Mother Earth--Over Population

[archangel]

If the NWO was defeated tomorrow

How would we as a society deal with overpopulation?
whatever your view points are right now on the current population, It is inevitable that it will naturally grow exponentially larger. If you simply track population from recorded history that we know of untill today. The population has grown significantly. (and this is while being suppressed)

This growth has occurred even in the face of multiple wars,famines,plague, and possibly engineered diseases all of which took MASSIVE numbers of human life.

What will happen when there are no wars, energy is more easily available through new technology to make life easier, medicine will continue to get better to extend life spans even longer, and there are no people supressing you or trying to keep you sick. There will be more time to enjoy life. When circumstances to support life are better that always means there will be an influx of new life. It is a universal law. (People will have more kids because "times are easier").

Is keeping the population down not important?
can our planet support an infinite amount of human beings?

I've heard people say that we will be able to colonize other planets by then so this is mute point. I DISAGREE. If Earth is becoming over crowded with people and you take some of them to Mars or another planet. People on earth are still going to keep multiplying. At best you just slowed down the problem slightly. Who is to say we will have the capability to do this anyway before this problem arises?

Should we as a race just consume all the natural resources of this planet untill its dead and then make our way through the universe like parasites looking for other suitable planets, strip it clean, and then move on to the next? Perhaps it is your view that none of this is relevant because our earth will never in a million years become overpopulated?

these are tough questions. but important questions.

what is your opinion.

[teslafire]

"The world is NOT over-populated. More than 97% of the land surface on Earth is empty.... Yes, certain cities are over-populated, of course. Yet the entire population of the world could fit inside the state of Arkansas. So, then, how is the world 'over-populated'? Europe and Japan will be facing under-population crises in the coming decades, even according to UN studies on population." -- Anthony C. LoBaido

http://www.juntosociety.com/guest/sperlazzo/bs_opm1010903.html

There is an article at the bottom of the page that can't be seen unless fully highlighted.

[archangel]

"The world is NOT over-populated. More than 97% of the land surface on Earth is empty.... Yes, certain cities are over-populated, of course. Yet the entire population of the world could fit inside the state of Arkansas. So, then, how is the world 'over-populated'? Europe and Japan will be facing under-population crises in the coming decades, even according to UN studies on population." -- Anthony C. LoBaido

http://www.juntosociety.com/guest/sperlazzo/bs_opm1010903.html

There is an article at the bottom of the page that can't be seen unless fully highlighted.

How about 50 years from now? 100 yrs? 200 yrs? 500 yrs? 1,000 yrs?

also the fact that u can fit all the people on earth into such as such sate is misleading. It takes alot of natural resources to support a person thorougly. People aslo cut down forests for new developement etc. what effect will a growing population have on this??

[teslafire]

Colonize Mars.

[teslafire]

It takes alot of natural resources to support a person thorougly.

In the silly way we are cultured to live in currently, yes.

[archangel]

Colonize Mars.

but as I stated. The problem with continue on earth. At best you just slowed it down. Also, how do you force people to go to Mars?

So what do you do??

[archangel]

In the silly way we are cultured to live in currently, yes.

We still need to grow fruits and vegatables, catch fish. etc. and building houses. What do you think we are going to eat in the future??? where will we live??

[teslafire]

