Eventually,overpopulation is not a myth,but an eventual result.
The crisis humans do to themselves-is abusing what they got,even if there is no over-population,the waste of resources gives the illusion that the number of people is beyond what it is,because each person consumes VAST amounts of what nature has,and they tend not to give anything back.
The food production is left to corporations that abuse their power endlessly,since their goal is profit alone.
@gadzometer Yeah,population will drop one way or another...It's a problem that solves itself eventually.
Yet indeed,the real problem is the Cause of consumption-and that is the real issue behind the idea of the "overpopulation"...And the issue with the overgrown consumption Everywhere on the planet,and the complete termination of resources in the name of idiotic needs,profit,and making things "easy" will end up that the resources won't fit the number of people alive-
@gadzometer So,time to rename the word "overpopulation",since I think that those who worry about overpopulation,actually think more to the point of lack of ability to provide for everybody that are already hear-due to overdone usage of what the planet has to offer...
We need to spread this,end debates upon "overpopulation myth",and start more real debates upon "Economy(which eventually is handling of resources) sucks badly,and people should really rethink how they manage their resources".
@assassinbbx Both sides of the discussion are valid mate. Good to see you listening. Reality is never one sided. I think we need to concentrate on solutions. :)
You seem like you are on drugs? Could I also politely point out that you live in Australia (not a criticism, just an observation) - which is not very heavily populated. If you went to Asia or America or Europe, you might change your mind on over population. People are eating food substitutes because they cannot afford the limited amount of things like fruit, vegetables and meats. There are no jobs for many people. The whole thing is a mess.
@SuperSpidey25 A bunch of PHD students just travelled to Europe to talk with a heap of Nobel Laureate's. They discussed overpopulation. The main problem is that people still think that the world is growing exponentially. Please have a look at the links in the description. My opinion counts for nothing, just look at the data. We should be focusing our efforts into rapidly decreasing resources and increasing energy consumption.
@SuperSpidey25 Though population is a factor, the rate of this increase is per person. Our economy is driven by growth which is based on consumption. The planet cannot sustain this.. the population will plateau at about 7-9billion if you interpolate the current trend. It is just pure numbers not opinion.
@Russebby lol.. nah mate.. I usually do them at 3 or 4 in the morning. When I am tired as. Or first thing when I get up.. and then I look a lot worse. :P
I think that this is all a result of a deeper evolution, not just for the sake of developing better hunting skills or dating skills :D
I think we are on a path to learn what is right and wrong, and to learn that we have to see the darkness and horror in the eyes, only then can we see its true color and result. Take Hitler and WW2 as an example.
I believe in the ability of everybody including me to change, and I think we will and must do so as we live.
I think that those who like to own things because its in their possession (or welding power for the sake of power in itself) would not like that everybody else shared the same amount. In a way, to rich people no sum is never enough, if everybody on earth owned a 1000 times more value than today it wouldn't make them happier because wealth is relative.
As it has always been, the human created problems on earth can be traced back to human greed.
@Nabo00o Maybe those people who are trying to accumulate wealth are trying to advance and currently wealth is the most popular way of doing that. It would be good if that was replaced with something like contribution to society.
Maybe I'm just too negative, but I don't think anything can replace that feeling for those who want it.
I mean, humans are different, some want to live life and learn and maybe even help others at their own cost, while others doesn't care too much for any other human but rather look for an opportunity in in every situation they have to expand upon their wealth and power.
I mean, this goes for most of our politicians and company leaders, and then they are also the ones in charge...
@Nabo00o And maybe I am too idealistic.. especially in the short term. We are deffinitely conditioned and are shaped a lot by society (could greed be part of our genetic makeup.. or is it just the need to excel?). There seems to be societies in the past that were not based on greed but they were very few and far between.
Oh I have so many thoughts on this : ) probably too many.
I myself believe what we call egoism and a lack of compassion is something we inherit from the animal kingdom.
For real animals there is no place for altruism or culture for that matter, either you fight everybody else or you die.
To us things have changed, but we are still possessed by the ancient trait of selfishness, but it is combined with our gigantic intelligence (compared to animals), and is magnified many ten times.
the real problem is overexploitation of the "civilised" world, the amoral corporate "free"-market rules
A living, chaotic system (like the world population) regulates itself very gently.. the problem would never appear if "civilised" people would'nt act and see as "consumers", manipulated and constrained like guinea pigs by and into the suicidal corporate, "free"-market system.
I diagree with you Mate...Even if we didn't waste as much, We cannot continue to increase our population at the current rate...It's not just food..Look at what we are doing to the Environment among other things...If we get to 8 or 9 or 10 billion..the standard of living for all of us will be much lower...food costs will be outrageous!! Yes, there is a population Crisis,,,,and it only gets worse as time goes by.
