Over Population Nightmare from 1960s - Star Trek's Mark of Gideon

[AltairsAttic]

wow.



[JungleUnderground]

Traitors! Jews & Arabs!

[pronatalist]

@JungleUnderground

Who are you trying to blame, for what?

"Every organ renews itself." That sounds like it describe the entire human race, on planet Gideon. Perhaps the people have intermarried, and such healthier genes have spread through most everybody? I presume maybe you are suggesting that both Jews and Arabs have families that are just "too big." I disagree, as people are supposed to multiply naturally, without use of "birth control."

Can I move to Gideon? No condoms!

[pronatalist]

@JungleUnderground

Life is sacred. Big families are common, as the people do not believe in restricting natural family growth. If only Earth was more pro-life.

No wonder VictorLepanto doesn't like the Federation. Did you catch that line? The Federation can provide whatever Gideon needs. What? The Federation is the evil Planned unParenthood, the rampant pushers of shoddy contraceptives? Why doesn't the Federation offer to assist the people of Gideon to spread to more worlds?

[Vaskadar]

Catholic Church vs. Condoms.

[VictorLepanto]

I hate the Federation. The UFP is a stand in for the UN & like most sci-fi it is a pointed political morality play. Anyone who believe the wretched myth of overpopulation needs only consult the writings of Julian Simon.

[pronatalist]

@VictorLepanto

No wonder you the Federation. Did you catch that line, that the Federation can provide the devices, whatever Gideon needs? What? So the Federation rampant pushes the shoddy contraceptives, still? The Federation is like what's wrong with our wicked cities, promoting pagan anti-life philosophies?

Unconstitutional Federal Reserve system that "prints" and debases our fiat paper currency to make us poor. The FEDeration. Hm. Sounds like almost the same name?Coincidence?

[pronatalist]

@VictorLepanto

Let me go out on a limb here and suggest something about this episode of Star Trek. I don't think the entire planet Gideon is encased "in a living mass" after all. Think about it. Gideon is not some abstract planet far away. It's a warning model of the future earth, if we don't get serious about using more nasty contraceptives. It's pop paranoia of the "free love" 1960s. So if it is really earth, then it's only certain wicked cities that are overcrowded.

[VictorLepanto]

@pronatalist: I don't know how old you are, but I remember the zero-pop propaganda of the late 60s & 70s. They were pushing this same bio mass fantasy. Yes, it is supposed to be one great mass of people. They live in a world of staships sending colonies throughout the cosmos,yet they are crowded on this one planet. Star Trek is a fun bit of nonsense sometimes, but people who see in it some meaningful ideal are too silly.

[pronatalist]

@VictorLepanto

Just read some of the comments, that people post about Octo-Mom or the Duggars, to see the "brain damage" caused by our secular gov monopoly "education" system. Sure, large families are good and all that, if wasn't for the "fact," that the planet is already "bursting at the seams" with 7 billion people? Like what does the "huge" pop have to do with anything? It's easy to see there's room for far more people, if we can in fact, let the planet steadily grow denser.

[pronatalist]

@VictorLepanto

If Gideon had actually petitioned to join the Federation, then surely they would have put in an urgent plea, "help us spread people to new colony planets, for our planet is growing too small for us." Yet, no mention, in a "space colonization" era? What? Now I don't think expanding to more worlds, is a practical goal for Earth, for our technology is nowhere near ready, and where's the need anyway? It's a lot easier and cheaper to hold "many planets" of people, here.

[pronatalist]

@VictorLepanto

I guess I've been becoming a natural contrarian for some time, for back when I watched that rerun, saw it on TV, some of the ideas stuck in my mind, but what I picked up is, "We can't use birth control, because we believe life is sacred, in all its forms, fetus, etc." I agree, and do not believe in hindering the natural spread of life. Sex should not deny the procreative potential. Also agree with Gideon simply allowing their pop to grow ever denser, to spread life

[pronatalist]

@VictorLepanto

Of course, I found it ludicrous to consider that we could ever become Gideon, as it takes quite a lot of work to bring another billion babies into the world. They make it sound like it's so easy and natural, that somebody just sneezes, and Oops!, there's another billion. Why didn't Gideon stack their people into highrises? At least then, they might be able to "be alone" long enough to enjoy their natural procreation? I do agree children should see sex,if so crowded

[pronatalist]

@VictorLepanto

You know that "crowded mass" outside the window, was just a few people pacing to and fro? How fake can they be? What was the fake Enterprise all about anyway?

I notice that stories in Star Trek TNG, have been much kinder in accepting the "huge" pops of the future. Pop relegated to a side issue, not propaganda scare tactics anymore.

God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes-Revelation 21: 4. I've often wondered, why would people cry then? Kids that never were?

[pronatalist]

@VictorLepanto

Oh, I think it is so bad, we had best be looking into the possibility of escaping any "ZPG" countries. It's not just the elderly bulge, that is the impending problems, but ZPG is a symptom or indicator, of freedom and truth in decline, of a nation in decline, a country that does not want to go forward.