Overpopulation? -- 10 Myths
by Dr. Jacqueline R. Kasun, Economist and Author
.
It's a day like any other. Your child comes home from school with an assignment. Only today, the assignment is to detail the problems that "overpopulation" is causing the world's ecosystem.
.
And part of this assignment is to educate you about the world's population "problem."
.
What do you do? Do you go along with what s/he's being taught? After all, this is what you've been hearing on television and in the newspapers for decades. Or do you have some counter-arguments? Might you, in fact, need to defend yourself and your child from a very real threat?
.
You should be aware that the question of "overpopulation" is no longer merely a topic of conversation, if it ever was. It is a burning matter of policy and action at the local, national and international level. Our national government is actually committed by law and by international agreement to reducing the worldwide rate of population growth.
.
Government spokesmen, such as Ambassador Timothy Wirth, insist that this effort must also apply to the population of the United States. Your chances of having grandchildren depend on whether and how this program is carried out. In many countries already, governments sterilize and abort their citizens by force, often with financial help from the United Nations, the United States and government-supported private agencies such as Planned Parenthood.
.
There are many government policies that make it difficult for families to bring children into the world, and for those children's fathers to support them and their mothers to stay home and raise them. Those policies include levying heavy taxes on families with children, discrimination against men in the job market, building codes and land use restrictions which increase the cost of housing, regulations which discourage productive activity. The groups which have supported these policies have plainly stated their intent to reduce population growth.
.
The United States government and the United Nations have promoted sex education in the schools, teaching children that there are too many -- far too many -- people in the world. The programs teach that abortion, sterilization and contraception are necessary to reduce "excessive" population growth.
.
If you familiarize yourself with the myths surrounding "overpopulation," you'll be in a better position to defend yourself and your family against these idealogical threats.
.
MYTH 1: The world is overcrowded and population growth is adding overwhelming numbers of humans to a small planet.
.
In fact, people do live in crowded conditions, and always have. We cluster together in cities and villages in order to exchange goods and services with one another. But while we crowd together for economic reasons in our great metropolitan areas, most of the world is empty, as we can see when we fly over it. It has been estimated by Paul Ehrlich and others that human beings actually occupy no more than 1-3% of the earth's land surface.
.
If you allotted 1250 square feet to each person, all the people in the world would fit into the state of Texas. Try the math yourself: 7,438,152,268,800 square feet in Texas, divided by the world population of 5,860,000,000, equals 1269 square feet per person. The population density of this giant city would be about 21,000 -- somewhat more than San Francisco and less than the Bronx.
.
Another fact: World population growth is rapidly declining. United Nations figures show that the 79 countries that comprise 40% of the world's population now have fertility rates too low to prevent population decline. The rate in Asia fell from 2.4 in 1965-70 to 1.5 in 1990-95. In Latin America and the Caribbean, the rate fell from 2.75 in 1960-65 to 1.70 in 1990-95. In Europe, the rate fell to 0.16 -- that is, effectively zero -- in 1990-95.And the annual rate of change in world population fell from 2% in 1965-70 to less than 1.5% in 1990-95.
.
Worldwide, the number of children the typical woman had during her lifetime (total fertility) fell from 5 in 1950-55 to less than 3 in 1990-95. (The number necessary just to "replace" the current generation is 2.1.) In the more developed regions, total fertility fell from 2.77 to 1.68 over the same period. In the less developed regions it fell from more than 6 to 3.3. Total fertility in Mexico was 3.1 in 1990-95. In Spain it stood at 1.3, and in Italy, it was 1.2.
.
Official forecasts of eventual world population size have been steadily falling. In 1992-93, the World Bank predicted world population would exceed 10 billion by the year 2050. In 1996, the UN predicted 9 billion for 2050. If the trend continues, the next estimate will be lower still.
.
MYTH 2: Overpopulation is causing global warming.
.
The message that is most likely to arouse the fervor of young people is that overpopulation is destroying the environment and the biosphere. On this point, the first thing to keep in mind is that some of the most beautiful parts of the world, with the highest environmental quality, are in densely populated countries such as western Germany, which has more than 600 persons per square mile, and the Netherlands, which has almost 1200 persons per square mile, compared with 330 in China. Several myths promote the belief that we are engulfed in an environmental catastrophe.
.
For instance, Vice-President Al Gore and some scientists say population growth is causing global warming. But there is much disagreement in the scientific community about this. Seventy-nine scientists issued the "Leipzig Declaration" in 1995 saying "...There does not exist today a general scientific consensus about ... greenhouse warming ...." Additionally, the satellite readings of global temperature, available on the NASA Web site at www.nasa.com, do not show a warming trend. And further, respected climatologists such as Hugh Ellsaesser, Richard S. Lindzen and Robert C. Balling vigorously dispute the notion of a global warming danger.
.
MYTH 3: Overpopulation causes ozone depletion.
.
Like global warming, the cause and significance of the so-called ozone "hole" is a matter of intense scientific dispute, although the United States and other nations have agreed to reductions in the use of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), which were alleged to have caused it. S. Fred Singer, an atmospheric physicist who participated in the earliest ozone measurements, calls the ozone scare a "misuse of science." In fact, many think the chief function of the CFC ban has been to help big chemical companies establish highly profitable new monopolies on the CFC substitutes which they developed.
.
MYTH 4: The world's forests are disappearing because of overpopulation.
.
This is an important matter because forests are an essential part of the world's environment and, therefore, humanity's well-being. The Psalmists spoke in awe of the cedars of Lebanon. Today we know that trees inhale carbon dioxide and exhale oxygen, which means that they are a first line of defense against air pollution and the specter of global warming. The world forested area, estimated by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN (FAO), currently amounts to four billion hectares, covering 30% of the land surface of the earth. Few people realize this is the same figure as in the 1950s.
.
In the United States, vast forests cover a third of the land, according to the US Forest Service. That's equivalent to two-thirds of the amount of land that was forested when the Europeans arrived in the 1600s. This acreage has not declined since 1920. In fact, annual forest growth today is more than 3-1/2 times what it was in 1920. Two-thirds of the nation's forests are classed as timberland, capable of producing at least 20 cubic feet per acre of industrial wood annually. Another fact: Trees are growing 33% faster than they are being cut.
.
The highest volumes of growth occur on privately-owned forest industry land, while the government-owned national forests, where the trees are older, have the lowest volumes of tree growth. The National Wilderness Preservation System grew from nine million acres in 1964 to 96 million acres in 1993. But this is not enough for the environmentalists of The Wildlands Project, who hope to turn fully half of the land area of the United States into wilderness areas inhabited by grizzly bears, wolverines and mountain lions, and make it off-limits to humans. There has also been great agitation about the "destruction of the tropical rainforests." Someone has claimed that an area twice the size of Belgium is now being logged worldwide each year, but people don't realize Belgium could fit into the world's tropical forests 500 times, and in the meantime, the rest of the world's trees -- 99.6% of them -- are continuing to grow. One of the greatest of these tropical stands exists in Brazil, with more than half of the forests of South America.
.
FAO and Brazilian government figures suggest that logging takes about 0.2% of forest acreage per year, and in 1993, Brazilian forests covered 58% of the country's total land area. Such figures hardly suggest a catastrophic decline. Another thing that's misleading is that FAO figures show a "decline" in forest cover even when forest land is appropriated for use as public parks, and not a single tree is cut down. And if in fact some deforestation is occurring in Brazil, it can scarcely be the result of overpopulation; Brazil has less than half as many people per square mile (31.2) as the world average (101).
