its funny coz u ppl r so busy making this shit video nad indians r busy doing researches and all inventions. WHat u have is coz of us..........ur country is power full coz indian brain is there behind every research and development......n that old lady immigration is the only reason u have all brilliant minds in ur country.....
Fuck u white guys......im proud to be indian........
if u cant respect some1 then dont even make fun of them......
Ya, People in Asian countries such as Singapore, Japan, Korea, Hong Kong and Taiwan and right now China is joing the rank of decreasing east asian population.
Now, South Asia and Africa better do something about their populaiton, it is gross and disgusting how there are so many of this poor people running around with little resources, please people from india, africa and mexico save the poor soul that is born into your miserable countries, if not your children will keep having the desire to..
Do us all a favour and die fast coz the us has lots of space and a 74%caucasian population which is quickly falling!If you can cut it down by jumping in the atlantic or pacific we can send like 700 million Indians there and end our overpopulation crisis!The main reason for all this overpopulation is a.)we are not impotent whitesb.)we don't kill each other with wars ala World war one and two.
so you are the ones still around crowdin.Remember historically whites were around 30%of world population
How do people so quickly forget, that until the evil "The Pill" in 1960, most everybody throughout the world had sex and bred like rabbits. So I have no criticism of people in populous India to go on welcoming their babies to push out as they come, as I reject nasty side-effect-ridden contraceptives, and also oppose imposing any population "control" upon human beings. It's the people's own homes they are first populating, so they know what makes babies, and want to populate denser
Hi there, this is nothing...........I am Indian lived all my life there in most crowded city..........you 5 guys sticking together still better . In reality 25-50 people would have clinged to me in that space in public transport. Imagine that?
guys this is quite funny..went back recently and 0.27 is not far off the truth..mind you in the big cities only..however what you should also know is that your carbon heavy lifestyle is due to the massive and poor populations in china and india..almost everything you buy will be made in that part of the world before long...would you sacrifice your materalistic lifestyle full of cheap consumables for a more egalitarian world with a smaller population, i dont think so!
i am very frightened by this data ,not only india ,all south asia is overpopulated ,the small bangladesh have a bigger population then the big russia ,how can a small and poor country have many people and pakistan too ,pakistan is a lot bigger but also have many people ,i think south asians must control their populations like east asians,today chinese ,korean and japanese have big populations but their birth rate is low and that is better for the enviroment
@KYONSUZUMIYA1 it worried me too. it disgusting how small bangladesh is and how big its population is. all the bengalis i know in the uk have 3-4 children
No, dense Bangladesh is not disgusting, but great progress for the human race, to be able to be enjoying keep expanding huge numbers. More people would be glad to live. I have long advocated large families worldwide, so that far more people may experience life
Technology, itself largely driven by population growth, makes it more and more feasible to have a huge population living upon small regions of land
Why should only Muslims be baby factories? God commanded humans multiply
If people really cared for the environment, and not so many bogus enviro-wackos, then wouldn't they speak against polluting the body directly with nasty cancer stick cigarettes, or with awful unnatural contraceptive potions and poisons?
Get over it, people, the world is supposed to have so many people. Reading the Bible tells it's God's design and will to allow so many people to experience life.
Rather than denying sacred human lives children life, we can simply populate denser
I study here in the USA, and I'm from India and I love the USA. The peopel here are really tolerant,and its a very considerate society, but little immature punks like u need to go out there and see what life really is. SUBWAY, BLAKES, SONIC etc. is keepin u guys alive and wear that HOLLISTER that ur wearing.. Get a life buddy !
The US uses 20 million barrels of oil a day, and China follwos second way behind at just 6 million barrels,a nd India is at a stagerring 2 million bbls. Now does it matter what the population of India or China is ? You guys are doign sufficient damage.
@clarkent69 Dork you should know .... do the math ....you will be living somalian life style....... sorry your dad lost job... coz all business went to china India and fareast...
@2makeuCry I meant what happens to our environment you fucking, fucking, fucking, fucking ignorant cunt This world is a time-bomb, and your strapped to it just as much as I am! Sweet dreams mutherfucker.
@clarkent69 lol you pigface retarted moron if you cannot produce so blame other nation hahaha thats why you invite form other countries you fucking guys are more enviormental hazard than the combine population of India and china so shut the fuckup pig go to school educate yourself or you will not get job even in India as bus boy.... idiot talking about envoirmental you guys are cancer to it not India and china .. in everthing you started it all
@clarkent69 lol cant see the progress of other countries over taking you shit heads suddenly it envoirmental for centuries you pig have been abusing exploiting people and nature it was not envoirmental lol idiot you started the race in exploitation and now falling behind and suddenly call foul hehehehehe your dork to the core man get a life try to work with them instead of finger pointing and blaming for world problem
Shallow loosers ! A bunch of american kids getting a lot fo money from their parents or making it workin in McDonalds, not knowing the hardships of life is what I would say this is. when u get a full time job in WALMART or ACE hardware,a nd when u dont have health insurance, u can get in touch with ur indian buddies who'd help ur wife deliver on a bench ! lol
Video is really silly, it really doesnt make any sense for guys who are not in india teasing indian population growth. Yes education is main reason for population growth, why dont you donate some money to india as responsilble citizen of planet, would you????
Suggestion are given by tom, dick and harry when it comes to contribution no one does. India knows its problem, it also knows how to solve, it is matter of time it gets solved.
I agree with people in India, worldwide, in my own country, wherever, naturally pushing out baby after baby. More people could be ready to marry young, and as world pop grows surely the numbers of people to become sexually active needs to increase, and I don't expect people to unnaturally "space" their babies.
Edu ought to help us more readily ADAPT to welcome an increasingly populous planet, as more and more people would be glad to live. We have to have our precious babies!
When I was born in 1978, the population of the United States was 200 million. Today the population is over 300 million. The european population outside of Europe (latin America, Canada, US, Australia etc) has increased disproprotinately. Guess the answer for India would be to export some of her population like Europe did during Industrialistion! Seek out new colonies and wipe out their indigeoneous peoples!
Well of course export some of the growing population?, as that worked well for Abraham and Lot's growing tribes, who decided to move farther apart, as described in Genesis
However, the planet isn't growing any bigger, while only 7% of people, I read somewhere, live in countires that aren't growing in population
As frontiers vanish somewhat, simply populating denser and denser is also a great population accommodation option, as technology is making denser living far more doable
Before long, the population of the world will reach 9 billion people, unfortunately the world can not sustain such a huge population. The earth has limited resources and until we come up with some new technology and fast, we will stuggle. Water is a case in point. Only 4% of the world's water supply is freshwater and only half of that is drinkable or obtainable. Populations need food and our agricultural practices take up too much water. How would you solve that Einstein?
I'm quite sure if you make much any effort, you can google up webpages or comments that explain how a world of 9 billion+, can be supported.
Did you know we already have water desalination plants in places like Saudi Arabia? Ocean water is UNLIMITED and can be stripped of salt to make it usable by people.
Some say it would take 4 planets. Can't you tell they are simply making up scare tactic stories? Welcome the human pop burgeon naturally, let people find their ADAPTATIONS
Desalination plants are inefficient, only countries with subsidies or excess oil monies can afford them.
With large populations and limited resources, the human race will do what it does best...fight over them. Water will be the reason for many conflicts of the future, Water rights are already being contested (if you need examples, I will give them).
Who's making up the scare stories and for what purpose?
So will desalination plants become more or less efficient in the future? Will people just lose the plans and technologies to build them? Technology moves naturally in the direction of higher efficient and more options, not less
It's the population phobics that urge fighting, not life and cooperation and trade. They claim there are no good solutions, rather than looking for them. They don't believe in freedom, and hide behind junk science to cover their evil anti-people plans
So let me get this right, we will have to go through conflicts before we can come up will any good solutions to adapt to the increased human population?
(Without referring to God please, he obviously doesn't have all the answers!)
How do you propose we eliminate all discomforts or struggles in life? If we didn't struggle against gravity to walk, our bones and muscles would be weak.
They say that necessity is the mother of invention. Therefore, accepting that human pop must increase, naturally leads to the proper ADAPTATIONS, especially among people who have faith to follow the proper way. To mean FAITH BABIES means letting babies push out without "birth control" by faith.
Why do you think I am so critical of enviro luddites? Because they are hindering the needed transformations needed to an increasingly populous world, by objecting to already well-proven technologies that better support vaster and denser pops.
So why don't you then "keep thy religion to thyself?" I don't see the pagans and atheists doing that, nor "Live and let live," so how dare they ask us to?
And do I really have to explain how wrong world views have consequences?
I live in the U.S. Yes, I agree, India should not make any effort to "control" their fertility, and we can absorb some of their pop increase. Our interest in the U.S. is not to "control" our rising numbers, but that immigrants contribute to our country. India is building some smart, hard-working, well-educated computer programmers and such. They can come and enjoy having their large families here.
By average world pop density, we could hold at least half a billion people.
And what natural resources will you destroy in the process and what species will you wipe out?
If the entire world consumes energy and produces carbon at the rate of the US, we will need one and a half more planets to sustain the human population!
The world supposedly couldn't hold the 7 billion we have now. And yet people are ADAPTING already, and gaining wealth
The Chicken Little sky-is-falling, gloom-and-doom anti-population stories are old and passé. By the time we reach 9 billion, the world could easily seem less "crowded" than some think we are now. People would be more used to having so many burgeoning billions around
What we need now, is a little urban sprawl here and there. No break-through techs needed yet
Throughout history and until the 1800's the world population remained contant at around 1 billion people. We have had advances but the world no longer lives them simple rural lifestyles. This is a story about quatity and quality. It's not a matter of what we want but what we need. Let's stop been selfish about this. We owe it to the species that we have wiped out (human, animal and plant kinds) and the future of other species rests in our hands. We effectively have the power of gods here!
The technology advancements accelerated greatly with the growth of the human population. I see it as a vicious feedback in the positive sense, meaning most anything that could conceivably keep our populations "in check" is fast fading away. This greatly expand freedom and options, not reducing them. It's a signal we should go on multiplying as God commanded us to.
As the world increasingly urbanizes, that's no excuse to deny people their precious darling God-given babies.
Technology advance because of wars in the last 200 years and society advance because of the social breakdowns during the time of these conflicts (women working for example was the consequence of WW2). Are you proposing that we need wars for longterm human sustainability.
You rely on labour of science for your survival and yet you give the credit to a fantasy man that lives upstairs, are you for real?
Why do I so often find that people on the pop phobic side, are almost always atheists, marxists, or somehow opposed to even the basics of freedom? What does that tell you about disfunctional false worldviews?
Technology advanced much, in between wars, not just from war. I see accumulating pop as a huge factor driving faster technology advancement, via growing markets, and more and more incremental improvements.
Wars do not accommodate pop, but destroy needed resources.
I know that 'thou shalt not kill' is pretty negotiable commandment for most religious people but doesn't your little man upstairs not teach about any compassion for the natural world?
Aren't you raising plenty of theological questions? Do you think we have room to discuss so much detail here? But I shall try to answer your questions.