"Mark of Gideon" was right, we do need to grow denser, globally. But why do they show the absurd extreme, when what they portray is impossible within our lifetimes?

[pronatalist]

@VictorLepanto

It is really sad, so many posts, all the people who say that don't want any, or maybe not very many, children, due to the "overpop crisis" of the world. I wonder how many of them may be burying natural yearnings for children, that they could have been so happy to have, if they had a better worldview, that would allow for more natural family growth?

People opine, how crazy the Duggars are, having 20 children, blind to FREEDOM of natural "uncontrolled" birthrate.

[pronatalist]

@VictorLepanto

Why are Gideon's cities so overcrowded with people? Because they have a wicked economics system, and something attracts people to the cities, for the excitement or to escape the poverty of the countryside. Perhaps they have ridiculously huge wildlife refuges, when the pop has grow so enormous, they need more of the land, just for places for people to live.

Obviously, Gideon is not developed properly, for their "huge" #s. Otherwise, why aren't they build highrises?

[pronatalist]

@VictorLepanto

When have we ever seen people, so uniformly distributed here on Earth? We don't. People cluster. So why can't the people of Gideon ever be alone? Apparently, because they have become so brainwashed, so non-self-reliant, that they think city life is all there is. Who wants to go out and live "off the land" or out "in the middle of nowhere?"

If we see "too many" people in big cities, why don't the cities simply spread more evenly into the countryside? Gideon = Earth

[VictorLepanto]

@pronatalist: The world is in for great & terrible shock when the great lie of over population is fully exposed. When the baby boomers start dying off, or even retiring in large numbers, the underlying collapse of population will be exposed & many attitudes will quickly & violently adjusted.

I often think about what the generation living through, say, 2111 will think of our present age. How harshly do you think they will damn our present wicked "civilisation?"

[pronatalist]

@VictorLepanto

Can you imagine, some improbable time in the future, 100 billion people alive, pondering why people a century ago, some pop phobics worried about how to add just a few more billions within several decades to prepare?

Maybe someday pop will really take off and soar, once people see the truth, and The Jetsons robots clean house and change the diapers? Working 9 hours a week, full-time work, imagine how much more time parents would have to conceive more babies?

[VictorLepanto]

@pronatalist: Unfortunately, I don't think there is any chance of the world being BLESSED w/ 100 billion souls in a century. In fact, we are facing an immenent collapse w/ our present aging populations. I expect we will have lost a few billion by 2100. The "Planned Parenthood" propagandist have been poisoning 3rd world cultures also. Even the Arabs are experiencing a great birth decline. The lack of wealth in the 3rd world will it far worse for them, w/ an aging population.

[pronatalist]

@VictorLepanto

I found "Mark of Gideon" "overpop" scare tactic, far less than convincing. In fact, I agree with some of their pro-life mockery side points. Yes, each and every human life is of immense and sacred value, a great reason why people ought to refuse to use contraceptives, and multiply naturally, even if in "overcrowded" conditions.

What a wonder it would be, if earth would "blossom" into 100 billion within a century. Afraid you are right. Not likely to grow that much.

[VictorLepanto]

@pronatalist: The thing about the misanthropic baby haters (a.k.a. advocates of population control) is they think of human beings generally as little more then mouths demanding feeding, & not as thinking individuals also. Every person ever born has their own perspective insights, they all add to the pool of real knowledge. How many people who complain about too many people in the world would complain about too many brain cells in their heads & wish to reduce the population of the skull?

[pronatalist]

@VictorLepanto

I wonder if somebody could make an interactive animation, with an adjustable population dial, based upon verifiable history? Turn it down a bit, to reduce global "overcrowding," and watch inventions like the computer you are using, disappear, then your friends disappear, then you and your parents disappear

How is it, that people think that people are but mouths and clutter? Yet have no idea of all the ways they would hurt if pop was less. No mechanic for your car?

[SgtTravisBickle]

I have trouble equating Star Trek with Gilligan's Island. And I'm only a fan of TOS, none of the spin-offs do much for me. I don't really get into sci-fi, so it's more about those 3 main characters for me. Put Kirk, Bones and Spock on a boat and I'll still watch.

[pronatalist]

@SgtTravisBickle

While I'm trying to think of the connection, let me tell you of some thoughts I had about Gilligan's Island, that I had left out. I've heard if they made Gilligan's Island today, rather than back in the 1960s, they have then shacking up together in the same hut. So it was better back then, than the crap "reality" shows they write now. Don't tell us it's real, for we know it's not.

It didn't take me long to get over replacing Spock with Data, as Data was a far better "Spock."

[pronatalist]

@SgtTravisBickle

TNG was the best series. TOS had bizarre half-baked ideas, while Voyager (TNG#2?) had tired and recycled ideas, although I did finally grow to like Captain Janeway

I liked how they tied the loose ends of the story together, in the last Star Trek movie, TOS old characters with new actors, finding how Kirk should never have been captain. He was too wild and unqualified, but the right man in the wrong place, and with help from friends (i.e. Bones), he landed into the Captain role

[pronatalist]

@SgtTravisBickle

One thing, I think a lot of people like about characters like Kirk, Bones, perhaps even Spock?, is that they were the old CAN-DO warrior men, who got things done, rather than study things to death, bury good ideas in endless debates and committees to die a slow and painful death. (Even the DVD cartoon Dilbert, had an interesting commentary on that matter.)