.
MYTH 5: Air pollution is the result of overpopulation, and acid rain, a byproduct of air pollution, is destroying lakes, rivers and forests.
.
In fact, air and water pollution levels have been highest in the centrally-planned economies of Eastern Europe and China, where population growth is low or negative. Legendary air pollution in Poland and Russia has occurred in areas with thinly-settled populations. In the United States, air pollution is declining significantly. The federal government's National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program recently reported "no widespread forest or crop damage in the United States" related to acid rain.
.
MYTH 6: Many plants and animals are disappearing because of the growth in human numbers.
.
There is absolutely no scientific data whatsoever to support this claim. Even a scientist such as David Jablonski, who believes species will decline, says, "We have no idea how many species are out there and how many are dying." Some species, such as blue whales, spotted owls and blackfooted ferrets, have been found to be more numerous than was once thought. Since many species exist in forests and the earth's forest cover is remaining about the same, the claims of massive species extinction appear doubtful.
.
MYTH 7: Overpopulation is threatening the world food supply.
.
According to the Food and Agriculture Organization, world food supplies exceed requirements in all world areas, amounting to a surplus approaching 50% in 1990 in the developed countries, and 17% in the developing regions. "Globally, food supplies have more than doubled in the last 40 years ... between 1962 and 1991, average daily per caput food supplies increased more than 15% ... at a global level, there is probably no obstacle to food production rising to meet demand," according to FAO documents prepared for the 1996 World Food Summit. The FAO also reported that less than a third as many people had less than 2100 calories per person per day in 1990-92 as had been the case in 1969-71.
.
At present, farmers use less than half of the world's arable land. The conversion of land to urban and built-up uses to accommodate a larger population will absorb less than 2% of the world's land, and "is not likely to seriously diminish the supply of land for agricultural production," according to Paul Waggoner, writing for the Council for Agricultural Science and Technology in 1994.
.
MYTH 8: Overpopulation is the chief cause of poverty.
.
In reality, problems commonly blamed on "overpopulation" are the result of bad economic policy. For example, Western journalists blamed the Ethiopian famine on "overpopulation," but that was simply not true. The Ethiopian government caused it by confiscating the food stocks of traders and farmers and exporting them to buy arms. That country's leftist regime, not its population, caused the tragedy. In fact, Africa, beset with problems often blamed on "overpopulation," has only one-fifth the population density of Europe, and has an unexploited food-raising potential that could feed twice the present population of the world, according to estimates by Roger Revelle of Harvard and the University of San Diego. Economists writing for the International Monetary Fund in 1994 said that African economic problems result from excessive government spending, high taxes on farmers, inflation, restrictions on trade, too much government ownership, and overregulation of private economic activity. There was no mention of overpopulation.
.
The government of the Philippines relies on foreign aid to control population growth, but protects monopolies which buy farmers' outputs at artificially low prices, and sell them inputs at artificially high prices, causing widespread poverty. Advocates of population control blame "overpopulation" for poverty in Bangladesh. But the government dominates the buying and processing of jute, the major cash crop, so that farmers receive less for their efforts than they would in a free market. Impoverished farmers flee to the city, but the government owns 40% of industry and regulates the rest with price controls, high taxes and unpublished rules administered by a huge, corrupt, foreign-aid dependent bureaucracy. Jobs are hard to find and poverty is rampant. This crowding leads to problems such as sporadic or inefficient food distribution, but this problem is caused -- as in Ethiopia -- by that country's flawed domestic policies.
.
It is often claimed that poverty in China is the result of "overpopulation." But Taiwan, with a population density five times as great as mainland China's, produces many times as much per capita. The Republic of Korea, with a population density 3.6 times as great as China's, has a per capita output almost 16 times as great. The Malaysian government abandoned population control in 1984, ushering in remarkable economic growth under free market reforms, while Ecuador, Uruguay, Bulgaria and other countries complained at the International Conference on Population and Development in Cairo that though they had reduced their population growth, they still had deteriorating economies.
.
MYTH 9: Women and men throughout the world are begging for the means to control their fertility.
.
Not so, according to reports from such places as Bangladesh, Africa and the Philippines. The fact is, surplus condoms and birth control pills fill warehouses in the less developed world and women flee the birth control workers and beg to have their implants and IUDs removed.
.
US foreign assistance law requires countries receiving American foreign aid to take steps to reduce population growth [you can find this in 22 US Code, sec. 2151-1; 22 US Code, sec. 2151(b)]. Far from meeting an "unmet need" for birth control, foreign-supported family planners in India, Bangladesh and other countries must pay, or force, their clients to accept it, according to reports from these countries. Foreign-supported population control is so unpopular in Bangladesh that riots over this issue prevented the prime minister from attending the International Conference on Population and Development in Cairo in 1994.
.
Dr. Margaret Ogola, a Kenyan pediatrician, disputed the claim of "unmet need" for family planning at the International Conference on Population and Develop-ment in Cairo in 1994. She said that foreign aid givers have lavished pills, condoms and IUDs on hospitals and clinics in Kenya, but that simple medicines for common diseases remain unavailable. A United Nations survey of abortion and birth control policies throughout the world found that high proportions of women were familiar with and were using "traditional" methods (NFP) of limiting births.
.
In 1981, the typical Bangladeshi woman was having seven children during her lifetime; since then the number has fallen to 3.4. According to Bangladesh press reports in 1994, the secretary of health acknowledged that "coercion, blackmail [and] abuse of payment provisions" were problems in the population control program. Alarmed by extremely low fertility, South Korea reported to the International Conference in Cairo that it has slashed its government expenditures on birth control. Singapore, faced with below-replacement fertility, reported that it now offers tax rebates to couples with more than two children. Government-supported "family planning" agencies in the United States, such as Planned Parenthood, claim their services save public assistance costs. In fact, published research has shown that states which spend large amounts on birth control subsequently have higher costs of public assistance. Research also shows that states which require parental consent for a minor to have an abortion have lower rates of adolescent pregnancy.
.
MYTH 10: Overpopulation causes war and revolution.
.
The most war-torn continent on earth -- Africa -- is also one of the least densely populated, with about half as many people per square mile as in the world as a whole. Bad governments, propped up by ineptly and unjustly managed foreign aid, are more probably the root of strife.
.
The worldwide movement which promotes population control is not small or weak. It is a powerful alliance of United Nations agencies, national governments, foundations and "nongovernmental organizations." It commands many billions of dollars in resources. Its members include family planning agencies, radical leftist environmental organizations such as the Sierra Club and the World Wildlife Fund, development planners, international financial institutions such as the World Bank, foreign relations agencies such as the US Agency for International Development, and "research" organizations such as Worldwatch Institute. Its ideology increasingly dominates school and college instructional programs and textbook publishing.
.
Ultimately, however, its power rests on public ignorance in countries such as the United States. For the billions of people who inhabit God's creation, and for the billions more He intends it for, it's up to us to find out the truth about "overpopulation," and to share it with as many people as will listen.
.
Dr. Jacqueline R. Kasun is an economist and the author of The War Against Population: The Economics and Ideology of World Population Control (Ignatius, 1988, 1998).
.
http://www.envoymagazine.com/backissues/2.3/coverstory.html
.
.

[archangel]

you just posted that information in Link form.
Why was it neccessary to post it again???

DOn't spam this thread.

Even if you buy everything in that article, All that it is saying is that the world is CURRENTLY not overpopulated.

Eventually it will be someday. If it is not already.

So how do we prevent it from becoming overpopulated? and prevent the resources from being stripped dry???

[bigus_dickus]

How would we as a society deal with overpopulation?
whatever your view points are right now on the current population, It is inevitable that it will naturally grow exponentially larger. If you simply track population from recorded history that we know of untill today. The population has grown significantly. (and this is while being suppressed)


we can start by stop believing nonsense like this and stop spreading fearful disinformation, archangel.

__________________________________________________

http://www.envoymagazine.com/backissues/2.3/coverstory.html

·

http://www.kqed.org/topics/news/perspectives/youdecide/pop/overpop/

Are you sure?

Cole Porter reminded us "Birds do it. Bees do it..." and even educated humans do it. Reproduction is one of the animal world's most basic functions. But with the current world population hovering just north of 6 billion people, many wonder if couples worldwide shouldn't be putting on the reproductive brakes.

During the twentieth century, the world population grew from 1.65 billion to its current level of over 6.3 billion people. Almost 80 percent of that increase occurred since 1950. It took just the 12 years between 1987 and 1999 for the world to add its most recent billion inhabitants -- the shortest period of time in history for that kind of population jump. And according to demographers, every second of every day, two people die and five are born.

Anxiety about overpopulation "officially" began as early as 1798 when the British economist and parson Thomas Malthus wrote An Essay on the Principle of Population. He argued that, "Population, when unchecked, increases in a geometrical ratio," and concluded that unless family size was regulated, famine would become a global epidemic. He believed that poverty and famine were natural outcomes of population growth.

In the book The Population Bomb, published in 1968, Paul Ehrlich carried the torch of fear of population growth. As Charles Mann wrote in The Atlantic Monthly, The Population Bomb was a "gloomy book for a gloomy time" that predicted unprecedented suffering due to the population explosion. In 1972, MIT researchers used computer modeling to predict that the world would exhaust its supplies of gold in 1981, oil in 1992, and farmland in 2000. Their report The Limits of Growth foresaw the collapse of civilization by 2070. And the book Famine 1975! warned that hunger would cause the complete demise of the Third World that year.

But those dire predictions did not come to fruition. As Stephen Moore wrote in The Washington Times, "These days almost no sane person gives any credence to the population bomb hysteria that was all the rage in the 1960s and 1970s."

Paul Ehrlich and others now estimate that humans actually occupy no more than one to three percent of the earth's land surface, prompting some to say that there's plenty of room -- and plenty of resources -- for everyone. Demographers assert that the world population will most likely peak in 30 years, then actually begin to decline. Global population is expected to be around eight billion in 2050, with a decrease to 6.4 billion by 2150.

Bill McKibben, former staff writer for The New Yorker and author of numerous books on the environment and society, isn't quite ready to celebrate. "The good news is that we won't grow forever. The bad news is that there are six billion of us already, a number the world strains to support. One more near-doubling -- four or five billion more people -- will nearly double that strain. Will these be the five billion straws that break the camel's back?"

But others assert that humans adapt both themselves and their environments to change. Ansley Coale of Princeton University said he doesn't see the wisdom in assuming worst case scenarios. "If you had asked someone in 1890 about today's population," Coale explained, "he'd say, 'There's no way the United States can support two hundred and fifty million people. Where are they going to pasture all their horses?'"

·

Popular Environmental Myths, Part I

http://nj.npri.org/nj97/07/myths1.htm

·

http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/0500overpopulation.htm

·

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=13087

Overpopulation Myths

Is the earth becoming overpopulated? It is not a question of the human population outstripping resources, since food production continues to exceed population growth and non-renewable resources become more plentiful each year as new sources are found.