I believe both of them are actually impossible, because evolution goes forward, not backward, and you cannot control a force as powerful as parenthood. We have come a long way in our development, but we need to continue along the path which is illumination and true peace.
We need to look at the true source to why the world is as bad as it is, why so many are suffering. And we need to remove the dogma, just like in science.
But I think there is even more work needed here and you mentioned it. "Economic efficiency" and true efficiency is not always the same, and in fact it often seems like they are the opposite of each other. Wasting food because it increases profit is insane, and hindering the development and commercialization of newer energy technology to keep the old wheel turning is just as bad. I do think that much of our problems can be traced back to greed and ignorance.
Consumption and its effect on boidiversity and ecosystems is the threat. You may drop the fertility rate by progessing friom an underdeveloped to industial, developed country, but your net impact on the planet will still rise. The bottom line is that we are at a state of severe ecoologica overshoot. We can either lower our environmental impact (much simpler lifestyles) or decerease the population.
(IF) governments move beyond draconian thinking & stop pushing warlike agenda, the world through technological advancement could implement reforestation & sustainable farming, sustainable housing, we could see world population attain 20+ billion & still allow wilderness areas, it would take a quantum leap in our primitive fear & terrorist based instincts/lower natures. Governments by their nature cannot do this: i.e. the thesis which states 'power corrupts absolute power corrupts absolutely'
great point... i mean how do we know how much is too many people, whats the number? i know the earth isn't getting any bigger, and if human population continues to increase, eventually it could become a crisis. but what is the capacity of the earth though?
Hey , Gadzo...Here si soem relevant, to me, a video that points to one of the larger "problems" brought up in ussues like these...Also, if your interested in the human requirements and accurate(to me) dedepiction of human needs, check out "maslow;s hierarchy of human needs."
Hi, Andy. Thanks for the response. I dig how you can disagree with me with a smile. :-) Refreshing.
When I said "population crisis," I was really referring to something that's on the way rather than something that's here now, with an emphasis on fixing the problem while we're ahead.
I have one question for you, regarding your stance on human freedom being paramount: If I'm wrong, what should China have done instead?
@darrylsloan They first implemented the child restriction and then raised the conditions of living. I am sure that the restrictions on children contributed to the raised standard of living at the two go hand in hand. But in my opinion (for what it is worth mate) it would have been better to concentrate on the standard of living, and then they would not have needed to murder so many baby girls. Remember that many villages never knew the sex of their child until after birth.
@gadzometer Thanks for the encouragement, Andy. I always liked the quote "If you're not being controversial, you're being redundant." Can't remember who said that.
I do think in the future they'll look back and understand more fully that we just had a more inefficient system, poorly designed cities, etc. For a start if we just had high rise hydroponic farming (why the fuck not?) we'd open up the entire planet.
I studied for a while this having less kids with higher living thing, and it's completely true. It's a function of ecology, education, living standards, necessity, etc.
Eventually,overpopulation is not a myth,but an eventual result.
The crisis humans do to themselves-is abusing what they got,even if there is no over-population,the waste of resources gives the illusion that the number of people is beyond what it is,because each person consumes VAST amounts of what nature has,and they tend not to give anything back.
The food production is left to corporations that abuse their power endlessly,since their goal is profit alone.
myth or not,problem is still very real
Wharwulif 1 month ago
@Wharwulif I think you have missed my main point. Population will not keep increasing. It will eventually plateau. Have a look at the data.
The problem is that the planet cannot sustain us at our current rate of consumption.
gadzometer 1 month ago
@gadzometer Yeah,population will drop one way or another...It's a problem that solves itself eventually.
Yet indeed,the real problem is the Cause of consumption-and that is the real issue behind the idea of the "overpopulation"...And the issue with the overgrown consumption Everywhere on the planet,and the complete termination of resources in the name of idiotic needs,profit,and making things "easy" will end up that the resources won't fit the number of people alive-
Larger issue...what remains?
Wharwulif 1 month ago
@Wharwulif Yeah mate. I probably missed your point. :P
I agree with you. Even with a fixed population, people keep consuming more and we already consume more then the planet can regenerate.
gadzometer 1 month ago
@gadzometer So,time to rename the word "overpopulation",since I think that those who worry about overpopulation,actually think more to the point of lack of ability to provide for everybody that are already hear-due to overdone usage of what the planet has to offer...
We need to spread this,end debates upon "overpopulation myth",and start more real debates upon "Economy(which eventually is handling of resources) sucks badly,and people should really rethink how they manage their resources".