Piccard gave pathetic speech about "have to let them die," while Worf's brother disregarded Prime Directive and SAVED them

[SgtTravisBickle]

@pronatalist What I get out of it is the friendship, warmth and loyalty they share no matter what. Any one of them would give his life for the others or any person on the ship's crew... even a lowly yeoman. And when they're combined, they make each other better and stronger as a whole.

[pronatalist]

@SgtTravisBickle

That episode about Worf's brother saving village, was a great reminder of how much we sometimes NEED people who "aren't very good at following rules and regulations." Yet they put Worf's brother in charge of watching the primitive developing planet?

I loved that episode, because when 1 guy escaped the faltering holodeck caves simulation, they respected him as an INDIVIDUAL, gave him incredible CHOICES. Go back home and hush-hush about aliens, go back and blab, or stay with us.

[pronatalist]

@SgtTravisBickle

The old TV shows, were BETTER. Sure, they may have made some good new stuff, but that seems more the exception than the rule. I liked TNG better, and there were 7 seasons, rather than 3 TOS.

Old TV shows told useful stories, and promoted at least some level of morality. Now the new stuff, is mostly crap. Mostly designed to further erode the decaying social mores, or designed to distract us from what's important and waste our time.

Knight Rider:"One man can make a difference."

[pronatalist]

@SgtTravisBickle

How would they ever sell us on Knight Rider now, that old show about the indestructible AI computer-driven Trans-Am "wonder" car? That show was so make-believe, low on modern special effects. (A comment on the DVD, tells us to pause-watch for the hidden guy's hand, pulling the car door shut.) Now they wow us with flashy, distracting, in-your-face, CGI special effects galore, and crap storylines. I'd rather have the story and use my imagination.

MacGyver promoted SCIENCE\action

[pronatalist]

@SgtTravisBickle

Video games have really progressed amazingly. Finally, we are nearly to the point, where the technology no longer restrains the story, that they can make a video game simulate most anything they want. Video games amazingly look more and more like good CGI movies

Enough with the endless maze rat-after-the-cheese video games

Yet many video games have gotten worse, too much battling, shooting, too many zombies, too serious for serious gamers, not enough fun and whimsical anymore

[SgtTravisBickle]

@pronatalist So we're just changing the topic now? Cool, but you could just send me a private message and we'll talk about all kinds of things :-)

[pronatalist]

@SgtTravisBickle

Changing topic? Even if so, I don't think we are "off-topic." For the video topic appears to be, what the episode was about, 1960s paranoia about "overpop," Star Trek, and probably even old TV shows?

I'm not so sure I even know how to do private messages, unless forced to do so, to reply to a private message. I don't like PMing, for I like for anybody to jump into the discussion, if they like

I liked TOS, especially TNG, Voyager was good too, Enterprise OK, and DS9 was boring

[pronatalist]

What a shame when sci-fi Star Trek dares "preach religion," plus, they are wrong!

For some 6000 years, humans did well without "birth control." But already, the criminal elitists are trying to morph "choice" (to not have children) into "obligation" to not have "too many" children, for "the environment" to absorb, or whatever nonsense the gullible sheeple might be misled somehow to believe.

I agree with some points. Each and every human life is sacred. Reject birth control. Let pop grow natural

[allcheesezup]

@pronatalist for 6000 years, the Earth's population was not over 6 billion. Get over yourself.

[pronatalist]

@allcheesezup

For 6000 years, world pop was not over 6 billion? So what? What's your point then? Now it is. This is not something to be decided by "a vote," for human pop rise is natural, not something that humans can reasonably "control." Until very recently, family size was thought to be "uncontrollable." Still is, in my view, because all contraceptive methods are shoddy, most are unnatural.

We now have at least 7 billion reasons for pop to be as large as it is. Pop is "huge?" Fact of life.

[allcheesezup]

@pronatalist people have expanded too fast and we cannot provide all the necessaries needed to properly sustain current human life. Should we not make sure that the people currently in the world can survive properly before we consider a population boom?

[pronatalist]

@allcheesezup

No, people have not expanded too fast. More people ought to be encouraged to marry young, and let babies naturally push out at the full rate of fecundity. What is "optimum" or "ideal" pop size anyway? Nearly as large as possible, for the more populous we can grow, the more people there are to experience life, so it's very easy to justify letting families grow naturally, "out of control"

Pop boom would be very good for the economy, for we NEED the jobs of building homes,big cities

[allcheesezup]

@pronatalist You ignore the statement, and yet somehow produce three paragraphs of shit. There is nothing wrong with poulation booms, once all the people already on the Earth can be properly taken care of. You want to finish eating your first cake before you start the second one, do you not? Same concept being applied here. We should make sure that people already born can live like humans, before we deal with a pop boom.

[pronatalist]

@allcheesezup

No, I didn't ignore, or didn't plan to ignore. And why do you disrespect what I wrote, calling it undeserved names?