Even in sheer numbers, though, there is growing evidence that the world's population is heading toward stability.

* The growth rate of the world's population appears to have peaked around 1970, when the annual rate of growth was 2.09 percent.
* By 1980, annual population growth was down to 1.73 percent, and by 1990 to 1.7 percent.
* By 1995, the annual increase had slowed even more to 1.5 percent.

What is sometimes meant by overpopulation is overcrowding, or too great a population density. However, population density varies widely. Much of the world's land surface is empty, and many countries with dense populations have a higher standard of living than less crowded countries.

* In 1992, the population of Hong Kong City was approximately 247,501 per square mile, while in New York City it was 11,480 per square mile, and in Houston 7,512.
* If the entire population of the world were put into the land area of Texas, each person would have an area equal to the floor space of a typical U.S. home and the population density of Texas would be about the same as Paris, France.
* In 1988, China had a population of 409 people per square mile and gross domestic product per capita of $320, while Hong Kong, with a population density more than 450 times greater, had a per capita GDP of $8,260.

One reason people are crowded together in cities is because it makes possible many more exchanges and greater specialization of labor, thus increasing living standards.

Source: Jim Peron, "Exploding Population Myths," Fraser Forum, October 1995, Fraser Institute, 2nd Floor, 626 Bute Street, Vancouver, B. C., V6E 3M1, (604) 688-0221.

·

Overpopulation Myths, Facts, and Politics

http://theunjustmedia.com/New%20World%20Order/Overpopulation%20Myths,%20Facts,%20and%20Politics. htm

·

The Myth of Overpopulation and the Folks Who Brought it to You

http://www.nccbuscc.org/prolife/programs/rlp//03ruse.shtml

·

Overpopulation: The Perennial Myth
By David Osterfeld

http://www.fee.org/publications/the-freeman/article.asp?aid=2025

In short, although there are now more people in the world than ever before, by any meaningful measure the world is actually becoming relatively less populated.

[teslafire]

you just posted that information in Link form.
Why was it neccessary to post it again???

DOn't spam this thread.

Even if you buy everything in that article, All that it is saying is that the world is CURRENTLY not overpopulated.

Eventually it will be someday. If it is not already.

So how do we prevent it from becoming overpopulated? and prevent the resources from being stripped dry???

What's your deal, huh?

You asked for an opinion, I gave it.

Then you got huffy and said "well, that's your opinion" and asked a bunch of questions.

In a genuine effort to inform you I posted an article that addresses all your questions. But you haven't even read it, I can tell, because you think it doesn't address the future.

Are we having a discussion or are you set on creating a debate?

[archangel]

actually the most current census says 6.6 billion

World population - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

no matter at what rate you want to call it. Our population has grown everytime a census was done. That is fact

here are the current projections
World population estimates - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So I guess you feel that our population, after being freed from slavery so to speak will not grow? medicine will not make people live longer? absense of wars will not spare millions of lives? ceasation of engineered sickness will not boost population??

You believe the population will "stabilize" itself and not keep growing untill it endangers the globe? if so what is your evidence for that??

I respect your opinion and if that is what you think then what can I say. If I was a betting man though, I would not lay down my bet for that to pan out.

[archangel]

What's your deal, huh?

You asked for an opinion, I gave it.

Then you got huffy and said "well, that's your opinion" and asked a bunch of questions.

In a genuine effort to inform you I posted an article that addresses all your questions. But you haven't even read it, I can tell, because you think it doesn't address the future.

Are we having a discussion or are you set on creating a debate?

It said the world is not overpopulated and the guy seems to think its not in risk of being.

I"m asking you how about when our population goes to 15 billion, or 30 billion? or is it your opinion too that the population will "even out" on its on??? these are not silly statements. 100,200,1,000 years into the future is bleep in time for how long the earth has been here.

[pollock]

If we where free to use our amazing abilities (mental and technical) for the good of mother earth and her inhabitants she could support twice the amount of people and still thrive in a way she hasnt since we started misusing our powers (led by the advocats of nwo)!
There is no doubt in my mind that left to fend for itself humanity has the key to open the doors to "paradise" (no im not religious just using a metaphore) that have been closed to us by those who fear it!

F

[teslafire]

Note that the population of industrialized nations are declining or staying level (this is all of Europe and America). The rest of the world is becoming industrialised and if history means anything, third world population rates will start to even out as they become first world nations. The tech evolution of India and China, in recent years, is proof of this.

[archangel]

If we where free to use our amazing abilities (mental and technical) for the good of mother earth and her inhabitants she could support twice the amount of people and still thrive in a way she hasnt since we started misusing our powers (led by the advocats of nwo)!
There is no doubt in my mind that left to fend for itself humanity has the key to open the doors to "paradise" (no im not religious just using a metaphore) that have been closed to us by those who fear it!

F

you base that off nothing but you're allowed to have your opinion. lets say your are correct.

You said that the earth can support twice the amount of people we have now. lets say thats true.

What do we do once 6.6 million turns int 15 million?? it would happen fairly quickly with the man not holding people back. It is a unversal law of certainty.

This would not take long.
50,100,500,1000,3000 yrs into the future is just a bleep in time.

[archangel]

Note that the population of industrialized nations are declining or staying level (this is all of Europe and America). The rest of the world is becoming industrialised and if history means anything, third world population rates will start to even out as they become first world nations. The tech evolution of India and China, in recent years, is proof of this.

The bottom line is the the Global population has GROWN every single time a Census was done. People say African people are suppressed and injected with aids. Harmful things are said to be put in vaccines which kill people off. and some say harmful things are put in food and water etc. What happens when all these things stop and modern medicine and science keeps getting better?

our population is sure to GROW

So are we sure there will be no overpopulation 50,100,200,500,1000 years from now???

[teslafire]

Who knows what the real limit there is to the biosphere?

Global Warming and Worldwide Poverty are not indicators as they are both frauds.

[archangel]

Who knows what the real limit there is to the biosphere?

Global Warming and Worldwide Poverty are not indicators as they are both frauds.

Perhaps they do not paint a true picture. I would agree with you here. Maybe if things were different the wealth of the planet would be spread around much better.

But will overpopluation never be an issue? ever? Years into the future???

[pollock]

you base that off nothing but you're allowed to have your opinion. lets say your are correct.

You said that the earth can support twice the amount of people we have now. lets say thats true.

What do we do once 6.6 million turns int 15 million?? it would happen fairly quickly with the man not holding people back. It is a unversal law of certainty.

This would not take long.
50,100,500,1000,3000 yrs into the future is just a bleep in time.

Mmm, yes on nothing:rolleyes:, and you base yours on other peoples assumptions, wich is worth more?
According to you we are fucked no matter what, so whats your point?
Just let the fuckers decimate us through war and poverty, because we will just overpopulate this planet anyway????

F

[archangel]

Mmm, yes on nothing:rolleyes:, and you base yours on other peoples assumtions wich is worth more I wonder?
According to you we are fucked no matter what, so whats your point?
Just let the fuckers decimate us through war and poverty, because we will just overpopulate this planet anyway????

F

I do not know the limits of Global population. My personal views are some what in line with what modern science is saying today. They should not go much higher if at all. These numbers can obviously and SHOULD be debated.

Regardless of the exact numbers, I do not know how any one can not deny that SOME DAY over population will dip into the the earths natural resources in a VERY NEGATIVE MANNER.

I do not agree with with having a hiddent Gov't secretly kill us to keep us down in numbers. I do not like the idea of a hidden power crafting a NWO at the expense of all of earths people. I hate the idea of this. But I agree that some of the things they speak about are real issues. I think we as a society should recongize these things and work together as a team.

I see all this we are all free and all one hippy talk which is all good. But people need to take responsibility for themselves in some way. The overpopulation and limited resource thing will happen someday. If not in 5 years, then in 100, or 2,000 yrs. As I said this is a bleep in time we are talking here.


Not everything can be Sun Shine and rainbows...

[teslafire]

Its a valid point...how do other species keep their populations in harmony with their environment? Predators.

The food chain...well who is above humans?

Reptilians? Does it go higher than that? Probably.

So the control of man through civilization and war and the rest of it is merely part of the circle of life. I think we all understand by this point that they need to manufacture our consent to forward their agendas and turn us against ourselves.

If we buy into the fear of overpopulation (which again, by the numbers, is highly dubious) then we subconsciously consent our own population culling which apparently feeds another species in a more direct method of energy absorbtion (soul harvest), it seems.

[archangel]

What you said there really makes you think!!

My thoughts
----------------------------------------------------------------------
once this Topic of Population was thoroughly investigated. and an estimate was determined. This number might be 16 mill. but regardless we will get to that very quickly.

Would it really be so ruthless to say couples were only allowed to have a restricted amount of kids?? in order to try to preserve the earth. and ensure the quality of life was extremely high for all of earths people. With fewer people you can spread the wealth much easier.

Yes, these are tough things to think about. But When you look at the big picture and into the future it is a very important subject.

[zedd]

actually the most current census says 6.6 billion

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population

no matter at what rate you want to call it. Our population has grown everytime a census was done. That is fact

here are the current projections
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population_estimates

So I guess you feel that our population, after being freed from slavery so to speak will not grow? medicine will not make people live longer? absense of wars will not spare millions of lives? ceasation of engineered sickness will not boost population??

You believe the population will "stabilize" itself and not keep growing untill it endangers the globe? if so what is your evidence for that??

I respect your opinion and if that is what you think then what can I say. If I was a betting man though, I would not lay down my bet for that to pan out.

Did you seriously just use Wikipedia as a source?

[bigus_dickus]

actually the most current census says 6.6 billion

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population

no matter at what rate you want to call it. Our population has grown everytime a census was done. That is fact

and, so what?

the issue her is OVER population (with respect to what? what is it over with?) and not population growth. do you actually read my posts?

and my nickname is definitely not BickDickus, anyway..

how was this post relevant to the issue?


btw, here are some interesting facts.

http://agnews.colostate.edu/index.asp?url=food_for_thought

Food for Thought from CSU AgNews
An Exercise in Earth Resource Appreciation

http://agnews.colostate.edu/images_agnews/apple_metaphor_0.jpg

http://agnews.colostate.edu/images_agnews/apple_metaphor_1.jpg

Cut an apple into quarters. Three of the quarters represent the amount of the earth that is covered by oceans and other bodies of water. The quarter that is left represents land above water.

http://agnews.colostate.edu/images_agnews/apple_metaphor_2.jpg

Slice the Remaining Quarter in half

Take that remaining quarter and slice it in half. One half of that quarter represents areas of the earth that can't be occupied by humans --- the North and South Poles, deserts, swamps and high mountains.

http://agnews.colostate.edu/images_agnews/apple_metaphor_3.jpg

One-Eighth of the Apple

The half of the quarter that is left one-eighth of the apple --- is the portion of the earth inhabited by humans, but not necessarily where they grow their food. It includes cities, as well.