Comments too short to explain well. Have you any idea how fast the "excess" of births over deaths mounts? World pop grows by around 211,000 people/day. Wars don't begin to keep up
Either we curb birthrates or find more places for more families. Most people prefer the latter. So build more cities, suburbs, villages, highrises
Why wouldn't "compassion for the natural world," include humans reproducing naturally? Humans aren't part of nature? Who then has made this decree, that we can't even be counted as animals in nature? We are both a part of nature, and transcend nature, because God created people in his image. Earth is not our final home.
How about compassion for children? Your homework: Find some pro-life writings and read them.
Somebody lent GATTAGA to me, then I later bought it. And iRobot
The fact that I'm not arguing on the contarary to this clearly shows you are missing my points. As a person from a non-religious perspective I value nature and the role it's played in man's evolution. It seems to me that religious people are trying to wipe out the evidence by wiping out all species. So where are we going to find the land for the extra people to live on and land for agriculture production to sustain them?
If the people rather like having "too many" babies, then all those babies can live in those people's homes, for a while. That seems fair enough. Why do you want to pile cruel penalties upon the most loving and responsible parents, beyond what God or nature would require? Are you deceived or a Nazi sadist?
A spacious world is naturally an outdated quaint concept. The here-and-now and future appears to be POPULOUS, so we should embrace what must be and ADAPT
We all know the Nazis weren't irreligious. Hitler, Mussolini and Franco were all Christians and manipulated their respective national churches for their own political causes. Don't open up a can of worms here!
Of course, the more natural methods of self-control, aren't thought to work all that well. Oh they work, but so many people seem to naturally opt for the easy TRADITIONALLY VERY LARGE families, when faced with such simple options. They are more in tune with nature, their natural reproductive urges, and God's commandment to MULTIPLY. Globalist power freaks aren't happy about that, because they are denied the power over the masses.
Who's out to wipe out all species? Why are you such a nature worshipper, and yet don't want to worship the Creator of nature, the God of Abraham? The God who created Adam and Eve?
I have no desire to get rid of all the birds, squirrels, rabbits. I can't even catch them, and they don't mind me living near them. But I wouldn't hesitate to cut down some trees to expand my home, if "too many" children being born, requires more living space. Who'd notice a few less squirrels?
Adam and Eve, did they go on to sleep with their childen to populate the world? or did their children sleep with each other to populate the world? Very perverse idea!
Why do people get so tripped up on "Who did Adam and Eve's children marry?" Logic would tell you, they likely married each other. But it wasn't incest back then, for there was nobody else to marry, and the genetic lines were much more pure, closer to the orginal, than they are now. Now our genetic lines are so corrupted, that we are supposed to marry outside our families, to help minimize similar genetic weaknesses.
In many of the United States, it's legal to marry a cousin.
Also, in many of the United States, it's legal to marry as young as 13.
Does that mean we all marry our cousins, or get married and start having babies as soon as puberty? Of course not. Thomas Jefferson said gov governs best which governs least.
The point is, that marriage of a cousin, is possibly sufficiently genetically dissimilar still, to not be branded, legally at least, as "incest."
I imagine it's possible for a person to be in love with a cousin and to want to mate
I'm not so sure I'm talking Laissez Faire, as neutrality doesn't work so well in today's politically charged world. I like to make a decisive viewpoint. But yeah, much of what I say could sound Libertarian, meaning that much shouldn't be decided by government, but by the people themselves. If the people prefer to breed naturally "out of control," then that's their rightful decision not to be disrespected or second-guessed
I urge pop growth, not just to let it happen naturally
The industrial revolution (which began in Britain) wasn't a smooth process, it involved great social upheavals. Regarless, it was exactly due to the opening up of lands in other parts of the world and the wealth that this generated which pricipitated this advancement. We can not afford to do this agian as there is no more territory. Once we have bred like parasites and occupied all available space, don't you thing the natural world will come under pressure?
Then let the natural world come under rising human pop "pressure." Nature is resilient, and can much more easily bear the rising human pop "pressure," than people can be expected to struggle against their natural reproductive urges, or with contrary-to-nature unnatural shoddy Big Pharma contraceptive potions and poisons. If you like nature, why not respect the body's natural reproductive rhythms and welcome babies to come forth?
I'm not concerned about the planet, as mentioned previously, I don't doubt the Planets ability to recover and thrive following the excesses of human nature. I'm more concerned about the survival of humans if we carry on the way we're going!
'Liberal retards'. If it was up to the religious freaks, we'd all be living the back in the Dark Ages (the golden period of religion).
You are enjoying the fruits of the labour of the liberals. Without it, there would have been no renaissaince of the Classical times. Religions has for too long limited the human ability and enslaved the human mind. You cling to religion because you are weak!
Religious freaks? Do you really want to get me started on the NWO religious freaks? Already, we have a Senate in the U.S., determined to ignore the will of the people, and pass their socialist ObamaRationCare gov monopolization of medical care. They want to bankrupt the country, because it's THEIR PAGAN RELIGION to cause all that marxist mess. Just to punish the successful and spread the misery around
When the Rapture comes, you shall get your wish to be free of us. DISASTER
If prostitution is the oldest trade and money-lending is the third, then prophets of doom has got to be the second oldest profession. You're peddling nothing new here, it's old had! Done much more eloquently and dramatically before. Infact, it's it like flogging (selling) a dead horse.
Huh? So now you agree with me partially, in criticizing the prophets of doom? They cry the sky is about to fall, like some scared Chicken Little, for attention or because bad news sells?
I said the Rapture. Did you misspell it on purpose for some reason that I missed? Yes, I believe the Rapture, or the removal of "Jesus' bride," the Church, is to happen soon. A careful reading of Bible leads many Christians to expect that, especially considering how fast libs ruining the world
The benefit of not being a slave to religion is not having to defend stupidity.
When the 'rapture' come, will Jesus also take Christians. Let me ask you some questions and see if you can answer without skirting round it.
Jesus was born into a Jewish household and he observed Jewish Law. Tell me now, did Jesus ever partake from the flesh of the swine? You know, that unclear meat of the pig which God forbade his people to touch, which flows through your own body? Are you pure or impure?
What does this have to do with anything? Just something you are curious about? I am Christian, not a Jew. Now there are Messianic Jews, or Jews who have accepted Jesus as their Lord and Savior, who don't give up their Jewishness. Neither are we in Old Testament times.
I don't see what would hold me to not eat the "impure" meats? Didn't Jesus say something about that it wasn't what a person eats that makes them impure, but the words that come out of their mouth that could?
If you want to be patronising, here's some homework for you. Read about the policy inspired by the Christian Reich ( 'Right') and Heathengelicals ( 'Evengelicals') and adopted by Bush on committing poor nations in Africa to promote abstinence as a form of HIV/AIDS prevention, rather then condoms. Countries which didn't promote abstinence didn't receive development aid (conditionality). What was that you said about sex being natural tendency? Why seek to prevent the act and not outcome?
I agree with abstinence rather than condom mania religion. Why? Because it keeps the power in the hands of the common people. They are still free to "overbreed" as they may wish, due to inevitability or that "sex being natural tendency" thing you mentioned. People not being pushed to use shoddy Big Pharma contraception, are UNDERSTANDABLY going to be prone for many to go on having TRADITIONALLY VERY LARGE families.
Further, I object to tax money going to BILLIONS of condoms.
You do know that abstinence, isn't really advocating for less sex? What it says is no sex outside of marriage, and the use of the more natural AND FREE methods, rather than reliance upon shoddy costly artificial methods of fertility control. The poor, and the people of the past, long had some control over family size. They had the FREE natural self-control, if they thought their homes was just too filled up with children, of no sex, less sex, rhythm, or early withdrawal.
And let people die slowly and painfully from AIDS. Creating orphans and letting these societies continue in their cycle of povery. Where is your compassion. Are you sure it's a god you worship and not the devil?
We have compassion and kindness towards the people, and think their babies are precious and cute.
Who's trying to spread AIDS or make more orphans, but the wicked peddlers of shoddy unsafe condoms that promote false security for promiscuous reckless sex?
Did you know many poor people areas reject contraceptives, still associating them with "dirty sex," such as prostitution? If one was only having sex with their spouse, what for should they need some unnatural awkward condom?
Now you are talking in circles. I already answered that one.
And BTW, have you noticed that most religions and priests seem to encourage LARGE families?
My pastor is pro-life and would welcome naturally large families.
Bambinos is Spanish for babies. The Hispanics seem to reproduce even faster than we do. So how will you convince anybody to deny the natural flow of human life?
Pagans criticize the Church for trying to pack their pews or coffers by encouraging big families
I don't think you've addressed any of my concerns, you've just used this as an opportunity to put across your points. I find that this is the extent of reasoning by religious people.
So all religious people promote large families, that not a surprising, given that they seek to increase their congregations. Having babies shouldn't be a competition.
We can discourage people from having too many babies my issuing a licence to breed!
Your issuing of a license to breed, is little better than Nazi eugenics, already discredited by Adolf Hitler. Why do you want to make "criminals" out of honest, hard-working parents? Surely you know for practical, religious, or powerful reproductive urges, reasons, they simply can't all stop reproducing, license or no license. Faraway evil politicians issuing such licenses to the rich people, as a means of "revenue enhancement," are not a proper basis to allow God's blessings
So what exactly is the difference? PAGAN stands for People Against Goodness And Normalcy, according to the movie Dragnet. Sounds like an OK definition to me. Atheist means somebody who rebels against belief or faith in God. Almost the same?
Religious people don't just want to fill pews and Church coffers. What a false straw man argument. People of faith see value in each and every person, created in the image of God, so logically, more people must be more valuable souls!
You're obviously in convenient denial about all the various religions and denominations competing for 'flock'.
Let me tell you the future, it will be through education that human population will reached a balance and religion and superstition will be no more! We know what happens when countries develop, religion is reduced to the background. Background noise is all you're making here. Your religion is irrelevant in this argument which is ultimately a scientific argument. Why fear science?
It's not just about "competing for flock." There's altruistic reasons to prefer the natural ENLARGEMENT of human pops, even of groups or countries outside one's own. Notice how I advocate pop expansion in countries outside my own. How does that expand my flock?
An article I read spoke of pop competition, or fear that other groups will outreproduce your own, and thus take over the political power.
You claim to push "science," but actually religion and propaganda. Tell truth.
I suggest you watch the movie, GATTAGA. I recently rewatched it with a family member. There's a very important lesson in this movie. It's set sometime in the future, when at least among the most "successful" wealthy people in the developed countries, most babies are genetically modified or "enhanced." But from what we see, there is little different other than the institutionalized rampant job-discrimination. I was impressed with the term, "faith babies." I like FAITH babies.
Even nature tells us that humans reproducing is as natural as eating or breathing.
They say you can't stop people from having sex. Sex makes babies!
Study the evil history of "birth control," and you would come to understand my pro-life, pro-population position better. Many religious people object to "artificial" methods of "birth control." Yeah, there's side effects! The world balks at more natural methods as rhythm, requiring too much self-control. So NO METHOD method!
Have sex, enjoy sex, it doesn't make you a pervert for having sex for it's own sake and for taking pleasure in it. It doesn't mean a baby is the end result. of your sexual experience, trust me, alot of priests are testament to that! This is the advancement of sexual exploration, the evolution of human pleasure!
Isn't it selfish to plant the human seed, and hope it doesn't grow? Wouldn't the children to come, be glad to let it grow as God would allow?