You ignored? Didn't I say, that parents can't wait "until hell freezes over" for pop to finally dip a little bit? I said I favor letting pop accumulate naturally without any birth control, leaving it up to nature or God. Pop is already growing, tends to grow relentlessly, although quite gradually

If we waited for problems solved 1st, humans would go extinct waiting

[pronatalist]

@allcheesezup

Sure, we should prepare for pop boom, but the evil criminal elites will never allow us to prepare, until we are forced to, as so many babies start increasingly coming. They say that "Necessity is the mother of invention." So the world will never be properly designed to become heavily populous, until it happens, so let it happen naturally.

Criminal elites admit they want to take us backwards, eliminate over 90% of present pop

Parents have very good reasons for having their babies

[pronatalist]

@allcheesezup

Humans won't humble themselves and submit to God's will. We have some serious issues with having to "control" everything, but we are not "gods." While we should of course alter nature to better support naturally growing human numbers, we don't need to "control" everything. We behave as if nature disgusts us, and we want to deny nature. If more natural, we would go with what in nature, benefits us anyway, and let baby booms grow "wild," leave human pop "explosion" nature "untamed."

[pronatalist]

@allcheesezup

Yes, I do tend to ramble, but often I can't correct decades of elitist wrong propaganda\brain-washing, in just a single comment.

Reality is, as libs claim "You can't stop people from having sex." Seems it is true, since babies were conceived on the Mayflower and in concentration camps, places so crowded it's doubtful there could have been any place of real privacy

I'm saying the pop boom may occur anyway, regardless whether we can agree whether it's good idea or not. Let's ADAPT

[pronatalist]

@allcheesezup

I don't fault people for having large families, nor India for having grown so incredibly populous. It's not just that it's nature, but more and more people would be glad to live. Nothing that India did, made them so populous, any more than what we are doing? Only 7% of people, I read somewhere, live in countries that are not growing in human numbers. Some old chapter on pop, graph, says that if U.S. keeps having 3 children, we'll have over a billion people within a century.

[pronatalist]

@allcheesezup

India doesn't have so many people because they have "too many" babies, but rather, because people have been living and multiplying there for so long, and they love their kids. Perhaps India signifies a bellwether for where the entire planet is headed?, but high pop is essential, poverty is optional. People fail to grasp, U.S. is 3rd most populous in the world. World ought to gain more pop billionaire countries,for a denser world would allow so many more billions to experience life

[pronatalist]

@allcheesezup

Until the 1950s at least, people just had children and didn't count the cost. I agree with the old innocence, of welcoming babies to happen as they happen and push out freely, as procreation is much the same, and natural, as eating. In fact, some overpop theories seem to agree that feeding people is the cause of pop rise.

Rather than Nazi eugenics, or excessive\evil "control" of others, I accept pop rise as "given" to plan around. To urge anyway for progress of growing human race

[pronatalist]

@allcheesezup

If you and I have no children, won't they still have large families in India, Utah,or wherever? Why do we think we can so "control" other people who we don't even know?

Preparing for pop boom, should be co-requisite, not prerequisite, for isn't it already happening, at least in some places?

And why wouldn't I buy my second cake, before finishing the first? Shouldn't we plan ahead, and thus not panic if on that day, the store is out of cakes?

Prepare then, but babies keep coming

[pronatalist]

@allcheesezup

I just don't get, what exactly do you mean, finish eating your 1st cake, before you start the 2nd one? Natural family growth can cause generations to som etimes overlap. For example, I see nothing with parents still having more babies, while their teenagers are going through puberty, and even getting married, so that there are more children + grandchildren coming, as I don't believe in use of any means of "birth control," so the babies come,until they don't

Allow nat flow of life

[pronatalist]

@allcheesezup

Who's responsible for pop "control" anyway? Criminal elites who don't care about us nor know us, nor make any reasonable effort to understand why some families grow large? How about the actual parents, who are to take responsibility for their children? Best answer, is God, who specifically commanded people to Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth. Since it God who commanded that, then it falls upon God to determine human pop size, not man.

So let families grow unrestrained.

[pronatalist]

@allcheesezup

What really offended me about "Mark of Gideon," is how dare they attack my religious beliefs. It's like they aimed to mock God, saying God would not provide for us. God gave those people ample food, but forgot they need living space too? And yet, I actually agreed with the reasons the people gave, for having high birthrate, leading me more towards becoming active pronatalist.

Gideon was something like a "full womb," so what kept them from naturally advancing towards "birth?"

[pronatalist]

@allcheesezup

Perhaps the baby, 9 months into the womb, wonders something similar? What could have gone wrong, now the womb is so full, the baby can hardly move? Sure, the baby may be becoming all the more aware, of sounds outside the womb, hinting that there's a vast exciting world out there, but what can a baby really know about the birth so soon to come?

Planet Gideon didn't have "too many" people, but was "overdue" to spread to more worlds.Labor pains or growing pains are natural and 4good

[pronatalist]

@allcheesezup

You said on my profile: "You are an arrogant, ignorant asshole, too busy trying to shove his beliefs down other people's throats to realize the long-term consequences of what beliefs like yours would bring if they came to fruition.