Wharwulif 1 month ago
Both of you are right, Darryl explaining one side of it, and you the other.
assassinbbx 1 month ago
@assassinbbx Both sides of the discussion are valid mate. Good to see you listening. Reality is never one sided. I think we need to concentrate on solutions. :)
gadzometer 1 month ago
You seem like you are on drugs? Could I also politely point out that you live in Australia (not a criticism, just an observation) - which is not very heavily populated. If you went to Asia or America or Europe, you might change your mind on over population. People are eating food substitutes because they cannot afford the limited amount of things like fruit, vegetables and meats. There are no jobs for many people. The whole thing is a mess.
SuperSpidey25 5 months ago
@SuperSpidey25 A bunch of PHD students just travelled to Europe to talk with a heap of Nobel Laureate's. They discussed overpopulation. The main problem is that people still think that the world is growing exponentially. Please have a look at the links in the description. My opinion counts for nothing, just look at the data. We should be focusing our efforts into rapidly decreasing resources and increasing energy consumption.
gadzometer 5 months ago
@gadzometer And no.. I have two companies, two kids and the only time I get to make these videos is late at night or very early morning. :(
gadzometer 5 months ago
@SuperSpidey25 Though population is a factor, the rate of this increase is per person. Our economy is driven by growth which is based on consumption. The planet cannot sustain this.. the population will plateau at about 7-9billion if you interpolate the current trend. It is just pure numbers not opinion.
gadzometer 5 months ago
@SuperSpidey25 Oh yeah and I agree that food is a major problem.
gadzometer 5 months ago
Do you do all your videos stoned?
Russebby 8 months ago
@Russebby lol.. nah mate.. I usually do them at 3 or 4 in the morning. When I am tired as. Or first thing when I get up.. and then I look a lot worse. :P
gadzometer 8 months ago
-continued
I think that this is all a result of a deeper evolution, not just for the sake of developing better hunting skills or dating skills :D
I think we are on a path to learn what is right and wrong, and to learn that we have to see the darkness and horror in the eyes, only then can we see its true color and result. Take Hitler and WW2 as an example.
I believe in the ability of everybody including me to change, and I think we will and must do so as we live.
Nabo00o 9 months ago
I don't think it is possible for us to overpopulate the planet, but it is possible to organize it in such a way that it 'appears' to be overpopulated.
Creation is not stupid, there are energies in place to make sure that the planet cannot be overwhelmed by it's inhabitants.
I absolutely agree. There are people who take too much and they are scared that they will no longer be able to do so.
The stupid thing is that they would be happier if they lived in a world where we share and create together
AlkPacino 10 months ago
@AlkPacino
I think that those who like to own things because its in their possession (or welding power for the sake of power in itself) would not like that everybody else shared the same amount. In a way, to rich people no sum is never enough, if everybody on earth owned a 1000 times more value than today it wouldn't make them happier because wealth is relative.
As it has always been, the human created problems on earth can be traced back to human greed.
The myth is there to pull attention away
Nabo00o 9 months ago
@Nabo00o Maybe those people who are trying to accumulate wealth are trying to advance and currently wealth is the most popular way of doing that. It would be good if that was replaced with something like contribution to society.
gadzometer 9 months ago
@gadzometer
Maybe I'm just too negative, but I don't think anything can replace that feeling for those who want it.
I mean, humans are different, some want to live life and learn and maybe even help others at their own cost, while others doesn't care too much for any other human but rather look for an opportunity in in every situation they have to expand upon their wealth and power.
I mean, this goes for most of our politicians and company leaders, and then they are also the ones in charge...
Nabo00o 9 months ago
@Nabo00o And maybe I am too idealistic.. especially in the short term. We are deffinitely conditioned and are shaped a lot by society (could greed be part of our genetic makeup.. or is it just the need to excel?). There seems to be societies in the past that were not based on greed but they were very few and far between.
gadzometer 9 months ago
@gadzometer
Oh I have so many thoughts on this : ) probably too many.
I myself believe what we call egoism and a lack of compassion is something we inherit from the animal kingdom.
For real animals there is no place for altruism or culture for that matter, either you fight everybody else or you die.
To us things have changed, but we are still possessed by the ancient trait of selfishness, but it is combined with our gigantic intelligence (compared to animals), and is magnified many ten times.