The movie had one meaning of FAITH babies, meaning a child conceived "by chance," natural meeting of sperm and egg, without "scientific" enhancement for sex-selection or better math or music ability or longer lifespan. I have another. I think quite many people naturally breed "out of control" by faith, and that's as it should be.
You are interfering with the proper order of things, if you take active measures to hinder sperm and egg meeting. It's a good thing you came to life, isn't it?
What happened to respect for one's body and it's natural rhythms? Do you sleep at night or when tired? Do you eat when hungry? So why no respect for the body's natural reproductive rhythms, so as to hinder and poison the body's natural reproductive function?
'interfering with the proper order of things', that what they said when the spinning Jenny was invented. This gave rise to the Luddites, people that went around breaking machinery as they saw it as ungodly and the natural order of things.
Seems you fear progress and the next stage of human evolution. I know we should be careful but no need to be a luddite about it!
New World Order is a secular rule under Anti-Christ, that can't possibly work for long without DISASTER for the masses. Any wonder NWO is so vehemently opposed, even searching for conspiracy video on YouTube. And yet isn't the decline of religion and superstition of which you speak, part of this popular delusion?
Green nazi luddites are communists, eugenicists who refuse to allow for accommodation of naturally-growing, very UNDERSTANDABLE expansion of human world pop size.
Good question, but no, they aren't acronyms. If they were, I would also want to know what they stand for.
When I capitalize UNDERSTANDABLE, what I mean is simply to BOLDFACE the word for emphasis, but boldface stylization isn't available. I wish to emphasize UNDERSTANDABLE, because I can UNDERSTAND why world pop is or has grown so much, and I APPROVE of most all the reasons that could be cited for people having had or continuing to have so many children.
I am very much for computers and machines, but I don't like eugenics experimental "technologies" designed to oppose humanity by stemming the rising tide of the naturally-growing human pop. That's an attack against traditional family, faith, self-determination, self-responsibility, children, religion, etc.
Humans are exceeding number of acres in some countries. Growing too close together and too dense to live comfortably/safely without flush toilets, clean cookstoves, etc.
Religion should be about your personal belief, not state sactioned. You have a personal choice in a secular democracy. If you object to 'Artificial methods' you can refrain from them but don't stop the progress and freedom for the rest of us. If it wasn't for the Classical Renaissance, we've all be living under the church's dark ages in ignorance and coercion!
Sorry for typo. I meant, to me FAITH babies means letting babies push out without use of any means of "birth control," by faith. Let God decide family size. More natural and relaxed sex, counting any children that result as precious blessings from God
Why have you so little understanding? I am defending YOUR freedom. I said you need not have any "permission" from gov, to enjoy having "however many" or "all the children God gives." Gov has no authority to ban NO METHOD method
However, exporting "surplus" pop can't be the only answer. I also agree with radio talk show host, Michael Savage in his emphasis of borders, language, culture. Productive immigrants should be welcome, however, there are anti-immigrant interests, and I don't think immigrants should be cheap votes to buy off for socialist Marxist DemocRATS, nor to load up the gov welfare rolls.
As India's pop swells, many don't want to leave. So all countries should populate denser and denser
We don't need to struggle over land for rising pops, for not only may growing pops sometimes "overspill" in other nearby regions that could hold more people, or sometimes emigrate to other countries, consider how might humans alter the entire planet to hold lots more people, so their can be place for everybody's progeny?
Isn't it obvious? Expect all countries to populate themselves denser and denser with people, especially via their own natural increase - their very own kids
I propose we give out licenses for having babies. You should be means tested if you want to reproduce. Reproducing is not a basic human right any more than having a choice of being born!
Planet Earth will recover and survive regardless of the wanton destruction that is human nature.
Why do you oppose freedom? Haven't you given any thought to the impossible logistics of requiring some "license" to birth babies? We already have one, a marriage license, however, marriages/weddings are supposed to be done by the Church, not the state. It's none of the state's business, other than maybe record's keeping.
5 babies are born per second. The natural proper outlet for our powerful reproductive urges is REPRODUCTION. Babies are going to happen! So welcome them!
Define freedom. So arrogant to assume that human freedom should come above the freedom of all other life species. The more I discuss this issue the more anti-human I'm becoming!
With freedom comes personal responsibility, otherwise, how can freedom last long, when rampant problems of abuses are not properly dealt with? Who defines morality? How about the creator God who created us? Get married first, welcome the natural flow of human life, take responsibility for any children that result. People already have enough difficulty with these basics, without adding cruel unjustified pop quotas.
Human pops have been growing all through history. Not new.
Lo and behold my people, today I decree unto thee a new commandment, one that you will set most high above all other laws I sent to you my followers. From this day hence, you will not beget another child without obtaining a warrant. Observe my decree, for the lord your God has spoken.
Oh, so now you think you are funny, putting words in God's mouth. But you can't fool me so easily, for I have read my Bible from cover to cover, several times.
I have done an informal survey among coworkers and friends, and everybody said God's commandment to people to Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth, still applies. My sister said it has not been rescinded. I do such "polls" occasionally for curiosity or discussion starters.
P.S If the US administration is given the task of handling the Indian govt functioning, they wouldnt know what to do and where to turn. Inspite of 400YEARS of colonial oppression and just 20 years of economc reforms, India has faced all odds and challenges and has been pulling 10MILLION ppl out of poverty every year.
Absolute crap. India has turned its growing population to its advantage. And while you guys are sitting around being idiotic, your jobs are going to well educated and deserving Indians. Grow up! America has a lot learn from India ( and its vice versa). There needs to be mutual respect.
Of course a huge growing population can be turned to great advantage, especially under correct Christian worldview that emphasizes the great and sacred value of each and every human life, that we are all created in God's image
It should be no shame for a country such as India to enjoy a HUGE population. We also feel/enjoy powerful reproductive urges, so we should UNDERSTAND and respect. People can still enjoy traditional very large families by spreading huge cities, growing denser
here are some of the modern inventions by indians: YOUTUBE (jawed karim), HOTMAIL (sabeer bhatia), USB/AGP/PCI EXPRESS (ajay bhatt), Bose Audio systems (Amar Bose), Sun Microsystems (Vinod Khosla), Pentium (Vinod Dham), HDTV (Arun Netravali), Compact Flash/ SANDISK (Sanjay Mehrotra)...Indians are freaking smart!...
its just that india doesn't give any fucking opportunities to these smart indians so they come overseas.
i saw a black dude in one of those scenes...well brother, you come from a race that is the world's oldest (1st humans on earth), so you should be proud of your culture instead of laughing with the whities...because behind your back, the whities will be saying n-word...i know this because i have had many white folks come and tell me how much they hate 'niggers'...
most americans (thanks to the education system) don't know indian mathematicians like brahmaputra, aryabhatta, bhaskara...inventors of arithmetic, mathematics, etc. or the kerala mathematicians who actually invented trigonometry that the greeks plagiarized and? called their own....
just imagine without the BRAHMIC NUMBER SYSTEM (sometimes inaccurately called 'arabic numerals'), or place value, decimal, zero, etc...without math, where will be all the inventions including computers?
india's inventions (arithmetic, trigonometry, precursor to calculus, geometry) etc are all overshadowed by the horrible state of affairs today.
the greeks copied a lot of stuff from india, yet the west thinks that the greeks did all the inventions (eg: algebra is persian "al-jabr'wa" written by musa-al-khawarizmi...and musa learned from india, but the americans think 'algebra' is greek...lol!)
lol...since i am indian, now i should make a video on how american females are all slutty skimpy-outfit wearing easy whores, and how american men are all racial supremacists always smoking weed and getting drunk.
nude cheerleaders, largest porno industry, high teenage pregnancies and divorce rates, extramarital affairs (like ashley madison), junk food anyone? welcome to AMERIKKKA!
The people who made this need to have their parents see how their farting away the money that they spent to send them to college. Yeah... real funny. What's funnier is seeing if any of you barking spiders can actually graduate and get a job that pays over 24K a year.
Ahh... In 2050 there willl be up to 11 billion people on the planet (6 billion today). Most educated people and teachers I have talkt to about this say, if teh population will rise so high, nature will probably take care of it. I think it would actually be better if like 99% of people died of becous of some desease. It would eb better for the environment, nature, - even the economy and the remaining 1% would be alot more happyer living in a healthyer environment, then an owercrownded shithole
And why should nature "take care of it?" Unless you mean that nature will be eager for humans to grow to so many? 11 billion can easily fit onto the planet, by 250, or do you really think there won't be any technology progress over 4 decades?
Large families should be encouraged worldwide, so that far more people may experence life. Contraceptives go against nature. We should advocate the simple elegance of the natural flow of life, be kind, generous, welcome all the kids coming alive
Look at it from a God-created worldview, and not that of the pagan atheists, to help you to see more clearly. Often, many of the self-appointed ex-spurts are WRONG, heaping their "educated beyond their intelligence" fantasies one upon another.
When God created Adam & Eve, and commanded people to multiply, that was God's idea to have EXPONENTIAL expansion of the human race, as descendents also inherit the ability and reproductive drive to multiply
as I sayed, its happaned in the blink of an eye... 10 000 years is nothing...
look, religion aside, most scientists agree, we, and the planet, would be much better off witch 500 000 -1 million humans... Look at what were doing to the environment, were killion off animals, making spiecies extinct, becous we need space to live, cuting down the rainforest, destroying the ozon layer, polluting the earth witch our endles tons of garbage, polluting the atmosphere. Were just fucking up this planet
Humans enhance the environment. What does nature matter, without people to see and enjoy it?
Cities only occupy but 2 or 3% of the land. It could be more. Just because we need space to live, is no reason everybody can't let their families grow naturally, quite possibly very large. Urbanize the planet to whatever extent needed. Let cities and towns grow larger and closer together, whatever so we can find or make place for all our progeny.
Don't believe lies of enviro-nazis. Cap and Trade goes hand in hand with slapping a "carbon tax" upon our precious darling babies. Even though there's no assurance they will grow up and still be driving gasoline cars.
I must oppose Captain Planet junk-science nonsense to take pollution "down to zero." That's just not possible with today's "huge" population size, and still so much incomplete technologies. Moderate, temporarily rising pollution may still be necessary. Trash is trivial.
I disagree with the rampant contraceptive pushers. My Bible says to be married and provide for my children. Says nothing to keep natural human fertility "under control." Says children are a blessing from God, even urges large families, and having children from parents married young. Psalm 127.
1 million humans excludes most people alive today. No incentive for us. More billions is huge number of additional human lives to be enjoyed.
Yes, I do think you are partially right. Nature is already reacting. It's absurd to suggest that nature hasn't yet reacted. What? Is nature asleep? Human population has been so "huge" for decades. In 1987, world population was said to be 5 billion. That's nearly as "huge" as today's 6.8 billion
Nature is reacting, by yielding to humanity, letting us take over more and more. Because God gave dominion over nature and other creatures TO MAN. Nature is egging us on, let baby booms spread
as I sayed, its happaned in the blink of an eye... 10 000 years is nothing...
look, religion aside, most scientists agree, we, and the planet, would be much better off witch 500 000 -1 million humans... Look at what were doing to the environment, were killion off animals, making spiecies extinct, becous we need space to live, cuting down the rainforest, destroying the ozon layer, polluting the earth witch our endles tons of garbage, polluting the atmosphere. Were just fucking up this planet
In the blink of an eye is fine. According to the Utilitarian Principle, often the best thing to do is that which most benefits the most people. I am not alone to notice that population growth benefits more people, as some website made this connection as well. Therefore, "ideal"-sized population would be "nearly as large as possible." This means shun "birth control" even as "huge" dense populations naturally "explode." Overflowing landfills, surging supercities, whatever to ENLARGE #s.
Am I supposed to feel "environmental guilt," to have a naturally large family, because there's so many of us alive already? Why can't I reproduce naturally, when I like some "natural" in areas that benefit humans?
There's so many ways to find/make more space to live. Huge cities steadily growing huger. Growing more dense. Small children sometimes sharing a bed. Apartment complexes and highrises
Of course huge numbers are fucking. Libs seem to prefer more sex? Be generous, spread life
Even living in the huge city, doesn't stop humans from being able to naturally reproduce. People can enjoy having their "traditionally very large" families, in the spacious countryside, or as the land fills with people, in the huge growing cities.
More and more people would be glad to live, babies want to be welcome to come to life, even if in overcrowded conditions. I believe in keeping the door to life open, respecting the body's natural reproductive rhythms, even "baby after baby"
ok, I have do doubt you are a stupid religious fanatic...
The bible also sayes you should give 1/3 of your income to god (the curch). The bible also sayes you are forbidden to shave your beard, you cant eat pigs etc
And dont fuckng read the 1st testament like it is. Its in a figurative sense. Or are you to dumb to understand it?
Judging from your statements you are indeed dumb
I do believe in god, but im glad we live in an age where people listen to scientists, not idiots like you
Oh, so I'm stupid? Well I'm smarter than you, as I have diligently studied the options, found easily that letting pop grow is most win-win for the most people. Since I am smarter than you, what does that make you?
Where do you come up with 1/3? Isn't the tithe the 10th? And a few verses say give as you feel led to give. God loves a cheerful giver. Could that be less or more?
Yes, shaving my beard is UNNATURAL, so I asked my Dad, Why do we shave? To keep food out of beard. Okay-works
Well, think - if we let the population grow so high, we use up all the Earths resources, food, water etc, at some point we will all die out. And it will be wery soon
I would say, if we continue like this it will happane in 200 - 300 years
but, if you have a population of like 1 million, it would last for thousends of years
So - where would there be more lives?
In the smaller population, witch would last ALOT longer
Breeding more naturally now, doesn't close doors, it keeps doors open, and helps alter nature to hold lots more people.
Commie chairman Mao Tse Tung was it?, said a large and growing population would make China strong. Maybe, maybe not. But at least it would allow all the more people to experience life.
I am a contrarian thinker, and I deliberately consider angles average morons miss. You don't turn on and off pop, like a light switch, China.
Martin Luther said that hindering the natural procreation would lead to all sort of sexual sins. Sorry, his quote won't fit here. He said that God created us and not only commanded us to multiply, but created us such that we HAVE TO multiply. He likened it to other necessary body functions.
Contraceptives have side-effects, "natural" rhythm requires huge willpower. Best option is "no method" method, which some now think = "breeding like rabbits," but that's what our ancestors did.
A society that is more fond of life, and welcomes babies, is more friendly to everybody, so why couldn't they last longer, no matter that the pop level has grown so high?
Much of the group think "environmentalism" is based on "fixed pie" deception. If there be more people, everybody gets a smaller slice? But economies work more like candles than fixed pies. When jobs are created, everybody can have more, without anybody having less. Candles can light other candles, without losing.
I am familiary with that calculation, so I shall now tell you why it's totally incorrect. There's many factors you aren't adequately considering. If you want the "maximum human population over the long run," then you had best get everybody born before the next killer comet or runaway star comes, if ever. We may not have as much time left as we think.
The Bible says we don't have much time left before the Endtimes.
How long were we cavemen? Homo Sapiens has existed for 200 000 years + with a wery small population and we havent vanished!
So - that proves - no, a smaller dosent mean a bigger chance to vanish...
why is that? Stupid old church woman? Becous we were in harmony with the environment... If there were 6 billion humans from the wery start - do you think we would still be here? No - we would have fucked up the planet, like were doing now.Scientists agree!
Whats in it for your children? I dont care about your children (who are probably as retarded as you)... neuter them!
But you know - thats the main reason your supporting this... You have made many children, thats why you cant admit its wrong... If you didnt have children you would have a different opinion
How can you be so insensitive? You dare to insult my children, whom I haven't even had yet? What do you know of them? You think having "too many" children clouds my judgement? Okay, how many children do you have? Let's put our "biases" onto the table then? Explain to me about the "bias" of Al Gore, having the gall to have 4 children himself, and then tell us there's "too many" people in the world. To me that's either class warfare, hypocrisy, or both
You sound young and immature. Do you mind if I ask you how old you are? No birthday, just basic number or age group. Are you a high school student? You sound like you are parroting to me what some leftist teacher told you?
I would like to hear something of what YOU believe/think.
I think you said "Scientists agree!" twice now. Do you not know, that not all scientists agree? What do you want? A recommended reading list? Even google can show you that not all agree. If you aren't lazy?
HEY STUPID LIB-TARD. ... then all the comments disappeared.
(continued) - server posting error
Are you always so incompentent? And what's this stuff on your channel about Lion of Judah? Are you trying to pass yourself off as some Christian, and acting like a pagan? Ever hear of freedom of speech? Are you so insecure to debate me, that you just sabotage, thus admitting I am right?
Explain to me, not about you, but about people like you, what happened to merely talk about people ought to have fewer children on average, but it's probably our "choice?" What happened to that? Where are you getting this tyrannical fascism? To dare dictate to me some restriction on how many children I should have? Is it just a common liberal mental disorder that's going around like the Obama Flu?
If we started with 6 billion, either God would have made us sterile, or quadrillions?
emilinate poverty and give education...this will help..
abksharma 2 months ago
good to know my parents are aware of overpopulation as I am a lone child and indian haha
CarbonDioxide1990 9 months ago
hahaa this is awesome, I'm Indian and agree we're making too many kids. Hence I moved to the west, only to find more Indians, having more kids :(
cow777 11 months ago 5
Yea this is racist. Durka durk was used for arab terrorists, not indians.
SuperUncleruckus 1 year ago
its funny coz u ppl r so busy making this shit video nad indians r busy doing researches and all inventions. WHat u have is coz of us..........ur country is power full coz indian brain is there behind every research and development......n that old lady immigration is the only reason u have all brilliant minds in ur country.....
Fuck u white guys......im proud to be indian........
if u cant respect some1 then dont even make fun of them......
My country is a factory of brilliant brain
-Frm ur dad
2202nj 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
too many people causes a toll on the earth.
it's best if each family has 2 kids or less.
Iamtheman4u2 1 year ago
emigrate to another countries.
MingTheMerciful 1 year ago 5
@MingTheMerciful I dont want Indians in my country
cheesynounou 1 year ago 2
Ya, People in Asian countries such as Singapore, Japan, Korea, Hong Kong and Taiwan and right now China is joing the rank of decreasing east asian population.
Now, South Asia and Africa better do something about their populaiton, it is gross and disgusting how there are so many of this poor people running around with little resources, please people from india, africa and mexico save the poor soul that is born into your miserable countries, if not your children will keep having the desire to..
MingTheMerciful 1 year ago 3
Do us all a favour and die fast coz the us has lots of space and a 74%caucasian population which is quickly falling!If you can cut it down by jumping in the atlantic or pacific we can send like 700 million Indians there and end our overpopulation crisis!The main reason for all this overpopulation is a.)we are not impotent whitesb.)we don't kill each other with wars ala World war one and two.
so you are the ones still around crowdin.Remember historically whites were around 30%of world population
indonippon 1 year ago 2
well at least the world is not overpopulated with a bunch of rednecks and crackers like these! LOL!
serious these guys make beavis and butthead look smart...hehehe
indonippon 1 year ago
indians always give the impression they are religious and moral people yet they have sex and breed like rabbits.
i think a time will come when a nuclear weapon will be the only solution to india's overpopulation. wipe some of these curry eating smelly people out
allaccess100 1 year ago
@allaccess100
How do people so quickly forget, that until the evil "The Pill" in 1960, most everybody throughout the world had sex and bred like rabbits. So I have no criticism of people in populous India to go on welcoming their babies to push out as they come, as I reject nasty side-effect-ridden contraceptives, and also oppose imposing any population "control" upon human beings. It's the people's own homes they are first populating, so they know what makes babies, and want to populate denser
pronatalist 1 year ago
@allaccess100 - Having sex and breeding like rabbits is not wrong, but accepting abortion must
be an option!!
limoboss6242 10 months ago 5
Hi there, this is nothing...........I am Indian lived all my life there in most crowded city..........you 5 guys sticking together still better . In reality 25-50 people would have clinged to me in that space in public transport. Imagine that?
virgoptrex 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
hahahahaha looking back on this makes me laugh so hard because most of my friends at SLU are from India
smallvillefan0 1 year ago
Comment removed
smallvillefan0 1 year ago
guys this is quite funny..went back recently and 0.27 is not far off the truth..mind you in the big cities only..however what you should also know is that your carbon heavy lifestyle is due to the massive and poor populations in china and india..almost everything you buy will be made in that part of the world before long...would you sacrifice your materalistic lifestyle full of cheap consumables for a more egalitarian world with a smaller population, i dont think so!
popinjay3000 1 year ago
i am very frightened by this data ,not only india ,all south asia is overpopulated ,the small bangladesh have a bigger population then the big russia ,how can a small and poor country have many people and pakistan too ,pakistan is a lot bigger but also have many people ,i think south asians must control their populations like east asians,today chinese ,korean and japanese have big populations but their birth rate is low and that is better for the enviroment
KYONSUZUMIYA1 1 year ago
@KYONSUZUMIYA1 it worried me too. it disgusting how small bangladesh is and how big its population is. all the bengalis i know in the uk have 3-4 children
drivelikejunio 1 year ago 2
@drivelikejunio
No, dense Bangladesh is not disgusting, but great progress for the human race, to be able to be enjoying keep expanding huge numbers. More people would be glad to live. I have long advocated large families worldwide, so that far more people may experience life
Technology, itself largely driven by population growth, makes it more and more feasible to have a huge population living upon small regions of land
Why should only Muslims be baby factories? God commanded humans multiply
pronatalist 1 year ago
@KYONSUZUMIYA1
If people really cared for the environment, and not so many bogus enviro-wackos, then wouldn't they speak against polluting the body directly with nasty cancer stick cigarettes, or with awful unnatural contraceptive potions and poisons?
Get over it, people, the world is supposed to have so many people. Reading the Bible tells it's God's design and will to allow so many people to experience life.
Rather than denying sacred human lives children life, we can simply populate denser
pronatalist 1 year ago
fuck u niggars...
munnabhai33 1 year ago
I don't think they should allow people to give birth in India until the population dies down.
bensmusicworld 1 year ago
Comment removed
SHANKERNAIR 1 year ago
I study here in the USA, and I'm from India and I love the USA. The peopel here are really tolerant,and its a very considerate society, but little immature punks like u need to go out there and see what life really is. SUBWAY, BLAKES, SONIC etc. is keepin u guys alive and wear that HOLLISTER that ur wearing.. Get a life buddy !
SHANKERNAIR 1 year ago
The US uses 20 million barrels of oil a day, and China follwos second way behind at just 6 million barrels,a nd India is at a stagerring 2 million bbls. Now does it matter what the population of India or China is ? You guys are doign sufficient damage.
SHANKERNAIR 1 year ago
@SHANKERNAIR So what happens when 2 billion chinesse and indians want a North American lifestyle? What happens then, smart-guy?
clarkent69 1 year ago
@clarkent69 Dork you should know .... do the math ....you will be living somalian life style....... sorry your dad lost job... coz all business went to china India and fareast...
2makeuCry 1 year ago
@2makeuCry I meant what happens to our environment you fucking, fucking, fucking, fucking ignorant cunt This world is a time-bomb, and your strapped to it just as much as I am! Sweet dreams mutherfucker.
clarkent69 1 year ago
@clarkent69 lol you pigface retarted moron if you cannot produce so blame other nation hahaha thats why you invite form other countries you fucking guys are more enviormental hazard than the combine population of India and china so shut the fuckup pig go to school educate yourself or you will not get job even in India as bus boy.... idiot talking about envoirmental you guys are cancer to it not India and china .. in everthing you started it all
Mythickdick 1 year ago
@clarkent69 lol cant see the progress of other countries over taking you shit heads suddenly it envoirmental for centuries you pig have been abusing exploiting people and nature it was not envoirmental lol idiot you started the race in exploitation and now falling behind and suddenly call foul hehehehehe your dork to the core man get a life try to work with them instead of finger pointing and blaming for world problem
Mythickdick 1 year ago
Shallow loosers ! A bunch of american kids getting a lot fo money from their parents or making it workin in McDonalds, not knowing the hardships of life is what I would say this is. when u get a full time job in WALMART or ACE hardware,a nd when u dont have health insurance, u can get in touch with ur indian buddies who'd help ur wife deliver on a bench ! lol
SHANKERNAIR 1 year ago
Comment removed
SHANKERNAIR 1 year ago
Comment removed
SHANKERNAIR 1 year ago
Comment removed
SHANKERNAIR 1 year ago
Comment removed
SHANKERNAIR 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
/watch?v=WWQ_gpEHjwc&feature=related...India is officially preparing a new drink which is strongly believed to beat PEPSI and COKE industries...
shazycalm 1 year ago
cockroaches.
x11115 1 year ago
In most parts of India they shouldn't allow people to give birth because of the spiraling population problems.
bensmusicworld 2 years ago
why have kids becuase ther fucken ugly
chuy655 2 years ago
Video is really silly, it really doesnt make any sense for guys who are not in india teasing indian population growth. Yes education is main reason for population growth, why dont you donate some money to india as responsilble citizen of planet, would you????
Suggestion are given by tom, dick and harry when it comes to contribution no one does. India knows its problem, it also knows how to solve, it is matter of time it gets solved.
junglebook195 2 years ago
To junglebook195:
I agree with people in India, worldwide, in my own country, wherever, naturally pushing out baby after baby. More people could be ready to marry young, and as world pop grows surely the numbers of people to become sexually active needs to increase, and I don't expect people to unnaturally "space" their babies.
Edu ought to help us more readily ADAPT to welcome an increasingly populous planet, as more and more people would be glad to live. We have to have our precious babies!
pronatalist 2 years ago
When I was born in 1978, the population of the United States was 200 million. Today the population is over 300 million. The european population outside of Europe (latin America, Canada, US, Australia etc) has increased disproprotinately. Guess the answer for India would be to export some of her population like Europe did during Industrialistion! Seek out new colonies and wipe out their indigeoneous peoples!
They can start with the US. What say you?
Northerncheeks 2 years ago
ToNortherncheeks
Well of course export some of the growing population?, as that worked well for Abraham and Lot's growing tribes, who decided to move farther apart, as described in Genesis
However, the planet isn't growing any bigger, while only 7% of people, I read somewhere, live in countires that aren't growing in population
As frontiers vanish somewhat, simply populating denser and denser is also a great population accommodation option, as technology is making denser living far more doable
pronatalist 2 years ago
Before long, the population of the world will reach 9 billion people, unfortunately the world can not sustain such a huge population. The earth has limited resources and until we come up with some new technology and fast, we will stuggle. Water is a case in point. Only 4% of the world's water supply is freshwater and only half of that is drinkable or obtainable. Populations need food and our agricultural practices take up too much water. How would you solve that Einstein?
Northerncheeks 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks:
I'm quite sure if you make much any effort, you can google up webpages or comments that explain how a world of 9 billion+, can be supported.
Did you know we already have water desalination plants in places like Saudi Arabia? Ocean water is UNLIMITED and can be stripped of salt to make it usable by people.
Some say it would take 4 planets. Can't you tell they are simply making up scare tactic stories? Welcome the human pop burgeon naturally, let people find their ADAPTATIONS
pronatalist 2 years ago
Desalination plants are inefficient, only countries with subsidies or excess oil monies can afford them.
With large populations and limited resources, the human race will do what it does best...fight over them. Water will be the reason for many conflicts of the future, Water rights are already being contested (if you need examples, I will give them).
Who's making up the scare stories and for what purpose?
Northerncheeks 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks:
So will desalination plants become more or less efficient in the future? Will people just lose the plans and technologies to build them? Technology moves naturally in the direction of higher efficient and more options, not less
It's the population phobics that urge fighting, not life and cooperation and trade. They claim there are no good solutions, rather than looking for them. They don't believe in freedom, and hide behind junk science to cover their evil anti-people plans
pronatalist 2 years ago
So let me get this right, we will have to go through conflicts before we can come up will any good solutions to adapt to the increased human population?
(Without referring to God please, he obviously doesn't have all the answers!)
Northerncheeks 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks:
How do you propose we eliminate all discomforts or struggles in life? If we didn't struggle against gravity to walk, our bones and muscles would be weak.
They say that necessity is the mother of invention. Therefore, accepting that human pop must increase, naturally leads to the proper ADAPTATIONS, especially among people who have faith to follow the proper way. To mean FAITH BABIES means letting babies push out without "birth control" by faith.
War doesn't reduce #s enough
pronatalist 2 years ago
Abraham and Lot who,? you're making references to characters I don't believe in. They may mean something to you but they mean nothing to me.
This is the 11th commandment 'Thou shalt keep thy religion to thyself'
Northerncheeks 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks:
Why do you think I am so critical of enviro luddites? Because they are hindering the needed transformations needed to an increasingly populous world, by objecting to already well-proven technologies that better support vaster and denser pops.
So why don't you then "keep thy religion to thyself?" I don't see the pagans and atheists doing that, nor "Live and let live," so how dare they ask us to?
And do I really have to explain how wrong world views have consequences?
pronatalist 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks:
I live in the U.S. Yes, I agree, India should not make any effort to "control" their fertility, and we can absorb some of their pop increase. Our interest in the U.S. is not to "control" our rising numbers, but that immigrants contribute to our country. India is building some smart, hard-working, well-educated computer programmers and such. They can come and enjoy having their large families here.
By average world pop density, we could hold at least half a billion people.
pronatalist 2 years ago
And what natural resources will you destroy in the process and what species will you wipe out?
If the entire world consumes energy and produces carbon at the rate of the US, we will need one and a half more planets to sustain the human population!
Northerncheeks 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks:
The world supposedly couldn't hold the 7 billion we have now. And yet people are ADAPTING already, and gaining wealth
The Chicken Little sky-is-falling, gloom-and-doom anti-population stories are old and passé. By the time we reach 9 billion, the world could easily seem less "crowded" than some think we are now. People would be more used to having so many burgeoning billions around
What we need now, is a little urban sprawl here and there. No break-through techs needed yet
pronatalist 2 years ago
Throughout history and until the 1800's the world population remained contant at around 1 billion people. We have had advances but the world no longer lives them simple rural lifestyles. This is a story about quatity and quality. It's not a matter of what we want but what we need. Let's stop been selfish about this. We owe it to the species that we have wiped out (human, animal and plant kinds) and the future of other species rests in our hands. We effectively have the power of gods here!
Northerncheeks 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks:
The technology advancements accelerated greatly with the growth of the human population. I see it as a vicious feedback in the positive sense, meaning most anything that could conceivably keep our populations "in check" is fast fading away. This greatly expand freedom and options, not reducing them. It's a signal we should go on multiplying as God commanded us to.
As the world increasingly urbanizes, that's no excuse to deny people their precious darling God-given babies.
pronatalist 2 years ago
Technology advance because of wars in the last 200 years and society advance because of the social breakdowns during the time of these conflicts (women working for example was the consequence of WW2). Are you proposing that we need wars for longterm human sustainability.
You rely on labour of science for your survival and yet you give the credit to a fantasy man that lives upstairs, are you for real?
Northerncheeks 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks:
Why do I so often find that people on the pop phobic side, are almost always atheists, marxists, or somehow opposed to even the basics of freedom? What does that tell you about disfunctional false worldviews?
Technology advanced much, in between wars, not just from war. I see accumulating pop as a huge factor driving faster technology advancement, via growing markets, and more and more incremental improvements.
Wars do not accommodate pop, but destroy needed resources.
pronatalist 2 years ago
I know that 'thou shalt not kill' is pretty negotiable commandment for most religious people but doesn't your little man upstairs not teach about any compassion for the natural world?
Northerncheeks 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks:
Aren't you raising plenty of theological questions? Do you think we have room to discuss so much detail here? But I shall try to answer your questions.
Comments too short to explain well. Have you any idea how fast the "excess" of births over deaths mounts? World pop grows by around 211,000 people/day. Wars don't begin to keep up
Either we curb birthrates or find more places for more families. Most people prefer the latter. So build more cities, suburbs, villages, highrises
pronatalist 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks:
Why wouldn't "compassion for the natural world," include humans reproducing naturally? Humans aren't part of nature? Who then has made this decree, that we can't even be counted as animals in nature? We are both a part of nature, and transcend nature, because God created people in his image. Earth is not our final home.
How about compassion for children? Your homework: Find some pro-life writings and read them.
Somebody lent GATTAGA to me, then I later bought it. And iRobot
pronatalist 2 years ago
The fact that I'm not arguing on the contarary to this clearly shows you are missing my points. As a person from a non-religious perspective I value nature and the role it's played in man's evolution. It seems to me that religious people are trying to wipe out the evidence by wiping out all species. So where are we going to find the land for the extra people to live on and land for agriculture production to sustain them?
Northerncheeks 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks
If the people rather like having "too many" babies, then all those babies can live in those people's homes, for a while. That seems fair enough. Why do you want to pile cruel penalties upon the most loving and responsible parents, beyond what God or nature would require? Are you deceived or a Nazi sadist?
A spacious world is naturally an outdated quaint concept. The here-and-now and future appears to be POPULOUS, so we should embrace what must be and ADAPT
Bigger/more cities
pronatalist 2 years ago
We all know the Nazis weren't irreligious. Hitler, Mussolini and Franco were all Christians and manipulated their respective national churches for their own political causes. Don't open up a can of worms here!
Northerncheeks 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks:
Of course, the more natural methods of self-control, aren't thought to work all that well. Oh they work, but so many people seem to naturally opt for the easy TRADITIONALLY VERY LARGE families, when faced with such simple options. They are more in tune with nature, their natural reproductive urges, and God's commandment to MULTIPLY. Globalist power freaks aren't happy about that, because they are denied the power over the masses.
Natural methods don't fund abortion interests
pronatalist 2 years ago
Yes, them bogeymen from 'Globalist power' are out to get you. Paranoid or what?
Northerncheeks 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks:
Who's out to wipe out all species? Why are you such a nature worshipper, and yet don't want to worship the Creator of nature, the God of Abraham? The God who created Adam and Eve?
I have no desire to get rid of all the birds, squirrels, rabbits. I can't even catch them, and they don't mind me living near them. But I wouldn't hesitate to cut down some trees to expand my home, if "too many" children being born, requires more living space. Who'd notice a few less squirrels?
pronatalist 2 years ago
Adam and Eve, did they go on to sleep with their childen to populate the world? or did their children sleep with each other to populate the world? Very perverse idea!
Northerncheeks 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks:
Why do people get so tripped up on "Who did Adam and Eve's children marry?" Logic would tell you, they likely married each other. But it wasn't incest back then, for there was nobody else to marry, and the genetic lines were much more pure, closer to the orginal, than they are now. Now our genetic lines are so corrupted, that we are supposed to marry outside our families, to help minimize similar genetic weaknesses.
In many of the United States, it's legal to marry a cousin.
pronatalist 2 years ago
'In many of the United States, it's legal to marry a cousin'. That explains alot!
Northerncheeks 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks:
Also, in many of the United States, it's legal to marry as young as 13.
Does that mean we all marry our cousins, or get married and start having babies as soon as puberty? Of course not. Thomas Jefferson said gov governs best which governs least.
The point is, that marriage of a cousin, is possibly sufficiently genetically dissimilar still, to not be branded, legally at least, as "incest."
I imagine it's possible for a person to be in love with a cousin and to want to mate
pronatalist 2 years ago
Your talking about Laissez Faire, the concept is not Thomas Jeffersons, the world was already familiar with it.
Like I said, the problem of modern america can be pinned down to all the past and present inbreeding. Anything for the sake of breeding hey!
Northerncheeks 2 years ago
To Notherncheeks:
I'm not so sure I'm talking Laissez Faire, as neutrality doesn't work so well in today's politically charged world. I like to make a decisive viewpoint. But yeah, much of what I say could sound Libertarian, meaning that much shouldn't be decided by government, but by the people themselves. If the people prefer to breed naturally "out of control," then that's their rightful decision not to be disrespected or second-guessed
I urge pop growth, not just to let it happen naturally
pronatalist 2 years ago
The industrial revolution (which began in Britain) wasn't a smooth process, it involved great social upheavals. Regarless, it was exactly due to the opening up of lands in other parts of the world and the wealth that this generated which pricipitated this advancement. We can not afford to do this agian as there is no more territory. Once we have bred like parasites and occupied all available space, don't you thing the natural world will come under pressure?
Northerncheeks 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks:
Then let the natural world come under rising human pop "pressure." Nature is resilient, and can much more easily bear the rising human pop "pressure," than people can be expected to struggle against their natural reproductive urges, or with contrary-to-nature unnatural shoddy Big Pharma contraceptive potions and poisons. If you like nature, why not respect the body's natural reproductive rhythms and welcome babies to come forth?
People can in fact overspread more land,denser
pronatalist 2 years ago
I'm not concerned about the planet, as mentioned previously, I don't doubt the Planets ability to recover and thrive following the excesses of human nature. I'm more concerned about the survival of humans if we carry on the way we're going!
Northerncheeks 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks:
Gov and secular edu is so confusing people.
Uncontrolled human fertility is quite sustainable long into the forseeable future.
Examples of unsustainability:
Runaway gov debt and spending.
Building more and more McMansions for semi-rich people, while not building any more coal or nuclear power plants to power growing pops and cities.
Piling on ever more college degrees while overtaxing and overregulating economies so that few jobs are created.
Letting liberal retards rule.
pronatalist 2 years ago
'Liberal retards'. If it was up to the religious freaks, we'd all be living the back in the Dark Ages (the golden period of religion).
You are enjoying the fruits of the labour of the liberals. Without it, there would have been no renaissaince of the Classical times. Religions has for too long limited the human ability and enslaved the human mind. You cling to religion because you are weak!
Northerncheeks 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks:
Religious freaks? Do you really want to get me started on the NWO religious freaks? Already, we have a Senate in the U.S., determined to ignore the will of the people, and pass their socialist ObamaRationCare gov monopolization of medical care. They want to bankrupt the country, because it's THEIR PAGAN RELIGION to cause all that marxist mess. Just to punish the successful and spread the misery around
When the Rapture comes, you shall get your wish to be free of us. DISASTER
pronatalist 2 years ago
The 'Rupture'? call yourseld rational?
If prostitution is the oldest trade and money-lending is the third, then prophets of doom has got to be the second oldest profession. You're peddling nothing new here, it's old had! Done much more eloquently and dramatically before. Infact, it's it like flogging (selling) a dead horse.
Northerncheeks 2 years ago
To Notherncheeks
Huh? So now you agree with me partially, in criticizing the prophets of doom? They cry the sky is about to fall, like some scared Chicken Little, for attention or because bad news sells?
I said the Rapture. Did you misspell it on purpose for some reason that I missed? Yes, I believe the Rapture, or the removal of "Jesus' bride," the Church, is to happen soon. A careful reading of Bible leads many Christians to expect that, especially considering how fast libs ruining the world
pronatalist 2 years ago
The benefit of not being a slave to religion is not having to defend stupidity.
When the 'rapture' come, will Jesus also take Christians. Let me ask you some questions and see if you can answer without skirting round it.
Jesus was born into a Jewish household and he observed Jewish Law. Tell me now, did Jesus ever partake from the flesh of the swine? You know, that unclear meat of the pig which God forbade his people to touch, which flows through your own body? Are you pure or impure?
Northerncheeks 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks:
What does this have to do with anything? Just something you are curious about? I am Christian, not a Jew. Now there are Messianic Jews, or Jews who have accepted Jesus as their Lord and Savior, who don't give up their Jewishness. Neither are we in Old Testament times.
I don't see what would hold me to not eat the "impure" meats? Didn't Jesus say something about that it wasn't what a person eats that makes them impure, but the words that come out of their mouth that could?
pronatalist 2 years ago
If you want to be patronising, here's some homework for you. Read about the policy inspired by the Christian Reich ( 'Right') and Heathengelicals ( 'Evengelicals') and adopted by Bush on committing poor nations in Africa to promote abstinence as a form of HIV/AIDS prevention, rather then condoms. Countries which didn't promote abstinence didn't receive development aid (conditionality). What was that you said about sex being natural tendency? Why seek to prevent the act and not outcome?
Northerncheeks 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks:
I agree with abstinence rather than condom mania religion. Why? Because it keeps the power in the hands of the common people. They are still free to "overbreed" as they may wish, due to inevitability or that "sex being natural tendency" thing you mentioned. People not being pushed to use shoddy Big Pharma contraception, are UNDERSTANDABLY going to be prone for many to go on having TRADITIONALLY VERY LARGE families.
Further, I object to tax money going to BILLIONS of condoms.
pronatalist 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks:
You do know that abstinence, isn't really advocating for less sex? What it says is no sex outside of marriage, and the use of the more natural AND FREE methods, rather than reliance upon shoddy costly artificial methods of fertility control. The poor, and the people of the past, long had some control over family size. They had the FREE natural self-control, if they thought their homes was just too filled up with children, of no sex, less sex, rhythm, or early withdrawal.
pronatalist 2 years ago
And let people die slowly and painfully from AIDS. Creating orphans and letting these societies continue in their cycle of povery. Where is your compassion. Are you sure it's a god you worship and not the devil?
Northerncheeks 2 years ago
To Notherncheeks:
We have compassion and kindness towards the people, and think their babies are precious and cute.
Who's trying to spread AIDS or make more orphans, but the wicked peddlers of shoddy unsafe condoms that promote false security for promiscuous reckless sex?
Did you know many poor people areas reject contraceptives, still associating them with "dirty sex," such as prostitution? If one was only having sex with their spouse, what for should they need some unnatural awkward condom?
pronatalist 2 years ago
Today your Lord God hath spoken and hath commanded you not to beget another child until you obtain warrant from the high priest of the temple.
There, that should settle that one.
No more bambinos for you!
Northerncheeks 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks:
Now you are talking in circles. I already answered that one.
And BTW, have you noticed that most religions and priests seem to encourage LARGE families?
My pastor is pro-life and would welcome naturally large families.
Bambinos is Spanish for babies. The Hispanics seem to reproduce even faster than we do. So how will you convince anybody to deny the natural flow of human life?
Pagans criticize the Church for trying to pack their pews or coffers by encouraging big families
pronatalist 2 years ago
I don't think you've addressed any of my concerns, you've just used this as an opportunity to put across your points. I find that this is the extent of reasoning by religious people.
So all religious people promote large families, that not a surprising, given that they seek to increase their congregations. Having babies shouldn't be a competition.
We can discourage people from having too many babies my issuing a licence to breed!
Northerncheeks 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks:
Your issuing of a license to breed, is little better than Nazi eugenics, already discredited by Adolf Hitler. Why do you want to make "criminals" out of honest, hard-working parents? Surely you know for practical, religious, or powerful reproductive urges, reasons, they simply can't all stop reproducing, license or no license. Faraway evil politicians issuing such licenses to the rich people, as a means of "revenue enhancement," are not a proper basis to allow God's blessings
pronatalist 2 years ago
BTW, I'm not a pagan, I'm an athiest...there is a difference!
Northerncheeks 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks:
So what exactly is the difference? PAGAN stands for People Against Goodness And Normalcy, according to the movie Dragnet. Sounds like an OK definition to me. Atheist means somebody who rebels against belief or faith in God. Almost the same?
Religious people don't just want to fill pews and Church coffers. What a false straw man argument. People of faith see value in each and every person, created in the image of God, so logically, more people must be more valuable souls!
pronatalist 2 years ago
You're obviously in convenient denial about all the various religions and denominations competing for 'flock'.
Let me tell you the future, it will be through education that human population will reached a balance and religion and superstition will be no more! We know what happens when countries develop, religion is reduced to the background. Background noise is all you're making here. Your religion is irrelevant in this argument which is ultimately a scientific argument. Why fear science?
Northerncheeks 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks:
It's not just about "competing for flock." There's altruistic reasons to prefer the natural ENLARGEMENT of human pops, even of groups or countries outside one's own. Notice how I advocate pop expansion in countries outside my own. How does that expand my flock?
An article I read spoke of pop competition, or fear that other groups will outreproduce your own, and thus take over the political power.
You claim to push "science," but actually religion and propaganda. Tell truth.
pronatalist 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks:
I suggest you watch the movie, GATTAGA. I recently rewatched it with a family member. There's a very important lesson in this movie. It's set sometime in the future, when at least among the most "successful" wealthy people in the developed countries, most babies are genetically modified or "enhanced." But from what we see, there is little different other than the institutionalized rampant job-discrimination. I was impressed with the term, "faith babies." I like FAITH babies.
pronatalist 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks:
Even nature tells us that humans reproducing is as natural as eating or breathing.
They say you can't stop people from having sex. Sex makes babies!
Study the evil history of "birth control," and you would come to understand my pro-life, pro-population position better. Many religious people object to "artificial" methods of "birth control." Yeah, there's side effects! The world balks at more natural methods as rhythm, requiring too much self-control. So NO METHOD method!
pronatalist 2 years ago
Have sex, enjoy sex, it doesn't make you a pervert for having sex for it's own sake and for taking pleasure in it. It doesn't mean a baby is the end result. of your sexual experience, trust me, alot of priests are testament to that! This is the advancement of sexual exploration, the evolution of human pleasure!
Northerncheeks 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks:
Isn't it selfish to plant the human seed, and hope it doesn't grow? Wouldn't the children to come, be glad to let it grow as God would allow?
The movie had one meaning of FAITH babies, meaning a child conceived "by chance," natural meeting of sperm and egg, without "scientific" enhancement for sex-selection or better math or music ability or longer lifespan. I have another. I think quite many people naturally breed "out of control" by faith, and that's as it should be.
pronatalist 2 years ago
If the sperm doesn't meet the egg, what difference does it make?
Stop taking about a movie I've never seen and I god i don't believe in (and never seen!)
Northerncheeks 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks:
You are interfering with the proper order of things, if you take active measures to hinder sperm and egg meeting. It's a good thing you came to life, isn't it?
What happened to respect for one's body and it's natural rhythms? Do you sleep at night or when tired? Do you eat when hungry? So why no respect for the body's natural reproductive rhythms, so as to hinder and poison the body's natural reproductive function?
Go buy the GATTAGA DVD, then you can see it.
God sees you.
pronatalist 2 years ago
'interfering with the proper order of things', that what they said when the spinning Jenny was invented. This gave rise to the Luddites, people that went around breaking machinery as they saw it as ungodly and the natural order of things.
Seems you fear progress and the next stage of human evolution. I know we should be careful but no need to be a luddite about it!
Northerncheeks 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks:
New World Order is a secular rule under Anti-Christ, that can't possibly work for long without DISASTER for the masses. Any wonder NWO is so vehemently opposed, even searching for conspiracy video on YouTube. And yet isn't the decline of religion and superstition of which you speak, part of this popular delusion?
Green nazi luddites are communists, eugenicists who refuse to allow for accommodation of naturally-growing, very UNDERSTANDABLE expansion of human world pop size.
pronatalist 2 years ago
Is you use of DISASTER and UNDERSTANDABLE also acronyms like your use of PAGAN?
Northerncheeks 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks:
Good question, but no, they aren't acronyms. If they were, I would also want to know what they stand for.
When I capitalize UNDERSTANDABLE, what I mean is simply to BOLDFACE the word for emphasis, but boldface stylization isn't available. I wish to emphasize UNDERSTANDABLE, because I can UNDERSTAND why world pop is or has grown so much, and I APPROVE of most all the reasons that could be cited for people having had or continuing to have so many children.
Let babies PUSH OUT
pronatalist 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks:
I am very much for computers and machines, but I don't like eugenics experimental "technologies" designed to oppose humanity by stemming the rising tide of the naturally-growing human pop. That's an attack against traditional family, faith, self-determination, self-responsibility, children, religion, etc.
Humans are exceeding number of acres in some countries. Growing too close together and too dense to live comfortably/safely without flush toilets, clean cookstoves, etc.
pronatalist 2 years ago
Religion should be about your personal belief, not state sactioned. You have a personal choice in a secular democracy. If you object to 'Artificial methods' you can refrain from them but don't stop the progress and freedom for the rest of us. If it wasn't for the Classical Renaissance, we've all be living under the church's dark ages in ignorance and coercion!
Northerncheeks 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks:
Sorry for typo. I meant, to me FAITH babies means letting babies push out without use of any means of "birth control," by faith. Let God decide family size. More natural and relaxed sex, counting any children that result as precious blessings from God
Why have you so little understanding? I am defending YOUR freedom. I said you need not have any "permission" from gov, to enjoy having "however many" or "all the children God gives." Gov has no authority to ban NO METHOD method
pronatalist 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks:
However, exporting "surplus" pop can't be the only answer. I also agree with radio talk show host, Michael Savage in his emphasis of borders, language, culture. Productive immigrants should be welcome, however, there are anti-immigrant interests, and I don't think immigrants should be cheap votes to buy off for socialist Marxist DemocRATS, nor to load up the gov welfare rolls.
As India's pop swells, many don't want to leave. So all countries should populate denser and denser
pronatalist 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks:
We don't need to struggle over land for rising pops, for not only may growing pops sometimes "overspill" in other nearby regions that could hold more people, or sometimes emigrate to other countries, consider how might humans alter the entire planet to hold lots more people, so their can be place for everybody's progeny?
Isn't it obvious? Expect all countries to populate themselves denser and denser with people, especially via their own natural increase - their very own kids
pronatalist 2 years ago
I propose we give out licenses for having babies. You should be means tested if you want to reproduce. Reproducing is not a basic human right any more than having a choice of being born!
Planet Earth will recover and survive regardless of the wanton destruction that is human nature.
Northerncheeks 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks:
Why do you oppose freedom? Haven't you given any thought to the impossible logistics of requiring some "license" to birth babies? We already have one, a marriage license, however, marriages/weddings are supposed to be done by the Church, not the state. It's none of the state's business, other than maybe record's keeping.
5 babies are born per second. The natural proper outlet for our powerful reproductive urges is REPRODUCTION. Babies are going to happen! So welcome them!
pronatalist 2 years ago
Define freedom. So arrogant to assume that human freedom should come above the freedom of all other life species. The more I discuss this issue the more anti-human I'm becoming!
Northerncheeks 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks:
With freedom comes personal responsibility, otherwise, how can freedom last long, when rampant problems of abuses are not properly dealt with? Who defines morality? How about the creator God who created us? Get married first, welcome the natural flow of human life, take responsibility for any children that result. People already have enough difficulty with these basics, without adding cruel unjustified pop quotas.
Human pops have been growing all through history. Not new.
pronatalist 2 years ago
Lo and behold my people, today I decree unto thee a new commandment, one that you will set most high above all other laws I sent to you my followers. From this day hence, you will not beget another child without obtaining a warrant. Observe my decree, for the lord your God has spoken.
Northerncheeks 2 years ago
To Northerncheeks:
Oh, so now you think you are funny, putting words in God's mouth. But you can't fool me so easily, for I have read my Bible from cover to cover, several times.
I have done an informal survey among coworkers and friends, and everybody said God's commandment to people to Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth, still applies. My sister said it has not been rescinded. I do such "polls" occasionally for curiosity or discussion starters.
Requirement is marriage commitment.
pronatalist 2 years ago
P.S If the US administration is given the task of handling the Indian govt functioning, they wouldnt know what to do and where to turn. Inspite of 400YEARS of colonial oppression and just 20 years of economc reforms, India has faced all odds and challenges and has been pulling 10MILLION ppl out of poverty every year.
kedharf1 2 years ago
Absolute crap. India has turned its growing population to its advantage. And while you guys are sitting around being idiotic, your jobs are going to well educated and deserving Indians. Grow up! America has a lot learn from India ( and its vice versa). There needs to be mutual respect.
kedharf1 2 years ago
To kedharf1:
Of course a huge growing population can be turned to great advantage, especially under correct Christian worldview that emphasizes the great and sacred value of each and every human life, that we are all created in God's image
It should be no shame for a country such as India to enjoy a HUGE population. We also feel/enjoy powerful reproductive urges, so we should UNDERSTAND and respect. People can still enjoy traditional very large families by spreading huge cities, growing denser
pronatalist 2 years ago
BLOWJOBS!
onlocash 2 years ago
here are some of the modern inventions by indians: YOUTUBE (jawed karim), HOTMAIL (sabeer bhatia), USB/AGP/PCI EXPRESS (ajay bhatt), Bose Audio systems (Amar Bose), Sun Microsystems (Vinod Khosla), Pentium (Vinod Dham), HDTV (Arun Netravali), Compact Flash/ SANDISK (Sanjay Mehrotra)...Indians are freaking smart!...
its just that india doesn't give any fucking opportunities to these smart indians so they come overseas.
lavakava 2 years ago
i saw a black dude in one of those scenes...well brother, you come from a race that is the world's oldest (1st humans on earth), so you should be proud of your culture instead of laughing with the whities...because behind your back, the whities will be saying n-word...i know this because i have had many white folks come and tell me how much they hate 'niggers'...
lavakava 2 years ago
most americans (thanks to the education system) don't know indian mathematicians like brahmaputra, aryabhatta, bhaskara...inventors of arithmetic, mathematics, etc. or the kerala mathematicians who actually invented trigonometry that the greeks plagiarized and? called their own....
just imagine without the BRAHMIC NUMBER SYSTEM (sometimes inaccurately called 'arabic numerals'), or place value, decimal, zero, etc...without math, where will be all the inventions including computers?
lavakava 2 years ago
india's inventions (arithmetic, trigonometry, precursor to calculus, geometry) etc are all overshadowed by the horrible state of affairs today.
the greeks copied a lot of stuff from india, yet the west thinks that the greeks did all the inventions (eg: algebra is persian "al-jabr'wa" written by musa-al-khawarizmi...and musa learned from india, but the americans think 'algebra' is greek...lol!)
lavakava 2 years ago
lol...since i am indian, now i should make a video on how american females are all slutty skimpy-outfit wearing easy whores, and how american men are all racial supremacists always smoking weed and getting drunk.
nude cheerleaders, largest porno industry, high teenage pregnancies and divorce rates, extramarital affairs (like ashley madison), junk food anyone? welcome to AMERIKKKA!
lavakava 2 years ago
The people who made this need to have their parents see how their farting away the money that they spent to send them to college. Yeah... real funny. What's funnier is seeing if any of you barking spiders can actually graduate and get a job that pays over 24K a year.
JeevesReturns 2 years ago
iam from india , you guys are MORONS, but so funny ,but iam still going to blast you with my american shot gun you fucking retards
zakaslam1 2 years ago
Ahh... In 2050 there willl be up to 11 billion people on the planet (6 billion today). Most educated people and teachers I have talkt to about this say, if teh population will rise so high, nature will probably take care of it. I think it would actually be better if like 99% of people died of becous of some desease. It would eb better for the environment, nature, - even the economy and the remaining 1% would be alot more happyer living in a healthyer environment, then an owercrownded shithole
105km 2 years ago 2
To 105km:
And why should nature "take care of it?" Unless you mean that nature will be eager for humans to grow to so many? 11 billion can easily fit onto the planet, by 250, or do you really think there won't be any technology progress over 4 decades?
Large families should be encouraged worldwide, so that far more people may experence life. Contraceptives go against nature. We should advocate the simple elegance of the natural flow of life, be kind, generous, welcome all the kids coming alive
pronatalist 2 years ago
um... no...