Fuck you short-sighted asshole."

I don't know if you'd see my reply,and I think I've already answered points on my profile?

I have no way to "enforce" my beliefs, and people won't go along, except they find their own reasons anyway. You oppose choice?

[pronatalist]

@allcheesezup

I don't agree that "Mark of Gideon" is our future, but rather pathetic anti-freedom pop scare tactics. Who believes that crap anymore, other than a few eugenics kooks and their commie-leaning "useful idiots?"

Natural increase of people, isn't my creation nor my idea, but a FACT OF LIFE and of God's design. So if you can't open your mind to understand or accept the 4 or 5 births ALREADY occurring per second, throughout the world, then isn't it you, retarding the necessary "birth?"

[allcheesezup]

@pronatalist You are retarded and selfish. And I hope that no one like you ever gains any sort of political power. I mean, there are a lot of short sighted shitheads in the world, but you sir, you win!

I hope you are enjoying your flaming, as I have no choice but to give you a 10/10.

[pronatalist]

@allcheesezup

Why don't you want anybody like me, being in any sort of political power? If I did write a bill to ban contraceptives, as obscene or whatever, or just to enforce old such laws perhaps still on the books, how far do you think it would go? Everybody would think that was the best idea since sliced bread, or would it die in committee year after year? You aren't thinking things through. Wouldn't you like to have a job, or a better, or higher paying job, when wealth and jobs come back?

[pronatalist]

@allcheesezup

Should it be any "surprise" to people like you, that there might be a lot of people, who are "less than convinced" by pop scare tactics such as the inconsistent, bizarre story of Mark of Gideon?

Actually, Mark of Gideon was right in a way. That's the answer how to fit more billions upon the Earth, if\as pop continues to rise. Allow planet to grow denser and denser. And yet, there's no chance the world could become anything near as crowded as Gideon, within the foreseeable future.

[pronatalist]

@allcheesezup

Somebody claimed that a reason that big families are accepted in Israel, is because they actually believe God's promise to multiply Abraham's descendants to be uncountable as the stars of the sky or the grains of sand of the seashore. That's a great reason to welcome "runaway" pop boom, as more and more people could then enjoy experiencing life

Poverty is not caused by large families, but by corrupt gov and fiat paper currencies. People CAN ADAPT in proper free enterprise economy

[pronatalist]

@allcheesezup

I think "Mark of Gideon" did intend to promote coercive pop "control," deception pushing people to use "birth control," for left to their own decisions, might they think human life is too "sacred" to hinder the natural spread of life? The people of Gideon couldn't use "birth control" because it wasn't compatible with their religious beliefs. What an OBVIOUS attack upon religions freedom?

We can't "vote" on pop size, for that's socialist social engineering, and babies sorta happen

[pronatalist]

@allcheesezup

I meant attack upon "religious freedom."

Supposedly, Thomas Malthus said that somebody must die, to make room for each birth. That is obviously not true, nor can parents wait "until hell freezes over," for the pop to finally dip a little, so that they can have another child. We can also GROW DENSER

People have very good reasons for having the children that they have. Nor do I expect people to use any method of "birth control," for there's awful side effects and willpower issues.

[Maximara]

@pronatalist The main flaw with "Mark of Gideon" (besides the fake Enterprise which would take up insane amounts of room on the planet) is that you start hitting Hubbert peaks in many of the resources needed to keep a high tech society going. Cheap fossil fuels made Green Revolution and the high population we have possible. If we don't get our population growth under control the resulting peaks will do it for us...very painfully.

[pronatalist]

@Maximara

I long thought it strange, that nobody had ever thought of stacking people on multiple floors of highrises? Perhaps their NWO criminal elitists, were even more retarded than ours?

Why do their reproductive organs "heal" themselves, so that their fertility can't be "controlled?" Even nature knows they were designed to multiply?

This episode causes God a liar, or implies God doesn't exist, mocking God's commandment to people to Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth.

[pronatalist]

@Maximara

There was another TOS episode that comes to mind, that mocks God, or perhaps mocks false Greek gods anyway. Something about man having grown past having to depend upon superstition or the old gods. Who were those false gods anyway? Demons, or the weird creatures that resulted when fallen angels had sexual relations with the daughters of men and produced giants? Giants and dinosaurs that the devil corrupted the world with, would have destroyed man, but Great Deluge prevented.

[Maximara]

@pronatalist "Who Mourns for Adonais?" didn't mock God but rather went the Clarke's Law route--beings with very advanced technology (ie great power) would have been regarded as gods if our ancestors had encountered them. Picard had similar problems in "Who Watches the Watchers"

[pronatalist]

@Maximara

I'm not sure if "Who Mourns for Adonais?" is the episode to which I was referring. Whichever it was, it was a TOS episode.

Bible warns of fake miracles to confuse the gullible before Jesus's Return. Technology maybe? Somebody said, check out Project Blue Beam.

Twilight Zone admits to presenting social issues, under the guise of sci-fi, as a way to get around the censors. Apparently some of the issues, might have been seen as "offensive." Also liked The Outer Limits.