Nabo00o 9 months ago
the real problem is overexploitation of the "civilised" world, the amoral corporate "free"-market rules
A living, chaotic system (like the world population) regulates itself very gently.. the problem would never appear if "civilised" people would'nt act and see as "consumers", manipulated and constrained like guinea pigs by and into the suicidal corporate, "free"-market system.
aerobique 1 year ago
I diagree with you Mate...Even if we didn't waste as much, We cannot continue to increase our population at the current rate...It's not just food..Look at what we are doing to the Environment among other things...If we get to 8 or 9 or 10 billion..the standard of living for all of us will be much lower...food costs will be outrageous!! Yes, there is a population Crisis,,,,and it only gets worse as time goes by.
MyFirstConcert 1 year ago
To @crashishlarcoche
I do not agree that those are the only options.
I believe both of them are actually impossible, because evolution goes forward, not backward, and you cannot control a force as powerful as parenthood. We have come a long way in our development, but we need to continue along the path which is illumination and true peace.
We need to look at the true source to why the world is as bad as it is, why so many are suffering. And we need to remove the dogma, just like in science.
Nabo00o 1 year ago
I very much liked your video gadzo!
But I think there is even more work needed here and you mentioned it. "Economic efficiency" and true efficiency is not always the same, and in fact it often seems like they are the opposite of each other. Wasting food because it increases profit is insane, and hindering the development and commercialization of newer energy technology to keep the old wheel turning is just as bad. I do think that much of our problems can be traced back to greed and ignorance.
Nabo00o 1 year ago
Consumption and its effect on boidiversity and ecosystems is the threat. You may drop the fertility rate by progessing friom an underdeveloped to industial, developed country, but your net impact on the planet will still rise. The bottom line is that we are at a state of severe ecoologica overshoot. We can either lower our environmental impact (much simpler lifestyles) or decerease the population.
crashishlaroche 1 year ago
(IF) governments move beyond draconian thinking & stop pushing warlike agenda, the world through technological advancement could implement reforestation & sustainable farming, sustainable housing, we could see world population attain 20+ billion & still allow wilderness areas, it would take a quantum leap in our primitive fear & terrorist based instincts/lower natures. Governments by their nature cannot do this: i.e. the thesis which states 'power corrupts absolute power corrupts absolutely'
HeLpLOstGOdAny1 1 year ago
great point... i mean how do we know how much is too many people, whats the number? i know the earth isn't getting any bigger, and if human population continues to increase, eventually it could become a crisis. but what is the capacity of the earth though?
lijit77 1 year ago
Hey , Gadzo...Here si soem relevant, to me, a video that points to one of the larger "problems" brought up in ussues like these...Also, if your interested in the human requirements and accurate(to me) dedepiction of human needs, check out "maslow;s hierarchy of human needs."
There is a five level model most useful.
youtube.com/watch?v=4SIRg4XqH
Namaste
jcherpaw1 1 year ago
@jcherpaw1 Hi Mate, I couldn't use that link. :)
gadzometer 1 year ago
@gadzometer sorry Gadzo...Here is the link
watch?v=4SIRg4XqH
(the "youtube.com" prefix is simply truncated, if already on youtube)
Namaste
jcherpaw1 1 year ago
Hi, Andy. Thanks for the response. I dig how you can disagree with me with a smile. :-) Refreshing.
When I said "population crisis," I was really referring to something that's on the way rather than something that's here now, with an emphasis on fixing the problem while we're ahead.
I have one question for you, regarding your stance on human freedom being paramount: If I'm wrong, what should China have done instead?
darrylsloan 1 year ago
@darrylsloan They first implemented the child restriction and then raised the conditions of living. I am sure that the restrictions on children contributed to the raised standard of living at the two go hand in hand. But in my opinion (for what it is worth mate) it would have been better to concentrate on the standard of living, and then they would not have needed to murder so many baby girls. Remember that many villages never knew the sex of their child until after birth.
gadzometer 1 year ago
@darrylsloan And BTW, you know your a champion. If we agreed on everything then one of us would be redundant or we would be clones.
Australia is just a colony of Irish convicts after all. :P
gadzometer 1 year ago
@gadzometer Thanks for the encouragement, Andy. I always liked the quote "If you're not being controversial, you're being redundant." Can't remember who said that.
darrylsloan 1 year ago
Check this out if you haven't seen it.
watch?v=vZVOU5bfHrM
I do think in the future they'll look back and understand more fully that we just had a more inefficient system, poorly designed cities, etc. For a start if we just had high rise hydroponic farming (why the fuck not?) we'd open up the entire planet.
I studied for a while this having less kids with higher living thing, and it's completely true. It's a function of ecology, education, living standards, necessity, etc.
Neanderthalcouzin 1 year ago
@Neanderthalcouzin Hi Mate, Great video that you linked there.
gadzometer 1 year ago