10 000 years ago there were 10 million humans world-wide. That was sustainable.
In 1950 there were 2.5 billion
now, there are 6 billion
10 000 years is far less then a blink of an eye in the Earths history!
So dont say nature had allowed us to grow to so many. Its just happaned so fast, nature hasnt yet reacted.
But there already have been some mojor deseases, like the 14th century plague, that killed like 1/3 of Europe
Eventualy, something will emerge, I am sure of it...
105km 2 years ago
To 105km:
Look at it from a God-created worldview, and not that of the pagan atheists, to help you to see more clearly. Often, many of the self-appointed ex-spurts are WRONG, heaping their "educated beyond their intelligence" fantasies one upon another.
When God created Adam & Eve, and commanded people to multiply, that was God's idea to have EXPONENTIAL expansion of the human race, as descendents also inherit the ability and reproductive drive to multiply
It means we're doing something right
pronatalist 2 years ago
as I sayed, its happaned in the blink of an eye... 10 000 years is nothing...
look, religion aside, most scientists agree, we, and the planet, would be much better off witch 500 000 -1 million humans... Look at what were doing to the environment, were killion off animals, making spiecies extinct, becous we need space to live, cuting down the rainforest, destroying the ozon layer, polluting the earth witch our endles tons of garbage, polluting the atmosphere. Were just fucking up this planet
105km 2 years ago
To 105km:
Humans enhance the environment. What does nature matter, without people to see and enjoy it?
Cities only occupy but 2 or 3% of the land. It could be more. Just because we need space to live, is no reason everybody can't let their families grow naturally, quite possibly very large. Urbanize the planet to whatever extent needed. Let cities and towns grow larger and closer together, whatever so we can find or make place for all our progeny.
If planet smells of people, dogs don't care.
pronatalist 2 years ago
To 105km:
Don't believe lies of enviro-nazis. Cap and Trade goes hand in hand with slapping a "carbon tax" upon our precious darling babies. Even though there's no assurance they will grow up and still be driving gasoline cars.
I must oppose Captain Planet junk-science nonsense to take pollution "down to zero." That's just not possible with today's "huge" population size, and still so much incomplete technologies. Moderate, temporarily rising pollution may still be necessary. Trash is trivial.
pronatalist 2 years ago
To 105km:
I disagree with the rampant contraceptive pushers. My Bible says to be married and provide for my children. Says nothing to keep natural human fertility "under control." Says children are a blessing from God, even urges large families, and having children from parents married young. Psalm 127.
1 million humans excludes most people alive today. No incentive for us. More billions is huge number of additional human lives to be enjoyed.
Each and every human life is valuable and sacred.
pronatalist 2 years ago
To 105km:
Yes, I do think you are partially right. Nature is already reacting. It's absurd to suggest that nature hasn't yet reacted. What? Is nature asleep? Human population has been so "huge" for decades. In 1987, world population was said to be 5 billion. That's nearly as "huge" as today's 6.8 billion
Nature is reacting, by yielding to humanity, letting us take over more and more. Because God gave dominion over nature and other creatures TO MAN. Nature is egging us on, let baby booms spread
pronatalist 2 years ago
as I sayed, its happaned in the blink of an eye... 10 000 years is nothing...
look, religion aside, most scientists agree, we, and the planet, would be much better off witch 500 000 -1 million humans... Look at what were doing to the environment, were killion off animals, making spiecies extinct, becous we need space to live, cuting down the rainforest, destroying the ozon layer, polluting the earth witch our endles tons of garbage, polluting the atmosphere. Were just fucking up this planet
105km 2 years ago
To 105km:
In the blink of an eye is fine. According to the Utilitarian Principle, often the best thing to do is that which most benefits the most people. I am not alone to notice that population growth benefits more people, as some website made this connection as well. Therefore, "ideal"-sized population would be "nearly as large as possible." This means shun "birth control" even as "huge" dense populations naturally "explode." Overflowing landfills, surging supercities, whatever to ENLARGE #s.
pronatalist 2 years ago
To 105km
Am I supposed to feel "environmental guilt," to have a naturally large family, because there's so many of us alive already? Why can't I reproduce naturally, when I like some "natural" in areas that benefit humans?
There's so many ways to find/make more space to live. Huge cities steadily growing huger. Growing more dense. Small children sometimes sharing a bed. Apartment complexes and highrises
Of course huge numbers are fucking. Libs seem to prefer more sex? Be generous, spread life
pronatalist 2 years ago
To 105km:
Even living in the huge city, doesn't stop humans from being able to naturally reproduce. People can enjoy having their "traditionally very large" families, in the spacious countryside, or as the land fills with people, in the huge growing cities.
More and more people would be glad to live, babies want to be welcome to come to life, even if in overcrowded conditions. I believe in keeping the door to life open, respecting the body's natural reproductive rhythms, even "baby after baby"
pronatalist 2 years ago
ok, I have do doubt you are a stupid religious fanatic...
The bible also sayes you should give 1/3 of your income to god (the curch). The bible also sayes you are forbidden to shave your beard, you cant eat pigs etc
And dont fuckng read the 1st testament like it is. Its in a figurative sense. Or are you to dumb to understand it?
Judging from your statements you are indeed dumb
I do believe in god, but im glad we live in an age where people listen to scientists, not idiots like you
105km 2 years ago
To 105km:
Oh, so I'm stupid? Well I'm smarter than you, as I have diligently studied the options, found easily that letting pop grow is most win-win for the most people. Since I am smarter than you, what does that make you?
Where do you come up with 1/3? Isn't the tithe the 10th? And a few verses say give as you feel led to give. God loves a cheerful giver. Could that be less or more?
Yes, shaving my beard is UNNATURAL, so I asked my Dad, Why do we shave? To keep food out of beard. Okay-works
pronatalist 2 years ago
oh so you support ''opening the door to life''
Well, think - if we let the population grow so high, we use up all the Earths resources, food, water etc, at some point we will all die out. And it will be wery soon
I would say, if we continue like this it will happane in 200 - 300 years
but, if you have a population of like 1 million, it would last for thousends of years
So - where would there be more lives?
In the smaller population, witch would last ALOT longer
105km 2 years ago
so, by breeding like crazy now, we are closing the doors for all the life that could live and die in the future
Do you understand?
A population that is big and grows fast, destroys itself and closes the door for all the life that could live and die in the future.
(witch is alot more, given the time, then the biger, faster groing population, that would die out)
105km 2 years ago
To 105km:
Breeding more naturally now, doesn't close doors, it keeps doors open, and helps alter nature to hold lots more people.
Commie chairman Mao Tse Tung was it?, said a large and growing population would make China strong. Maybe, maybe not. But at least it would allow all the more people to experience life.
I am a contrarian thinker, and I deliberately consider angles average morons miss. You don't turn on and off pop, like a light switch, China.
Want more people? Huge pop * long time.
pronatalist 2 years ago
To 105km:
Martin Luther said that hindering the natural procreation would lead to all sort of sexual sins. Sorry, his quote won't fit here. He said that God created us and not only commanded us to multiply, but created us such that we HAVE TO multiply. He likened it to other necessary body functions.
Contraceptives have side-effects, "natural" rhythm requires huge willpower. Best option is "no method" method, which some now think = "breeding like rabbits," but that's what our ancestors did.
pronatalist 2 years ago
To 105km:
A society that is more fond of life, and welcomes babies, is more friendly to everybody, so why couldn't they last longer, no matter that the pop level has grown so high?
Much of the group think "environmentalism" is based on "fixed pie" deception. If there be more people, everybody gets a smaller slice? But economies work more like candles than fixed pies. When jobs are created, everybody can have more, without anybody having less. Candles can light other candles, without losing.
pronatalist 2 years ago
If you have a population of 9 billion (and growing) that uses its resources in 300 years
and a steady 1 billion population that would last for 10 thousend years
Were would there be more life?
In the smaller population! Becous it has more time!
So you are supporting the closing of doors to even more life!
Do you understand or are you too dumb?
105km 2 years ago
To 105km:
I am familiary with that calculation, so I shall now tell you why it's totally incorrect. There's many factors you aren't adequately considering. If you want the "maximum human population over the long run," then you had best get everybody born before the next killer comet or runaway star comes, if ever. We may not have as much time left as we think.
The Bible says we don't have much time left before the Endtimes.
A smaller pop may more easily vanish.
What's in it for my MANY kids?
pronatalist 2 years ago
ahahaha
Before the next killer comet...
How long were we cavemen? Homo Sapiens has existed for 200 000 years + with a wery small population and we havent vanished!
So - that proves - no, a smaller dosent mean a bigger chance to vanish...
why is that? Stupid old church woman? Becous we were in harmony with the environment... If there were 6 billion humans from the wery start - do you think we would still be here? No - we would have fucked up the planet, like were doing now.Scientists agree!
105km 2 years ago
Whats in it for your children? I dont care about your children (who are probably as retarded as you)... neuter them!
But you know - thats the main reason your supporting this... You have made many children, thats why you cant admit its wrong... If you didnt have children you would have a different opinion
Goodbye
105km 2 years ago
To 105km:
How can you be so insensitive? You dare to insult my children, whom I haven't even had yet? What do you know of them? You think having "too many" children clouds my judgement? Okay, how many children do you have? Let's put our "biases" onto the table then? Explain to me about the "bias" of Al Gore, having the gall to have 4 children himself, and then tell us there's "too many" people in the world. To me that's either class warfare, hypocrisy, or both
I welcome "however many" children
pronatalist 2 years ago
To 105km:
You sound young and immature. Do you mind if I ask you how old you are? No birthday, just basic number or age group. Are you a high school student? You sound like you are parroting to me what some leftist teacher told you?
I would like to hear something of what YOU believe/think.
pronatalist 2 years ago
To 105km:
You sound ... believe/think.
(continued) - posting error
I think you said "Scientists agree!" twice now. Do you not know, that not all scientists agree? What do you want? A recommended reading list? Even google can show you that not all agree. If you aren't lazy?
pronatalist 2 years ago
To 105km:
HEY STUPID LIB-TARD. ... then all the comments disappeared.
(continued) - server posting error
Are you always so incompentent? And what's this stuff on your channel about Lion of Judah? Are you trying to pass yourself off as some Christian, and acting like a pagan? Ever hear of freedom of speech? Are you so insecure to debate me, that you just sabotage, thus admitting I am right?
pronatalist 2 years ago
To 105km:
Probably not long. Adam & Eve didn't live in caves, did they? Just some groups who had handy caves and didn't want to build themselves homes.
We couldn't all live "naturally" in caves anyway anymore. There's now way too many of us, to reasonably fit into the caves, all at the same time.
The world has been around for around 6000 years.
A small pop is precarious. A larger pop has more people who can solve problems and share solutions.
God started with just 2 people for a reason?
pronatalist 2 years ago
To 105km:
Explain to me, not about you, but about people like you, what happened to merely talk about people ought to have fewer children on average, but it's probably our "choice?" What happened to that? Where are you getting this tyrannical fascism? To dare dictate to me some restriction on how many children I should have? Is it just a common liberal mental disorder that's going around like the Obama Flu?
If we started with 6 billion, either God would have made us sterile, or quadrillions?
pronatalist 2 years ago