http://agnews.colostate.edu/images_agnews/apple_metaphor_4.jpg

Slice the 1/8 piece into Four Sections

Now, slice that 1/8 piece of the apple into four sections and set aside all but one of them. The three small sections that you've set aside represent the places where the soil can't be farmed because it is too rocky, too steep, too cold or too wet to produce food. Those three sections also represent the land covered by cities, houses, highways, stores, schools, parks, industry, parking lots, golf courses, and other land uses than agriculture.

http://agnews.colostate.edu/images_agnews/apple_metaphor_6.jpg

Top 5 Feet of Earth

Because food can only be grown on top of the soil --- food is grown only on the top 5 feet of earth --- peel the 1/32 section of an apple that is left. The peel represents the surface of the earth that is available to farm and feed the world. It represents the section of the Earths crust that all humans depend upon for their food and fibers for clothing and other goods.

[archangel]

Did you seriously just use Wikipedia as a source?

are the number and projections wrong?

Here is a gov't website with the same numbers.

http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/idb/worldpopinfo.html

[archangel]

I wasn't trying you call you a name there (bigdickus) haha that was just a typo.

I thought you were trying to say that overpopulation is a myth. Food output exceeds population. and that there is evidence that the population is stabilzing.

IS this what you were saying?

You posted alot of information on your first post with people making arguments on both sides of the coin. Maybe I didn't get a clear picture in what YOUR opinion was.

[pollock]

are the number and projections wrong?

Here is a gov't website with the same numbers.

http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/idb/worldpopinfo.html

Yes, we trust the government!!!!:rolleyes:
And my point is; that if we free ourselves from the influence of those who manipulate us, we will not continue to rape the earths resourses and things will balance themselves, nature has ways of sorting herself out you know!

F

[bigus_dickus]

I see all this we are all free and all one hippy talk which is all good. But people need to take responsibility for themselves in some way. The overpopulation and limited resource thing will happen someday. If not in 5 years, then in 100, or 2,000 yrs. As I said this is a bleep in time we are talking here.

Not everything can be Sun Shine and rainbows...

right...

i there were 100 people on earth and steadily growing, you would still worry about resource shortage in thousands or millions of years span.

[_underscore_]

but as I stated. The problem with continue on earth. At best you just slowed it down. Also, how do you force people to go to Mars?

So what do you do??


You wouldn't have to force anybody to go to Mars, the people would go willingly, if the Earth were horribly over populated, as you say it will be (which it won't).

[bigus_dickus]

You posted alot of information on your first post with people making arguments on both sides of the coin. Maybe I didn't get a clear picture in what YOUR opinion was.

my opinion is that we don't know shit about what's going to happen tomorrow morning... sure, we can all be prophets if we want, but what's the use? why would we worry instead of having faith? what is the significance of the problem and where is the evidence? is it part of an agenda, or is it just speculation based on nothing?

[dr_strangelove]

but as I stated. The problem with continue on earth. At best you just slowed it down. Also, how do you force people to go to Mars?

So what do you do??

how did they force the jews to go to Israel ?

[lemonique]

ith so much attention being paid to the world being overpopulated, it seems no one is paying any attention to countries that are becoming underpopulated and is either decreasing or set to decrease in population. It is well hypothesized that a population must maintain a 2.1 children per woman ratio in order to acheive zero growth without immigration.

http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=23071
World Underpopulation Problem

Cheers

[Anders Lindman]

How about 50 years from now? 100 yrs? 200 yrs? 500 yrs? 1,000 yrs?


My guess is that there will be an increase of the population for a long time, but it will gradually slow down. In fact, if too few babies were born, the population would actually shrink until there would be no people at all! So it all depends on how many children are born. I have great fate in that the population will not be too large nor too small in the future.

[cheesedanish]

My hypothesis :
overpopulation = lack of food (ultimately)
lack of food = starvation
starvation = death

Nature takes care of it's own?

[thetonic]

Archangel - Stop trying to flex your avatars pecs and think outside your box... There is a wonderful thing called horticulture which could actually provide food for the whole world and then some ... But instead we choose to use our resources for feeding Cows ( NWO SLAUGHTERFEST ) which im sure you partake so you can keep flexing your avatars pecs despite the people that starve to death today! So stop your fearmongering! The laws of nature will sort us all out in the end including you and any NWO fascist, elitist, i want it all for myself piece of crap out there! YOU WILL GET YOURS SOON ENOUGH!

[ninpo]

If the NWO was defeated tomorrow

How would we as a society deal with overpopulation?
whatever your view points are right now on the current population, It is inevitable that it will naturally grow exponentially larger. If you simply track population from recorded history that we know of untill today. The population has grown significantly. (and this is while being suppressed)

This growth has occurred even in the face of multiple wars,famines,plague, and possibly engineered diseases all of which took MASSIVE numbers of human life.

What will happen when there are no wars, energy is more easily available through new technology to make life easier, medicine will continue to get better to extend life spans even longer, and there are no people supressing you or trying to keep you sick. There will be more time to enjoy life. When circumstances to support life are better that always means there will be an influx of new life. It is a universal law. (People will have more kids because "times are easier").

Is keeping the population down not important?
can our planet support an infinite amount of human beings?

I've heard people say that we will be able to colonize other planets by then so this is mute point. I DISAGREE. If Earth is becoming over crowded with people and you take some of them to Mars or another planet. People on earth are still going to keep multiplying. At best you just slowed down the problem slightly. Who is to say we will have the capability to do this anyway before this problem arises?

Should we as a race just consume all the natural resources of this planet untill its dead and then make our way through the universe like parasites looking for other suitable planets, strip it clean, and then move on to the next? Perhaps it is your view that none of this is relevant because our earth will never in a million years become overpopulated?

these are tough questions. but important questions.

what is your opinion.

I think there is a reason for evil, and there is a real reason to get rid of the earth's population.

The forum is full of new age kooks.

[archangel]

1.The world is not over populated

2.It will never be overpopulated even in 3,000 years from now

3. Natural resources will never be threatened

4. Population will stabilize itself and not continue to grow

5. The Universe has a way of protecting itself

6.Mother earth will find a way to keep herself safe and also keep
humans thriving to the highest degree possible without putting any of them in harms way.

7. In the future everyone will only eat plants and berries, and look like skinny string beans.

8. This is not and never will be an important topic, Nature will work itself out

9. Once the NWO is defeated, we can build a paradise on earth and live happily ever after.

Thanks for clearing everything up for me. I should have realized this sooner.

Peace be with all of you

[ninpo]

1.The world is not over populated

2.It will never be overpopulated even in 3,000 years from now

3. Natural resources will never be threatened

4. Population will stabilize itself and not continue to grow

5. The Universe has a way of protecting itself

6.Mother earth will find a way to keep herself safe and also keep
humans thriving to the highest degree possible without puttin any of them in harms way.

7. This is not and never will be an important topic, Nature will work itself out

8. Once the NWO is defeated, we can build a paradise on earth.

Thanks for clearing everything up for me. I should have realized this sooner.

Peace be with all of you

LMAO!

This is the funniest shit I have read here today! Thanks.

[bigus_dickus]

1.The world is not over populated

who decides the limits? who knows when it is over or under populated and what is the criteria?

2.It will never be overpopulated even in 3,000 years from now

there is no way we can know something like that, namely the future..

3. Natural resources will never be threatened

resources can't be threatened, humans may perceive their lives being threatened by various factors, one of which the planet herself.

4. Population will stabilize itself and not continue to grow

population issues can only be local. where there is forest today, it will be desert tomorrow.

5. The Universe has a way of protecting itself

the universe does not think like humans do and does not have the same fears and ambitions.

6.Mother earth will find a way to keep herself safe and also keep
humans thriving to the highest degree possible without putting any of them in harms way.

mother earth will continue to grow and evolve and eventually die.

7. In the future everyone will only eat plants and berries, and look like skinny string beans.

how far into the future is this? what did everyone eat 500,000 years ago?

8. This is not and never will be an important topic, Nature will work itself out

nature is what it is and it doesn't share our political and economical structures.

9. Once the NWO is defeated, we can build a paradise on earth and live happily ever after.

there is always going to be a NWO, even if it looks like a NWD. paradise is a state of mind.

Thanks for clearing everything up for me. I should have realized this sooner.

Peace be with all of you

peace :)

[ninpo]

my opinion is that we don't know shit about what's going to happen tomorrow morning... sure, we can all be prophets if we want, but what's the use? why would we worry instead of having faith? what is the significance of the problem and where is the evidence? is it part of an agenda, or is it just speculation based on nothing?

We are overpopulated because there are too many bigus_dickuses.

Just my theory...

[bigus_dickus]

We are overpopulated because there are too many bigus_dickuses.

Just my theory...

LOL :D

[archangel]

1. Based off off current evidnece. There is no evidence to support we are any where near over population

2. Since the world is no where near over population. It can support about 10000000 x as many people (probably?)and this will take an infinite amount of time to ever happen. But we don't have to worry about this because the population will stabilize itself anyway.

3 Natural resources will never be threatened. People will not cut down any more trees and we will make recycling 100% efficient.

4. The universe will work itself out to protect earth and humans. I am just listening to the majority opinion of my peers here.

5. mother earth will not grow old and die for Millions of years. and if that ever happens it will be the Mean suns fault and not humans fault. She loves us and we love her and we are a happy family

6.We will eat Fruits and berries because raising animals and eating them is what is bad for nature, our bodies, and we are meanies for doing this anyway. We can eat beans and blue berries throughout they day and every one will be Skinny as a bone.

7. Nature is what it is. But it will protect us. We don't have to worry about protecting ourselves from it. Well maybe we have to protect ourselves from the rain and cold weather but thats it.

8. Yes there are is always going to be a NWO. But we are going to defeat the Mean one that is made up Snakes, Snails, and Puppy Dog Tails and the Fun new one we are going to build is going to be made of Sugar and Spice and Everything Nice.

:)

[hagbard_celine]

We still need to grow fruits and vegatables, catch fish. etc. and building houses. What do you think we are going to eat in the future??? where will we live??

Whether the world's population is 6 billion or 12 billion we still only represent a tiny portion of the biosphere. The myth of overpopulation comes from the propaganda that we are dependant on modern intensive farming. We're starving men at a banquet! The fertility of the Earth has been blunted by the way we pollute and poison the environment. If we use ORMUS elements, terra preta and other natural organic famring methods you can feed a family from a windowbox! See this:http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-2809044795781727003&q=horizon+el+dorado&total=4&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

Someone once said that a supermarket contains enough food to feed a single person for a lifetime, but not if you take all the frozen food out of the cool shelves, open all the tins, pour it on the floor and shit on it! But that's what we've been doing to the Earth! No wonder the overpopulation myth has grown up!