[Maximara]

@pronatalist Project Blue Beam is an unwarrented conspiracy theory ie full of irrational nonsense. It should be mentioned that in the original Greek Paul expressly denies the virgin birth in Romans 1:1-3. Paul in fact states Jesus was heir to house of David through the MALE line. Many modern Bibles hide this fact by mistranslating "sperma" as decedent which is a totally different Greek word. This along with other hiccups show the Bible to be be the work of man not God.

[Maximara]

@Maximara Project Blue Beam is in fact based on a EPISODE SCRIPT for Phase II that become "Devil's Due" for TNG. It has no more basis in reality then the "Protocols of Zion" does.

[pronatalist]

@Maximara

Either we control our numbers, or nature will? Wrong. Nature won't. Why do you think there's so many people now? In nature, life spreads into most every available niche it can, so why not all the more so, with supposedly intelligent human life?

Why do mad scientists do bizarre "overpop" experiments upon animals, giving them "unlimited" food but adding more animals to the same confines? Perhaps NWO knows people solve problems, but NWO aims to prevent any real solutions?

[pronatalist]

@Maximara

One obvious problem with "Mark of Gideon," is why is it preaching pagan enviro-religion, in a supposed sci-fi show? Hello. It's a show about SPACE SHIPS. Aren't people supposed to be spreading to more worlds? Perhaps that's why TNG was more kind towards growing human pop.

We are living in a world of layer upon layers of deception. You better wake up. Evil people have so twisted things, to confuse the gullible and uninformed, while they in their greed, spread poverty, death.

[Maximara]

@pronatalist Sci-fi has LONG been a vehicle for exploring social issues that the current culture finds uncomfortable. Take "Swastika Night" (1937) which examined how the world under Nazi would look 700 years hence. Hitler has been made into a 7' tall blue eye blond hair god and women have degenerated to little more then baby machines resulting in problems keeping the population up.

[Maximara]

@Maximara The Iron Dream is another examination of unsettling social traditions--but in this case of the Sci-fi genre itself and how many Sci-fi stories had (and sadly have) ideas frighteningly similar to those of Hitler.

[pronatalist]

@55kudu

Are you ashamed of your comment? So why did you remove it? If our pop is already "at the breaking point," what does that mean anyway? I like the metaphor of a mother 7 months (7 billion) pregnant. If there was any hiding her pregnancy, there isn't anymore. She is "great with child." So put on the loose maternity clothes or let her belly poof out proudly with a precious new human life. If world pop is "bursting," then populate more densely and efficiently, to relieve apparent "pressure."

[pronatalist]

@55kudu

Why not let other forms of life "overpop?" One reason is, there simply isn't room anymore. Everything can't be top priority, or nothing is priority. "Animal rights," means reducing humans to mere animals, and yet Genesis 1: 26 says that people aren't animals, but created in the image of God, and given dominion over nature and other creatures.

Not only can 7-months-pregnant mother not hide pregnancy, but her belly can't stop growing. Answer is to welcome birth, not hinder spread of life

[pronatalist]

@55kudu

"It is high time to accept as forever gone, the sparsely populated world of the past, and to move on in an orderly transition, to the populous world of the future." Pronatalist

"Mark of Gideon" actually had the right idea, but it was distorted to be pop scare tactics, not grounded in truth at all. By allowing planet to naturally grow ever denser with people, everybody's progeny could be made to fit. People can still spread outwards, inwards, upwards. Episode was to mock people of faith

[pronatalist]

@55kudu

"Mark of Gideon" story was also written to mock God, saying that God could feed everybody, people could have good health, but even in a space-faring age, moving people to more worlds, isn't even considered? Implied that considering each and every human life to be sacred, results in lack of enough space for anybody? But I would much rather live on planet Gideon, than on Earth with insecurity, violence, endless wars. Sacredness of every human life, keeps people from attacking one another.

[pronatalist]

@55kudu

If you propose to let other forms of life "overpop," then why not also humans?

In "Mark of Gideon," people don't use any form of birth control," not even the "natural" rhythm or "pulling out," because it's unnatural or contrary to the sacredness of human life in all its forms: semen, fetus, born babies, and older people. I agree with married people enjoying sex natural as God designed it, without trying to "space" children nor "pulling out," as each and every human life is precious.

[SgtTravisBickle]

Kirk doesn't exactly call for it, he just offers it up as a suggestion among many to deal with a worst case scenario. Most mentions of Eugenics, to my memory, seemed anti-Eugenics.

[pronatalist]

@SgtTravisBickle

Funny that Kirk seems reluctant to even consider that human life upon planet Gideon, may have naturally grown "too abundant." In spite of Kirk's penchant for being wild and getting into trouble, Kirk actually seems a lot more social-able than the trendy eugenicists of our day.

I don't think Kirk is so much ignorant of pop dangers, as the story implies, but rather, is reluctant to buy into trendy eugenics theories. Even though "impossible to be alone," =no excuse to kill people

[pronatalist]

@SgtTravisBickle

Funny that Kirk seems reluctant to even consider that human life upon planet Gideon, may have naturally grown "too abundant." In spite of Kirk's penchant for being wild and getting into trouble, Kirk actually seems a lot more social-able than the trendy eugenicists of our day.

I don't think Kirk is so much ignorant of pop dangers, as the story implies, but rather, is reluctant to buy into trendy eugenics theories. Even though "impossible to be alone," =no excuse to kill people

[pronatalist]

@SgtTravisBickle

"Mark of Gideon" exhibits several logical fallacies. It takes the most obvious and natural solution to pop growth, that of urging countries to simply populate themselves denser and denser, and extrapolates to absurdity, a "danger" that wasn't even possible back in the 1960s. World pop was only 3 billion, now they say it's 7 billion. People in the 1960s had no danger of ever seeing a "standing room only" world, and neither do we. Before 100s of billion, we must first reach 10B?

[pronatalist]

@SgtTravisBickle

The description of the video, was correct to use the word "fear-mongering."

Kirk didn't want to believe that a lack of deaths, could present a pop "problem." And yet, isn't there another way of viewing this ridiculous scenario? In spite of a lack of any place to be alone, the people were not really willing to kill, nor to stop living themselves, in order for the pop to be any less. On the positive side, Gideon was very efficiently populated.

God would not cause that "poverty"

[SgtTravisBickle]

@pronatalist The way I see it is that this is a half-baked episode and doesn't seem to be on the side of forced sterilization in any case. There's a difference between calling for something and suggesting it among many other options. And God has nothing to do with anything... it's a tv show and a pretend planet.

[pronatalist]

@SgtTravisBickle

Kirk might not be for forced pop "control," but the episode clearly is. They had to soft-petal it back then, as "birth control" was a trendy new idea that hadn't really caught on all that well yet. And yet, you know that's the real message of the episode, that if we can't soon get a handle on the natural human pop growth, before long, the entire earth will be looking like that.

But let's tell the truth. Not in our lifetimes, nor that of our children, as we can't grow THAT FAST

[pronatalist]

@SgtTravisBickle

I do agree it was "half-baked," for the episode didn't make much sense. I think Star Trek TNG actually tried to be a bit more plausible, than TOS.

There's a lot of Orwellian logic, or would that be "lack of logic," in "Mark of Gideon." Calling things what they are not. Death is "good," and lack of deaths is "bad?"

I do agree with the idea, that humans should "eventually" be expected to "outgrow" a planet, much of the idea already of sci-fi and Star Trek, so go ahead and enjoy

[SgtTravisBickle]

@pronatalist Fair enough. Let's not forget that this is from the 3rd season. The show had already been canceled after season 2 and was only brought back due to a massive, fan-coordinated letter writing campaign. The last season was really slapped together pretty last minute, the budget was slashed even more and you got a lot of hammy acting with ridiculous plots. I see what you mean about perceived doublethink, but I don't think it's meant as an overt mind control tool here.

[pronatalist]

@SgtTravisBickle

Oh yeah, I know, there's time pressure to put together yet another episode, writing and all, in just a short week? But that's not really any excuse for parroting the trendy "overpop" nonsense of the rebellious "free love" 1960s, 1960 being the year of "the pill."

We watch TV, sitcoms, to be entertained, not to have false religion preached at us.

TNG did far better episodes that mentioned pop, but not as the trendy enviro-"crisis" it was made out to be in the 1960s, ZPG 1970s.

[pronatalist]

@SgtTravisBickle

Now that pop talk is often considered to be "racist" or taboo, or offensive to pro-lifers or people of faith, I've found TNG to be far more fair on pop.

There was the episode in which the surviving crew of some crash-landing on some planet, grew rapidly to 12,000 people over a century or so. Transporters couldn't work through "harsh" atmosphere. Owners of planet insisted Remove humans within 3 days. Impossible by shuttlecraft. Piccard imposed diplomatic solution for more time.

[pronatalist]

@SgtTravisBickle

I don't recall the episode title, but in that episode, the people weren't "overpop" for the planet, but rather, there was just so many of them, that it took longer than they had, to evacuate them, to make way for the planet's impatient owners to come colonize. The people weren't guilty for having "too many" children, but were too many to be moved quickly by shuttlecraft.

Moral of story isn't to not "overpop," but rather, try to land on your owned planet when crash-landing?

[pronatalist]

@SgtTravisBickle

Episode in which they could just never quite transport a cheap canister, without it coming back all destroyed. They tried tweaking transporter, but transporter just wouldn't work with that atmosphere. Before Star Trek Voyager, the "mothership" couldn't actually land directly on a planet, I presume a spaceship the size of nearly a city, would be too heavy, gravity stresses too great.

Piccard didn't care 12,000 would "crowd" Enterprise, he'd drop them off anyway on some planet.

[pronatalist]

@SgtTravisBickle

Then, there was TNG episode, in which some alien was masquerading as some planet's "god," and using her spaceship technology magic to fit their prophecies. Piccard line in there, about how the planet was "overpop" and polluted, and did this lady do anything to help them? No. The people fixed the problems themselves, and conspicuously absent, is any mention of the pop size ever being reduced. I presume that they fixed the polluting technologies, to better support the "huge" pop.

[pronatalist]

@SgtTravisBickle

Another TNG episode, in alternate timeline humans losing in ongoing war with the Klingons I think it was, or was it Borg?, some vague reference to 40 billion on earth being lost. Must be 100s of billions? But then, that shouldn't be a problem, whatever else for, were "food replicators" invented for? With no need for farms, all that land would have been opened to human habitation, cities, residential space

Like on The Jetsons cartoon, pop might be "huge," but not a real problem

[pronatalist]

@SgtTravisBickle

Another TNG episode, in alternate timeline humans losing in ongoing war with the Klingons I think it was, or was it Borg?, some vague reference to 40 billion on earth being lost. Must be 100s of billions? But then, that shouldn't be a problem, whatever else for, were "food replicators" invented for? With no need for farms, all that land would have been opened to human habitation, cities, residential space

Like on The Jetsons cartoon, pop might be "huge," but not a real problem

[pronatalist]

@SgtTravisBickle

TNG appears to have had better budget, perhaps even better writers.

I think one reason they had to drop the "overpop" rhetoric, is that it would cut into the credibility of the show, as it was supposed to be about technology and progress, and optimistic, not about outdated Nazi-eugenics pop phobic ideas of the past.

I loved the episode in which Warf's brother beamed an entire village up into a holodeck caves simulation to rescue them, didn't care he violated Prime Directive.

[pronatalist]

@SgtTravisBickle

Probably Gilligan's Island suffered also a bit, from "writer's block?" How many ways can the refugees stranded on that island, "almost get rescued?" That show also only lasted for 3 seasons.

Speaking of TNG writer's block, I found it amusing all the excuses they came up with, to bring back characters they had previously killed off. Tasha Yar, killed off in Season 1, came back as her "evil sister," and in an alternate timeline. Data's creator, survived the Crystalline Entity?

[SPKaa]

This is the future if anti-environmentalist pro-lifers (read: Christians) keep power.

[SgtTravisBickle]

@SPKaa That's not true at all, that's just propaganda. Most scientists who have studied this agree that the global population will level off and stabilize at about 9 billion by 2300. Countries that are allowed to modernize and industrialize are seen to have lower birth rates... it's the IMF, UN and World Bank who keep these areas in the dark ages. What you're spouting comes from the Global Warmists who want to use their cause to make money by deception via carbon credits.

[pronatalist]

@SPKaa

No, that isn't the future, under moral people (pro-lifers, Christians) rule. A world without enough room for everybody, is what enviro-wackos would cause, because enviros have little interest in accommodating the needs of people, or of so many.

"Mark of Gideon" was unbelievably inconsistent. I agree with all forms of human life are sacred, thus everybody should multiply natural without birth control. But why would they build a copy of Enterprise, but not highrises to house more people?

[pronatalist]

@SPKaa

"Mark of Gideon" warns of another danger, that of how the enviro-radicals taint most all our media with their evil propaganda. For the obvious solution to the planet's supposed "overpop," was deliberately not considered. If the people had eventually outgrown their planet, in an apparently space-faring age, why not simply expand to fill more planets? The natural rising pop "pressure" should be seen as a growing baby in the womb. "Bursting" confines of planet = birth into far better era.

[33rdPatriot]

See zombietime dawt com slash john_holdren for Obama's Science Czar's book ("ECOSCIENCE") which proposes sterilizing the unwitting sheep by contamination of the public water supplies. Guess what? Male fish in Potomac River, according to Washington Post reports, grow eggs, have offspring. See movie "Children of Men" also. The bigger the lie, the more incredible the holocaust the less people can comprehend and believe it.

[fmscribs]

If this planet wanted to join the Federation then that would mean that they are a space faring civilization, right. If so, then why not take half of the population off the planet and colonize another planet ?

Or call up the Borg. They're always looking for new recruits, I mean drones.

[KINKYG11242]

it should be against are nature too.

[JPGiardina]

According to the book by Paul Erlich , "Population Bomb." ..."It warned of the mass starvation of humans in 1970s and 1980s due to overpopulation and advocated immediate action to limit population growth."

More anti-Catholic propaganda to promote abortion.

[fmscribs]

@JPGiardina

Your absolutely right. Talk about Eugenics. It all stems from the Progressive / Marxists movements from the early 20th century.

Nice call.

[SgtTravisBickle]

@JPGiardina Do you think that it's a coincidence that John Holdren, who wrote a Eugenics "How To" Handbook called Ecoscience, is Obama's "Science Czar"? Think about it.

[JPGiardina]

@SgtTravisBickle According to Wiki ,"John Holdren was involved in the famous Simon-Ehrlich wager in 1980. He helped Paul R. Ehrlich establish the bet with Julian Simon, in which they bet that the price of five key metals would be higher in 1990. The bet was centred around a disagreement concerning the future scaricity of resources in an increasingly polluted and heavily populated world. Ehrlich and Holdren lost the bet, when the price of metals had decreased by 1990."

This guy is scary.