem to be in line with the guide stones...how are you still against NOT managing the worlds population?

reply to post by liquidsmoke206



I personally believe in liberty. non encraochment and respect for my fellow beings and the Earth
I would not wish to bring a child into this world at present but would never dictate what or how others should live their lifes
How old are you - have you seen how the world has changed over the past 60 years
Nanny states more draconian laws based on fear of some boogie man
The centralisation of power - demonising of free thinking that disagrees with government
The deliberate dumbing down - Poisens in the food and water - Endless war in the name of peace
to name but a few things - Yes all is going to plan for the NWO
I see you are a Ron Paul supporter perhaps you should ask him his thoughts on the stones

You can't say you believe in the Georgia guide-stones, but then say you disagree with No.1, when No.1 on the guide-stones is probably the strongest point being made, hence being No.1. The other points basiclly point out how society was "supposed" to be in the first place, but without the heavily mentioned "rule" attached to those other points on the guide-stones.
And as a gambling man, i bet the same groups of nameless people that came up the guide-stones more than likely own the majority of the multi-national companies that rape the Earth of its resources, for a heavy profit of course !
If resources were used on a needed basis, rather then for a profit basis, there would be more than enough resources to maintain todays population and no need to mention No.1 on the list in the first place. But who profits from these resources the most..........those who own the companies !
These guide-stones seem very similar to the belief's of those in the Bilderberg group, and a lot of the Bilderberg group are owners of these companies that rape the Earth of its resources !

Originally posted by ALOSTSOUL
So I was recently reading an article about the Georgia Guide stones, the article was bashing them saying that they are part of the satanic NWO etc etc. But I find myself in agreement with all but the first "rules" the stones set.

Anyone else feel the same?

1. Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.
2. Guide reproduction wisely -- improving fitness and diversity.
3. Unite humanity with a living new language.
4. Rule passion -- faith -- tradition -- and all things with tempered reason.
5. Protect people and nations with fair laws and just courts.
6. Let all nations rule internally resolving external disputes in a world court.
7. Avoid petty laws and useless officials.
8. Balance personal rights with social duties.
9. Prize truth -- beauty -- love -- seeking harmony with the infinite.
10. Be not a cancer on the earth -- Leave room for nature -- Leave room for nature.

ALS

ETA: sorry pressed enter by mistake thats why this thread is so rushed.

edit on 4-3-2012 by ALOSTSOUL because: (no reason given)

edit on 4-3-2012 by ALOSTSOUL because: (no reason given)

I more or less agree with the Georgia Guidestones. Which is why I was all "wtf?" when conspiracy theorists were railing against them as this evil terrible tyrannical satanic thing...

Most of these tenets are quite benign/reasonable/scientific/rational.

Originally posted by Sly1one
reply to post by ALOSTSOUL

 

If you agree maybe you would like to sacrafice yourself and your family first in order to help hit that 500mill population mark...I mean since you agree the least you can do is put your money where your mouth is and "take one for the team"...

Oh shut up.

Just because overpopulation as a problem SUCKS, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Multiple studies have shown that human population cannot be sustained at current levels and consumption rates, end of story. There is no law of nature that says- "because it's sad/troubling to think about, human overpopulation is impossible"

One way or another, we have to start thinking about population/consumption reduction, otherwise WE WILL INADVERTENTLY SACRIFICE ALL OUR FAMILIES/POSTERITY IN OUR OWN NEGLIGENT AND WILLFUL IGNORANCE/GREED.

Maybe the population figure isn't for the planet but for each nation. Or each continent. Or each whatever. It doesn't say 500 million for the whole planet. With only 500 million this planet would be very sparsely populated, a scattering of small communities, about 8.6 people per square mile.

Originally posted by XelNaga
i agree with all but the first one.

for us to continue our species, we have to grow by the numbers. limiting us to 500 million is damning us to staying on this planet, which our future isnt on. with a growing population, we should be looking for ways to begin colonizing space with the technology and resources we all know we have.

Umm... 500 million people isn't enough to establish colonies on other moons/planets??

reply to post by artistpoet


What I'm trying to say is that you are responsible for you and everything you do, and that goes for all of us. In which case if we all look at the suggestions on the stones as individuals then the wording would not be so forceful.
#4 Rule passion -- faith -- tradition -- and all things with tempered reason. This one for instance, is a command we all should adhere to.
I firmly agree with Liquidsmoke206, that all of our world problems could be fixed or greatly helped by reducing the population. To do that everyone would have to do their part as individuals. Fewer births per family, education for those who do not know about birth control, or don't have access to it, or are not allowed access to it [ soon to be all of us if the religious right have their way].

reply to post by artistpoet

I personally believe in liberty. non encraochment and respect for my fellow beings and the Earth

SOOOOOOO?? UM? What about the guide stones don't you agree with? Or is this what you THINK you believe?

How old are you - have you seen how the world has changed over the past 60 years
Nanny states more draconian laws based on fear of some boogie man
The centralisation of power - demonising of free thinking that disagrees with government
The deliberate dumbing down - Poisens in the food and water - Endless war in the name of peace
to name but a few things - Yes all is going to plan for the NWO

how does any of this go in line with anything written on the stones? and what does my age have to do with anything? and I don't care what Ron Paul thinks of the stones. I'm a supporter of his, not some cult looney that shares 100% of all his beliefs.

A couple articles on overpopulation and scientifically optimal human population levels (based on a number of complex factors):



dieoff.org...

Although the tremendous size and rate of growth of the human population now influence virtually every aspect of society, rarely does the public debate, or even consider, the question of what would be an optimum number of human beings to live on Earth at any given time? While there are many possible optima depending on both the criteria defining "optimum" and on prevailing biophysical and social conditions, there is a solid scientific basis for determining the bounds of possibilities. All optima must lie between the minimum viable population size, MVP (Gilpin & Soule, 1986; Soule, 1987) and the biophysical carrying capacity of the planet (Daily & Ehrlich, 1992). At the lower end, 50-100 people in each of several groups, for a total of about 500, might constitute an MVP.

At the upper end, the present population of 5.5 billion, with its resource consumption patterns and technologies, has clearly exceeded the capacity of Earth to sustain it. This is evident in the continuous depletion and dispersion of a one-time inheritance of essential, nonsubstitutable resources that now maintains the human enterprise (e.g., Ehrlich & Ehrlich, 1991; Daily & Ehrlich 1992). Numerous claims have been made that Earth's carrying capacity is much higher than today's population size. A few years ago, for example, a group of Catholic bishops, misinterpreting a thought exercise by Roger Revelle (1976), asserted that Earth could feed 40 billion people (Anonymous, 1988); various social scientists have made estimates running as high as 150 billion (Livi-Bacci, 1989). These assertions are based on preposterous assumptions, and we do not deal further with them here.

...

To summarize this brief essay, determination of an "optimum" world population size involves social decisions about the life styles to be lived and the distribution of those life styles among individuals in the population. To us it seems reasonable to assume that, until cultures and technology change radically, the optimum number of people to exist simultaneously km in the vicinity of 1.5 to 2 billion people. That number, if achieved reasonably soon, would also likely permit the maximum number of Homo sapiens to live a good life over the long run. But suppose we have underestimated the optimum and it actually is 4 billion? Since the present population is over 5.5 billion and growing rapidly, the policy implications of our conclusions are still clear.

www.evfit.com...

What is the maximum sustainable human population? [7]

My own view is that it's about 600 million.

Other estimates given by people who either provide a credible methodology or who are known as thinkers of some authority are: