OVERPOPULATION DOES NOT EXIST. WHAT EXIST IS THE RESOURCES OF THE WORLD IN THE HANDS OF A FEW.
WITH MODERN DAY TECHNOLOGY SUCH AS SKYSCRAPERS, VERTICAL FARMS, 3D PRINTING, THORIUM REACTORS, AUTOMATION AKA (TECHNOLOGICAL UNEMPLOYMENT) THERE IS NO REASON WHY THE PLANET EARTH COULD NOT SUSTAIN OUR CURRENT POPULATION (7 BILLION) OR MORE.
THE MASSES ARE UNEDUCATED. IT IS A FACT THAT MORE EDUCATED COUPLES HAVE LESS CHILDREN (2.1 OR AROUND 2 CHILDREN) IN THERE LIFETIMES.
We still have enough resources to feed and power the entire planet for thousands of years if we build up a better system, use all our efforts to educate people and take down the 1% greedy bastards that owns 50% of the planets wealth.
this doesnt make any sense or have any actual points other than your planet will fall (through a gravity-free void) and crash into "something at the bottom"? Also, aliens will watch (from the moon?) with fear... O.o" Nice.
Read the facts you idiots before you make bullshit videos like this. If a population doesn't replace itself it dies. The west is dieing all western countries have a BR of under 2 we are not replacing our selves. Think instead of being told what to think
That is not quite correct: If a population does not replace itself it shrinks. Europe's population is currently 733 million people, that is two million more than in 2005. If the Europeans would not voluntarily make space for immigrants, many people would die in other countries due to malnutrition, diseases and war. Their act of freely giving away their land to strangers, instead of fighting for it, can almost be seen as noble self-sacrifice.
More brainwashing garbage! Read the UN & US governments white papers (you know those boring long documents that adults read) and you'll see that overpopulation is not an issue. Too many people living in concentrated places is the problem. If you've travelled at all in any way you'd know first hand how much space there is on the planet..
Overpopulation scare tactics play into the hands of eugenists who wish to use it as an excuse for total control / depopulation in the name of saving the earth.
I have travelled a lot too and I have the impression, that almost all of the land in Europe is already in use. I think, half of the land should have been left for nature reserves and not turned into fields, roads and cities. You americans seem to have a lot of space left. Would you accept some 400 mio. european immigrants?
@flamifer1 our most crowded country england has 17% of land forests ya thats not all used up now is it. and the amount of forestry is growing there along with the population i funnly dought uv ever been to europe and if you have you must be blind or you went on a city break and a city break isnt all europe its only 10% of the land mass and thats definatly not all
Crowd hamsters into a confined area and watch what happens: They go about killing eachother. The day of POPULATION CORRECTION is comming. The only question is: Which people, which culture will survive? Western Civilization gave the world the means for population growth by its modern medicine & technology. Will Western Civilization surrvive or not? Do the White Power Holders have the will? Or will ISLAM take over Humanity ? ? ?
Croud hamsters into a confined area and watch what happens: They go about killing eachother. The day of POPULATION CORRECTION is comming. The only question is: Which people, which culture will survive? Western Civilization gave the world the means for population growth by its modern medicine & technology. Will Western Civilization surrvive or not? Do the White Power Holders have the will? Or will ISLAM take over Humanity ? ? ?
You are right. Except of the fact, that India's population of 1.21 billion is about 1/5th of the world's current population of 7 billion. It is only logic that the oil price rises when they have to drill in the deep sea and sideways now to get it. And together with the price for gasoline the price of everything else rises too.
I observed, that people who are against birth control have blind faith either in religion or science and will never tell you how many they think are enough.
If you are concerned, blame the Christian right for sending missionaries all over the world condemning birth control, sex ed, abortion, and sterilization and enforcing "the family" over all other (more productive) human pursuits. Don't blame the women of India, blame India for not educating all its girls. You can't blame people for what they don't know, or what the American Christian right has been allowed to spew to them unopposed.
I don't blame people for not knowing. But it is time to let them know. You are right. Religions are not going to help. They are in competition with other religions. Especially the christian right wants to boycott family planning. They are not so much interested in saving souls or helping people than in having as many poor and miserable people as possible as they are the most fervent believers (or suckers).
The world's population is growing at 2% (about 80 mio) per year. Traditionally it has been growing until hunger, war and diseases kept it in check. Now we are trying to break this pattern by trying to convince women to have less children and to stabilize world population. We do so against strong opposition of religious traditions and short-sighted economic interests. And: Do we really want even more people on the planet right before peak-oil?
@flamifer1 i think we have already reached peak oil. We still have nuclear and coal and some oil here in the US. But our rate of consumption in everything (food, energy, etc) to meet our indulgent lifestyle is unsustainable, if we can learn to live within our means Population would not be a huge issue.
There are a lot of people who believe that more people means more scientists and they will solve any problem that will ever occur due to an ever increasing population.
And what do scientists? They warn the world from the dangers of overpopulation and recommend to have less babies.
Isn't common sense enough to understand, that avoiding the problem is far better than mend it forever?
As for resources wasted in Iraq; What about all other war zones? All other countries? Military excercises? Apollo used a much smaller bite of the worlds resources.
I agree, that the resources wasted in wars would be much better invested in education and research. But that's not the topic here.
One of the problems with overpopulation is, that it develops slowly and that its consequences remain hidden behind social conflicts, natural disasters and market prices. Overpopulation does not become obvious before it is way too late to do anything about it. Overshooting can peak three times above the carrying capacity of an environment.
I don't take Leonaro seriously. The Rennaisance Man was a Jack but never a master. By your logic space travel is even older because even before that a Chinese king blew himself up in a rocket chair trying to reach the stars.
Yes, and what makes you so confident that the problems of mass space travel will be solved before 2050? Faith in scientific progress alone?
And if we can not make it before 2050, who are you going to blame? The scientist for not being smart enough or the governments for wasting money in wars or the multinationals for being so greedy? And why never the irresponsible proletarians who are the reason for the short time frame? Because they are such loving parents? Where do you live?
Invalid argument. The problems of space travel are not solved yet.
The people of Rapa Nui (like the Haitians) cut down all the forests on their island to grow more food for their growing population. And when the overused soil had eroded and left the land infertile I am sure they would have wanted to leave. But unfortunately they had no wood left to build boats by then.
The "population research center" not only has nothing to do with any research. Not even the anti-abortion propaganda behind this fanatic religious group is real. Their true goal is to manipulate Christians into having more babies in order to start a population race against the fast growing Muslim community. Any person with some brains can imagine where this insanity would end up. The poorest and most miserable people are the most fervent believers. And these ### live off the world's suffering.
There is no real "Population Research" going on. This video series is merely following the growing trend to disguise religion behind a mask of "science."
But there is no science. It's cleverly designed anti-abortion propaganda. There is no ecology. There is no sustainibility findings. Even the predictions they make are purely speculative.
You're free to have any opinion you want about abortion, but the "Population Research Institute" has nothing to do with those last two terms.
@influxrift I am atheist and support women's reproductive rights whether they want 0 kids or 50. If this video is from a religious group, I will use skepticism. I know many religious groups wrap their fantasy in a little truth to promote their brand of mental slavery.
Are a woman's reproductive rights more important than clean water, ample natural grown food, and a healthy natural environment for their children to grow up in? Most women will choose the second option. But a lot of education can and has to be done. Women in an overpopulated slum, who are having more than two babies are to be called by their neighbours as what they are: dirty sluts.
WE CAN CHANGE IT! I suggest that everyone watch documentary movie 'Zeitgeist moving forward' here on youtube and see that we have a practical option to change it. It's up to us to change it. Not politicians. Remember to tell to other peoples about the movie so everyone will be aware that’s we can change it.
What a nonsense. Even if you could house and feed thousands of people sustainably per square kilometer. Who would want to live there? How much space would you allocate as nature reserves? What would you do to keep the climate stable and above all: What would people trade in for the loss of pristine nature?
You people, who want mankind to spread like a virus over the planet never mention life quality? How come?
@flamifer1 People have fled the country to enjoy learning and prosperity in cities for centuries. NYC is infested with our "virus", and its the most valuable land in the world. Many building projects to deal with the "problems from too many people" have brought even more jobs and prosperity. Thanks to one, the subway, people make less CO2 than they would driving big pickups through the country. Great museums inspire new geniuses. Barriers between races and religions collapse! Ppl=Prosperity!
The argument, that problems are so good because they create jobs is just ridiculous. And you are simply lying to yourself, when you say, that you prefer a sardine-can ride in the subway to one in your own Mercedes on an empty road.
Great museums can be enjoyed much more without fighting your way through the crowd to see. And racial conflicts don't get better when people live in slum-ghettos. You need education to solve social problems.
Actually, more people means more solutions to any problems that could possibly result from overpopulation. Advocates of "population control' assume that all those people aren't capable of being educated to develop solutions such as expanding our species into space, skyscrapers, clean energy, supercrops, and water purification. If you think humans are a problem and that overpopulation will hurt us, then kill yourself. It's that simple.
"more people means more solutions to any problems that could possibly result from overpopulation"
That's a classic pyramid scheme. Farmers and fishers have more kids, more hands to reap the grain and pull the net, more brains to invent better nets and better tractors, more drillers to drill oil to feed the machines, more wells and canals to get irrigation water, more miners to dig fertilizers, more, more, more... Oops, now there's no land left to plow, no fertilizer, no oil...
@mosquitobight We don't need Land, fertilizer, or oil. Haven't you seen Big Oil flooding your television with how we can do everything with natural Gas? As for fertilizer, more people = more urine and feces. And finally land. If NASA didn't just do its job when it wanted to beat Russia, we'd be on Mars. Then farming fish and using that dirty water to hydroponically grow crops in space by now while heading to hd85512b for all the land and water we'll ever need.
And why would we want to have to do all that, if we can just have not so many babies and get the fish right out of a clean ocean? BTW Natural gas is a finit natural resource. Your dreams about growing crops in space show me about how much you know about the availability of natural resources and human needs.
@flamifer1 Why? because we are intelligent life, not just life, not grizzlies content to wave our claws around in clear water for a fish. We do the hard things! We think ahead. You have the computer you're typing anti future B.S. on because of the space exploration that you're belittling here. Space or extinction is our destiny. People aren't volunteering for sterilization. Out there are unlimited resources.
@flamifer1 If we remain earthbound, extinction is inevitable. Every few million years, there are mass extinction events such as impacts with large heavenly bodies, ice ages, periods of massive volcanism, and anoxic periods. These typically eliminate large land animals (us) and would, even if minor, destroy human civilization. It's close to time for another such period. If you want your grandkids looking, dumbfounded at the doom of their era, like the dinosaurs, that's up to you.
How many people do you think we need to conquer space? Is a world population of 5 billion not enough? Give me 25 million educated people and in less than 500 years we can colonize Mars. Pack the world full with 10 billion ever-starving proletarians and we will run out of natural resources in less than 100 years and destroy the earth's environment together with man's future more effectively as any asteroid impact.
@flamifer1 What I've been trying to say for weeks here now is that if we follow our destiny as explorers, inventors and navigators who figure things out, we could have millions living in space by now and be on our way to colonizing Mars and the planets out there that we are discovering in stellar "goldilocks zones". THAT MEANS A SMALLER POPULATION ON EARTH!!!!!!!!!! Unfortunately, we blew all that "reducing the population" IE wars and holocausts.
Radiation, long term effects on astronauts and lack of money have prevented it so far.
But even if it was possible: 8 million people e.g. would be no more than 10% of the increase in population each year. At the current growth rate Mars would be as densely populated as earth within 25 years and the nearest other earth like planet is at least 20 light years away.
Do you think, that India would be faster in space if they had even more children?
Even if, with a gigantic effort, mankind could find a way to support 10 or more billion people on earth: How are you going to explain to them how it came that they can't live in a house with garden instead of the tiny flat on floor 12 in block 17? What are you going to tell them why most animal species are extinct and we eat synthesized food with artificial flavour instead real strawberries and oranges. Are you going to tell them that it was to protect the "right" to have 5 children?
Natural gas is a limited resource too. If the population keeps growing for another 50 years, we will have double as many people on the planet when the stuff runs out. And the later it does, the more people will be in troubles. Your argument is invalid.
As for space travel: I strongly suggest to read more about it. And I mean not science-fiction.
@mosquitobight If we didn't abandon our future after Apollo to take over France's war with Vietnam, we wouldn't be having this discussion. We need to fund math and science education and we need a SERIOUS MANNED space program. We could afford this if we didn't stake our lives on the profit motive and stopped trying to turn Southwest Asia and North Africa into Mayberry! BTW, the space shuttle was a JOKE. A quarter billion dollars per launch? Are you fucking kidding me?
I don't see a connection between the space program and the current environmental destruction caused by overpopulation. If you want more smart people, then you don't need more people - Just a better educational system.
@flamifer1 Yes, I have absolute faith in science. It's why I'm alive today. As for the bus analogy, you can only get so many scientists on the bus, but the engineer, steelworker, and machinist can make more busses. Lets call those busses MARS, space stations, and the new planets we're discovering in "Goldilocks Zones" throughout the galaxy. You are working for an elite group of ASSHOLES that want to control the number of slaves on their plantation so we don't revolt or run away.
Me too, but I also know, that one needs to have it BEFORE it can be applied. And we don't. Until then it would be very unwise to increase world population any further. With a stable population our earth will serve us for another million years. That's more than enough time to develop space travel. But if we overshoot it's straight back to the stone-age on an impoverished world.
BTW: You can't escape from social problems on Mars either.
@mosquitobight yeah that would be great! there's a vacant house right next door and 3 more at the other block, if you want you can live with me either!... THERE'S STILL A LOT OF SPACE IN THIS WORLD!
Cool that there is so much space left! I would like to have a hectare of property in Costa Rica for $10 or so with access to the beach and a spring of fresh water please. Talking about it: I need more space for forests and endangered species in general. Can you provide that too?
And then, because you are obviously using your brain so well, please explain why we want to fill up the remaining space? I forgot.
@flamifer1 it seemed your the one who doesnt understand my answer. i bet you cant even answer your own questions and why would i answer questions that is based on the questioner's subjective perspective? the logic is simple "If you think its overcrowded then, MOVE!"
if you still cant understand the logic, then you may be having a problem with people... :-(
My question was: "Why fill up the remaining space?"
Your first reaction was an irrational threat, then you simply denied to answer the question with this excuse:
>> why would i answer questions that is based on the questioner's subjective perspective?
You could have either answered by denying that there was a limit. Or you could have stated reasons why we should strive for maximum population density. The question maybe inconvenient but it is objective.
my answer is not an excuse, i just dont like leaded questions that falls on to the advantage of the opponent. by the way, congratulations! you just answered your own question. ^_^
there is no such thing as overpopulation, but only mismanaged control of the population and resources available. one nation may suffer overpopulation but it doesn't apply to all other nations.
either way overpopulation propaganda is another way of masking racism and prejudice to other people.
>> i just dont like leaded questions that falls on to the advantage of the opponent.
I understand that you do not answer my questions because you do not want to admit that the world's resources are not limitless and that there is a maximum number of people it can support.
Just to remind you: It's scientists who have been warning of the dangers of overpopulation and religious fanatics and racists who deny it. (The makers of this movie e.g.)
By the way: "leaded questions". In contrary to you, you may ask me any kind of question no matter how "leaded" they are and I will truthfully answer them. The problem is: Any question you may ask will make it only more obvious, that overpopulation really is a problem and that we are in troubles.
With no real arguments left for your cause, I fear you will have to resort to more threats and insults and finally will have to give up.
@flamifer1 yep there's no argument of that overpopulation is troublesome but the WORLD is not overpopulated. even 3rd graders can understand that but you seemed not.
remember, we see the world differently so dont force yourself to be the victor over our argument cause that would make you look pathetic. arguments exercises our reasoning skills and doesnt guarantees both opponent will agree each other.
and it seemed dat your last statement was wrong... i havent met your expectations... ^_^
>> there's no argument of that overpopulation is troublesome
What the children now in 3rd grade will see is how "troublesome" it can get, when the world's economies are going to try and replace oil with alternative energy sources.
>> but the WORLD is not overpopulated
As long as it's not you who has to live in a mega-slum yourself and who has to line up for a bucket of dirty water. Now you are down to plain denial because you have no valid arguments to support your irrational attitude.
@flamifer1 "As long as it's not you who has to live in a mega-slum yourself and who has to line up for a bucket of dirty water. Now you are down to plain denial because you have no valid arguments to support your irrational attitude." <<now now dont go on too emotional on me buddy, blame your GOVERNMENT! Not me nor the PEOPLE!
i thought i was the one who's gonna flare up first? but it seemed the other way around. now your telling me i have irrational attitude? yeah right!
Millions of people every year have to leave the farms where they are born to end up in the slums of a city because they were so unlucky to be child no. 5 or 6. You are entertaining the convenient attitude to blame the government for being overwhelmed by the endless problems caused by this situation while you have nothing else to offer for a "solution" but to help them have even more babies.
There are some things, that you over-shooters all have in common: A complete lack of interest in the beauty of this planet and its biodiversity and a fervent religious belief that technological progress will always solve in time all problems and shortages caused by a fast growing demand of an ever growing population.
And if it does not work out you are the first ones to cry for blood: Blame the government, blame the multis, immigrants, communists, environmentalists... I am properly disgusted
Still trying to sell family planning as holocaust? Sorry, the old "birth control=murder" lie won't work any more.
Too many people know already, that birth control has nothing to do with killing people and that using condoms is NOT a crime, while not to inform girls about their rights and the advantages of birth control is.
You have utterly failed to explain why you want to pack more people on this planet right before peak-oil. More fun is not a good enough reason to risk extinction.
>> mismanaged control of the population and resources available.
Yes, you can pack ten times more people on this planet. If they work very hard and super-efficient for their daily handful of Monsanto-rice, take there every morning sardine-can ride to work, live in their tiny little flats in Block 217 and take their holidays in balconia. And ... (now comes the best part) are by law forbidden to have more than 2 children.
Why would anybody prefer to live in an ugly multistory building and share the same little appartment with 20 more people, if he can have a house with a garden and a swimming pool instead? Would you?
@flamifer1 ammm dipshit i said have a 20 story apartment block with a apartment on each floor! its not that hard and id rather live in a mulitystory apartment. a house in the subarbs is like a island soronded by asfelt
Who said anything about suburbs? I live in a house with a big garden. On one side I have a view to a coffee plantage, on the other side are bananas and on the third side is a meadow. The next asphalt road is 200m away. But of course the area it is threatened to turn into city as always.
@flamifer1 I love the big city! That's where the good museums, entertainment, best food, best schools, opportunity, diversity, etc,etc are. I love people! The more the merrier! From NYC! BROOK BROOK BROOKLYYYYYYYN!!!! I'm unfortunately stuck in a boring, quiet suburb.
Yes, much fun. As long as supply from the outside runs freely and in abundant quantities. Not so much if not any more. Neither in the suburbs, where the infrastructure is built on cheap gasoline.
But I guess, it is no use to tell that a techno-believer. A person who is convinced, that god and technology will always provide for an ever growing population.
@flamifer1 your actually a dip shit alge is now being used as petrol in most european countries so ya technology can fix everthing. its saveing forests with the computer
@flamifer1 in ireland by 13% this year and an estimates 20% next year plus on the estmated 2000 electric cars which alone reduce 1040 liters a year.ammm ya they have so before you get facts shut up becauz im sick and tired of listening to you and im only wasting electricity replying! go get an education or some bit of brains before you start bull shitting over a farm and too many cars. you can fix them problems extremly easy.
I confirm: Ireland has reduced consumption of petrol by 13% this year. This is a development in the right direction. I estimate that it can even be cut in half. 2,000 electric cars in 3,000,000 (0,6%) vehicles is still a drop in the ocean, but showing at least a little bit of effort. Thank you for the good news.
Now I would like to know why you think that Ireland is not overpopulated with 4.5 million people, how many will be enough and why to increase the population any further?
@flamifer1 ur ar fucking stupid ireland has 2.5million cars not 3 million and actually nearer to 6 million according to the last figures we have 80 people per killiometre it could suport 3500 per square killiometre and have room for tourism i duno u do the math! and thats with todays technology with tommorows that number will be way higher
No, it could not. Ireland does not have enough raw materials and energy sources to support 246 millon people sustainably.
And why should the tourists come? To see the uniform multi-story buildings, to listen to the noise of the traffic or to squeeze tight into an overcrowded train? Maybe they are interested in the industrial complexes or power-stations? Or in a tour around the seawater desalination or sewage plants?
@flamifer1 ireland has no need for energy materials wave energy alone would be able to power all of asias energy needs for the next 20 years in one day with hidroponics and verticle farms u could feed all of europe in an area half of wat we grow our food in right now. and other resorces ar so valuable we will do anything to get them even if that means space mining (not my words stephen hawkins) and that was found in surveys done by europe and the american goverment.
You know what is the worst part of your science fiction horror? That it not only meant to end all biodiversity of this planet committing the greatest genocide in history, but that there were also no escape from this nightmare.
In your world, there would be no differences. Everything and everyone would be uniform, endlessly repeated. And with the loss of diversity also goes creativity. Even if there were any freedom left: What could be done with it?
@flamifer1 ohhh so new york is so uniform. rio deginero has no wild life and lonod has no parks. people could take up a tiny percentage of the world and still have a house with a garden. only the size of texas is needed but no people like you dont like city or country planning
Yes, it is. The modern parts of any city in the world are so uniform that it is impossible to know one's location at a glance. They are boring at best. The "wildlife" of the slums of Rio de Janeiro consist of dogs and chicken and try to set up your tent and fireplace in a London park.
The size of Texas is about 700,000 km2, equally distributed to 7 billion people you get 100 m2 per person. In the reality of capitalism that means 50% of the land for 90% of the population. = 200 m2 for a family of 4 to have a house with garden. The market price for properties would be in the thousands per square centimeter. And I don't even want to know how you intend to stack the poorest billion of people.
@flamifer1 was i talking about who has money no! god all you seem to think about is money this and not living in a apartment that! actually i was talking about new yorks people not the city and if people dont like modern areas so much then why ar they buying million doller apartments. rio actually has a ton of monkey who live around the forests that surround the city and in london i know people who went caming in a park with no troule.
You have not answered my question why tourists should come to your science fiction Ireland because you know exactly, that there would be nothing left to see.
@flamifer1 havent you heard of city planning or goverment planning. were not stupid we know not to build on tourist destonations thats why the vast magority of irelands population live in randstads or very densly populated regions of infertile land unfit for tourism or farming. they are now home to 60% of the population and by 2050 over 89% will live there. so start thinking not acting
So 89% of the population will have to live on land unfit for tourism or farming. In other words: in the ugliest places. As I said before: Life quality seems to be no factor in your calculation. And when that space will be occupied, then you just stack higher up, shut people away from daylight and fresh air. And after that? What other plans do you have to make people's lives even more miserable?
@flamifer1 look you ar slow beond belief! were smart enough to build on unusable land that we makes parks and living areas for. im sure the tourist destionation wouldnt be so nice if 5million people were there thats why we build on land that is fit for dense cities. and if you think other wise you need a reality check right now because ur stupid as hell
I understand the idea very well. What you have not thought through is, that the concept has its limitis too and the main point that continually seems to slip your grasp is: THERE IS NO NEED to store away the poor part of the population in ugly sattelite cities if you simply do not create them in the first place.
That's why education is so important. People need to know, that many children creates poverty and education means prosperity.
@flamifer1 no matter how much you educate people there will always be poor and what we ar seening in almost all of europe (except germany) family sizes ar growing in the native populations in all categories no matter rich or poor. and we all knw overpopulation wont happen the sad fact is that our goverments would just let off a super virus that would kill half the world. i mean sadly they ar that mental. anyway they expect ebola to hit lagos any day soo and when it hits there everyone is fucked
>> family sizes ar growing no matter rich or poor.
That is not correct. The poorer and the less educated people are, the bigger their families.
The explanation is simple: They just make love without considering the consequences. It also does not help that priests encourage their sheep to have many children and/or forbid to use contraceptives.
Have you ever thought that a government needed to be very desperate to eliminate half of its tax payers. What could be a possible reason?
@flamifer1 i am talking about europe to day the average birth rate of a native european is going up in britain the rise has been from 1.67 to 2.04 and that has nothing to do with emmigrants
and in europe christianity has no grip here as 20% are atheist and the ammount of people actual chritians like america has is less then 3% who take it seriously EU figures
well actually aging populations as they are already scaring the chinese to shit. china is thinking of abolishing its 1 child policy
>> aging populations as they are already scaring the chinese to shit
The aging problem can not be solved by increasing the population, because young people will become old one generation later.
>> china is thinking of abolishing its 1 child policy
China has changed to a 2 child policy long ago and people can buy the right to have a third child now. Due to birth control 500 million people were not born and China was spared famines of apocalyptic dimensions (so far).
@flamifer1 actually if ur population is growing there is always going to be more kids then old people thats more then obviuse.
and china still has a one child policy but you can buy ur way to a 2 child policy which is out of reach of most chinese.
and even china admites there famin in the 1940's and 50's were man made to control the country even harder by communist rule. nothing to do with there population. 500million more and thats when there population will stop growin. there not worried
>> actually if ur population is growing there is always going to be more kids then old people
until we overshoot. And that means a diminished existence on a destroyed planet for all future generations. You have already said that you want it so. no comment.
>> which is out of reach of most chinese
Couples want a third child only when they can afford to feed it anyway, right?
>> The man made famines in the 50's
You are right. This had nothing to do with overpopulation.
@flamifer1 i said wed never overshoot and thats so dumb just because now we look at the planet and say we cant hold 23billion dosent mean we cant in the future. technology is always powering ahead fact!
to bring up a child in china is €1000 till 15 years of age the fine is 45000 once off the average chinese person makes €6000 a year you do the math
so why are you going on about famines then. theres enough food now to feed 26billion and growing but 5% of ppl eat half of it, all in the USA
>> i said wed never overshoot ... technology is always powering ahead fact!
That is still to be proven. And I told you before, that people are not going to preserve nature and confine themselves to the ugliest areas. There is no rational reason to increase world population any further.
And: If the average chines person makes only €6000 a year, why shouldn't they concentrate on educating their children rather than having another one?
@flamifer1 ya there is having children isnt like buying a car its something you do because they are your mark on the world no matter what you do you will be remembered by your children and the love you fell for them cant be replacated.
you obviusly havent felt that love.
and most children arent planed there like a present and even if there a accident only 2% of wemen will end it in abortion most of them regret it beound belief. any statistic will tell you.
I admire people more that make a mark on the world with noble deeds. If you love your children, you don't have more than you can feed and give a proper education or you will mark yourself as a proletarian. Sorry, you can't put me in the box "traumatized childhood".
You still have not told me about the advantages of increasing the world population to 23 billion people or more. And why shouldn't poor people rather concentrate on education than on having more than 2 children?
@flamifer1 no i said you obviusly dont have kids. Ya but that is only a couple of hundred people and they dont give a shit about you having kids is diffrent it something you cant feel in any other part of society or consumerism and you cant even try to argue that because its the truth.
Ya thats not an issue in western or communist countrys so there they can have as many kids as they want and in poor contrys they have the same right. if you want kids you can have them no one can stop you
Which right is more valuable? The right to have as many children as you want or the a child's right to be born in a family that can feed you and give you a proper education. To me it's clear, that the child is more important than what the parents want.
By now it is quite obvious, that you have no answer to the question what is to be gained by increasing the world's population any further. And that is, what this is all about.
@flamifer1 ur retarded there is free education and free food if your that poor and you can move from a shity country to europe or the USA if your that poor. No its not this is just you bitching about how you want a perfect world filled with no people and you all by your self. the population will keep on rising because people want kids and that is a good enough reson its not your choice and it never will be so just be quiet about, people they want kids you dont want them to now that selfishness
@flamifer1 every person is diffrent so new thinking. also larger populations usually mean that people are more forward thinking and more open.
also just the fact that people want to have more kidsis a good enough reason. i want a large family is my choice and it wont be changed i live in a country that has enough food and free education,health,transport and everything.
also i am atheist and i feel you only get one chance at life and our main aim is to have kids so they can experience it.
>> also larger populations usually mean that people are more forward thinking and more open.
Nonsense. In a city with 1 million people people can be as forward thinking and open than in a city with 10 million people. The only difference is the amount of landscape destruction and strain of resources.
>> just the fact that people want to have more kidsis a good enough reason
Yes, it's this very selfishness of the individual that causes all this destruction.
@flamifer1 ya it dose because everyone think diffrently meaing there is more opions! ya and in the country side theres usually no thinking and there all stupid backward people. usually larger citys take up the same space as smaller ones and its been found that citys at 5million are at the peak of using resorses and land space as a city grows it usually ends up growing upwards not outwards!
no you trying to take away there human rights is selfish. go to the sahara it has no people.
@flamifer1 no theres more opions in mexico city and more opertunites then vienna. and vienna is a city of 2.5million i said citys of 5million are at the peak as city generily then start producing there own food and there ar fewer cars as the transport network improves.
and there is as much quaity in mexico as in vienna. there most famous resident was hitler and he had no qualities so shup because ur some idiot who wants wemen to have no rights if they want 100 kids or zero its not ur choice
What happens to this planet is everyones business. People have no right to destroy and pollute all of nature and the future of our children with it. With the progress of the destruction and more and more people becoming aware of it, more and more people are thinking like me. So you pseudo-liberals are a dying species.
@flamifer1 lmao lovely fantesy world your in to be honest you sound more like a crazy american then a costa rican
it is widly known liberals ar the most open and ar pushing the most for change. also the enviroment of most european countrys is getting better and the whole world is opening its eyes our planet is getting destoried not because of the size of population but because of greed and the top companys in the world such as big coal and oil that ar partners with most goverments.
Yes, and I am saying, that it is not only greed, but also the sheer number of people, greedy or not, that is destroying nature. The environment of most european countries is not getting better. But at least it's not as bad as it would be, if all people had your ambition to leave their mark as a true proletarian.
Just continue to tell the world, that more people need less resources and that the right to have 3 children was more important than the children themselves.
@flamifer1 lmao im not like u i wana live in a highrise apartment i wana be able to walk everywhere and i only want a balcony to grow food on it like most europeans do but no seen as u have no arguments just say im using up all the resorces. 3 children hahaha i want more then that and seen as europe could sustain 3billion theres no fear of people going hungry with free education and liberal inclusive open society i think my children will be fine and happy! and slowly d enviroment is getin better
I wana live in a highrise apartment ... grow food on my balcony
Good for you, that you prefer such a monastic life-style. I suggest, that you try and live for a year off the vegies grown on your balcony and then we can talk about packing 3 or 300 billion people into Europe.
>> 3 children: i want more then that
Yes, I know. To make your mark as a selfish, uneducated, irresponsible, immature proletarian who does not care what becomes of the children he litters the world with.
@flamifer1 did i say that ur just some low life that has nothing better to do then bitch on this about people shouldnt have kids just because you didnt have the oppertunity to have them. and amazingly with hidroponics you could live off a average european balcony for a year.
considering im in d top 0.1% of the population because i have such an IQ then everyone else should be so uneducated they cant breath. Lmao nothings gona happen theyill grow up and get married or cizil unions and be happy
>> just because you didnt have the oppertunity to have them
Yes, thank you they are fine. One is attending a university of tourism and management in the U.S. and our girl is still in school. I admit, that we could not afford to send a third child to university.
>> and amazingly with hidroponics you could live off a average european balcony for a year
Go ahead, do the experiment!
considering im in d top 0.1% of the population because i have such an IQ
@flamifer1 why didnt the third one come to europe vast majority of countrys have no university fees?? and wow arent you the hipocrite you dont even belive the words coming outa your mouth. Its already been done how else would we knw? Haha why because my views arent stupid and have no ground like yours were never going to suffer from over population the worlds population is going to stabelize in 100 years and then there will be people complaing about how aging populations ar destroying the earth
>> no you trying to take away there human rights is selfish
Is that so? Is the human "right" to have more than 2 children regardless of the circumstances and the consequences more worth to you than the human right of the child to be born into a world with an intact environment and into a loving family that can feed and give it a proper education?
Remember that a human right ends right there were it starts damaging the one of another person.
@flamifer1 for the 9th time education and food are not an issue if you have a proper goverment. and if you dont have a proper one then wemen cant get contraception so they cant do anything about it!
your right to life is not more important then a babies cause someone in adult hood will never be chosen over a child
@flamifer1 'the ugly areas' is where most people are and want to be living! citys are the most popular place to live and very few people dont like them there where 98% of growth is going to be and in western countries that figure is even higher so obviusly people dont think there ugly they seem to love them.
theres free education in china and europe and canada along with free health care so no they dont need to focus on that its already marked out for them.
@flamifer1 and no why do people go to new york or tokyo or london? for the buzz of energy and life for quesin for cosmopolition life in huge metropolises! look go back to ur church and pray to ur fake god because get over it over population will never affect us will never happen when were brought to the edge we always find a way. it the human nature even this planet isnt home anymore were reaching out into space
>> population will never affect us will never happen
That's simply not true. It does in this very moment. I can hear the "buzz" of the city all around me I am glad that I can flee up the mountain to escape, something many can not. If you want buzz go and live in Tokyo, but you ant-people have not right to destroy the planet.
>> when were brought to the edge we always find a way
@flamifer1 i have no idea what i am dealing with....so now you ar treating me. you know as well as i do overpopulation aint gona happen population growth is grownding to a halt and theres more a cance a deadly deases is going to wipe all of us out then population
@flamifer1 ya and that is a bad thing? if u have such a problem move to mongolia they have 2 people per sqaure kilometre there just because u wana live in the shit arse of no where dosent mean people cant creat with there land what they want stop complaining and move on the more people the better fresh ideas and diversity!
Yes, it means noise and dust, the heat of the asphalt, criminality, no parking space, traffic jams, bad air and neighbours complaining about my noise. And it means barking dogs instead of hummingbirds in front of the window, no shady trees, no walks in nature, no fresh bananas or mangoes from the tree....
You don't get it, do you? There is a reason why nobody wants to live in Mongolia or the Sahara. And you don't need 12 million people to fill a city.
@flamifer1 ya thats in a shity city go to london or even paris and you will see huge parks there not polluted and there isnt jams on the streets your thinking in the light that everyone is fat slobs! look at the netherlands they arent at all polluted have massive parks and no traffic! so get out of your suv and start using a bike! its not that hard to make citys work you have to cop on and live sustanibly
I am not going to discuss the ugly belts of multi-story buildings around London and Paris housing the masses of poor immigrants who nobody wants. And I am not going to speak about the prices for even a small property in the Netherlands. I will simply ask you why you want to redouble the poor part of the population there?
And how I am supposed to escape the noise and stink of the city without my car? Of course, if the city did not already fill the whole valley, I would not have to climb.
@flamifer1 have you heard of a train? guess not and there called councell estates there free housing for the poor and most are being torn down! no when people live sustanibly. and ya you can i duno look at oktoberfest in munic a city of 5million or all the pride parades in tokyo new york super citys both over 30million. and density brought the berlin wall down it caused the civil rights movement in america and citys ar the best places of refuge for people who ar descriminated against
High population density as a guarantee for freedom and a high standard of living. Can you even come up with a more ridiculous idea? As if you could not have a proper Oktoberfest with less than a million visitors. And following this logic Canada or Australia must be dictaturships like North Korea.
Honestly: How many people do you think can live sustainably on this planet and why push it to the limit?
@flamifer1 if you want to bring it to fact fine so 95% of canadians live in only 10% of canada. no you couldnt have the same oktoberfest with out them million tourists just like you couldnt have the buzz of new york with out its 27 and a half million residence. and you know why they have a dictatorship in north korea because of fear and no diversity vertualy 100% of the population are korean but of course you wouldnt know that. and with todays technology 15 times the population of the earth 2day
Do you believe you can redouble the population of a country forever as long as it is done in a sustainable way? According to you: When will it be enough?
When most animals have gone extinct?
When we run out of the first major natural resource?
When we can't stand the stink anymore?
or when we run out of food and clean water?
And why go so far? Just to end up with strict birth control laws enforced with cruel methods?
@flamifer1 what ar you on about overpopulation is when no one has food! you ar obviusly very uneducated. im being childish?? well i am 14 so i guess im aloud but the only one whos being childish is you. and by the way im sure that lovely sugar cane farm or what ever you live in was once a rain forest so thanks for take some of my oxygen. Now leave me alone and stop trying to make assumtions with absolutly no fact
Yes, the land I live on used to be rain forest not so long ago. And it would still be, if the Latinos did not have YOUR attitude: The more the merrier! Now the whole valley is city. And this did not improve its beauty. You can believe me that.
Bad news for you: Currently we are working on a project for soft tourism. It means no multi-story buildings in front of the beaches, no discos, no second airport, the preservation of the national park and a lot less tourists.
@flamifer1 i dont have that attitude acctually i want them areas where we get our oxygen to be cept. its selfish people like you who thinks they can do what they want with it and turn it into a farm. ammm what have i been saying to be sustanible which means to preserve. and your the one complaining about your poor fucking farm well soft tourism takes up more land then high density living so cop on birkering with a 14 year old and especially over issues you dont even know anything about
This has been flagged as spam show
OVERPOPULATION DOES NOT EXIST. WHAT EXIST IS THE RESOURCES OF THE WORLD IN THE HANDS OF A FEW.
WITH MODERN DAY TECHNOLOGY SUCH AS SKYSCRAPERS, VERTICAL FARMS, 3D PRINTING, THORIUM REACTORS, AUTOMATION AKA (TECHNOLOGICAL UNEMPLOYMENT) THERE IS NO REASON WHY THE PLANET EARTH COULD NOT SUSTAIN OUR CURRENT POPULATION (7 BILLION) OR MORE.
THE MASSES ARE UNEDUCATED. IT IS A FACT THAT MORE EDUCATED COUPLES HAVE LESS CHILDREN (2.1 OR AROUND 2 CHILDREN) IN THERE LIFETIMES.
ISMOPANAMA 1 month ago
watch this then youtube.com/watch?v=iodJ0OOdgRg
gibezynu 1 month ago
Good one..nice cartoon...goodwill is ever need from everyone...
abksharma 2 months ago
We still have enough resources to feed and power the entire planet for thousands of years if we build up a better system, use all our efforts to educate people and take down the 1% greedy bastards that owns 50% of the planets wealth.
FreeFromWar 2 months ago
howcom she imagined that ..huahahahhaa i was laughing when the earth fall
Cheekblushing 2 months ago
yeah we need to kill of all the humans ...beginning with the one who made this stupid cartoon
shempmocurly 2 months ago
huh
chuckyLIVINGDEADGIRL 2 months ago
so kill yourself then.
RebelAllianceMedia 3 months ago
this doesnt make any sense or have any actual points other than your planet will fall (through a gravity-free void) and crash into "something at the bottom"? Also, aliens will watch (from the moon?) with fear... O.o" Nice.
mizziwhoop 3 months ago
@mizziwhoop is that seriously all you got from it? you are so dumb. That wasn't the point of the video.
iluvkms 1 month ago
Read the facts you idiots before you make bullshit videos like this. If a population doesn't replace itself it dies. The west is dieing all western countries have a BR of under 2 we are not replacing our selves. Think instead of being told what to think
digwillhachi 3 months ago
@digwillhachi
That is not quite correct: If a population does not replace itself it shrinks. Europe's population is currently 733 million people, that is two million more than in 2005. If the Europeans would not voluntarily make space for immigrants, many people would die in other countries due to malnutrition, diseases and war. Their act of freely giving away their land to strangers, instead of fighting for it, can almost be seen as noble self-sacrifice.
flamifer1 3 months ago
More brainwashing garbage! Read the UN & US governments white papers (you know those boring long documents that adults read) and you'll see that overpopulation is not an issue. Too many people living in concentrated places is the problem. If you've travelled at all in any way you'd know first hand how much space there is on the planet..
Overpopulation scare tactics play into the hands of eugenists who wish to use it as an excuse for total control / depopulation in the name of saving the earth.
popdreams 3 months ago
@popdreams
I have travelled a lot too and I have the impression, that almost all of the land in Europe is already in use. I think, half of the land should have been left for nature reserves and not turned into fields, roads and cities. You americans seem to have a lot of space left. Would you accept some 400 mio. european immigrants?
flamifer1 3 months ago
@flamifer1 our most crowded country england has 17% of land forests ya thats not all used up now is it. and the amount of forestry is growing there along with the population i funnly dought uv ever been to europe and if you have you must be blind or you went on a city break and a city break isnt all europe its only 10% of the land mass and thats definatly not all
1997seanmac 3 months ago
How to make this kind of v ideo??any 1 know??
9640010839 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
wtf is this shit?
FrenchSteina 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Crowd hamsters into a confined area and watch what happens: They go about killing eachother. The day of POPULATION CORRECTION is comming. The only question is: Which people, which culture will survive? Western Civilization gave the world the means for population growth by its modern medicine & technology. Will Western Civilization surrvive or not? Do the White Power Holders have the will? Or will ISLAM take over Humanity ? ? ?
Avalon400 4 months ago
Croud hamsters into a confined area and watch what happens: They go about killing eachother. The day of POPULATION CORRECTION is comming. The only question is: Which people, which culture will survive? Western Civilization gave the world the means for population growth by its modern medicine & technology. Will Western Civilization surrvive or not? Do the White Power Holders have the will? Or will ISLAM take over Humanity ? ? ?
Avalon400 4 months ago
totally agree,guys STP HAVING 8Y1235 BABIES!
Hunting4TheLight 4 months ago
if western slags didnt drink so much , we wouldnt have so many people in the world ..
mrpaulcaswell1 4 months ago
@gloryboxlock
You are right. Except of the fact, that India's population of 1.21 billion is about 1/5th of the world's current population of 7 billion. It is only logic that the oil price rises when they have to drill in the deep sea and sideways now to get it. And together with the price for gasoline the price of everything else rises too.
I observed, that people who are against birth control have blind faith either in religion or science and will never tell you how many they think are enough.
flamifer1 4 months ago
If you are concerned, blame the Christian right for sending missionaries all over the world condemning birth control, sex ed, abortion, and sterilization and enforcing "the family" over all other (more productive) human pursuits. Don't blame the women of India, blame India for not educating all its girls. You can't blame people for what they don't know, or what the American Christian right has been allowed to spew to them unopposed.
Bill1275w 4 months ago
@Bill1275w
I don't blame people for not knowing. But it is time to let them know. You are right. Religions are not going to help. They are in competition with other religions. Especially the christian right wants to boycott family planning. They are not so much interested in saving souls or helping people than in having as many poor and miserable people as possible as they are the most fervent believers (or suckers).
flamifer1 4 months ago
@gloryboxlock who needs gay ass europeans anyways
defgill 4 months ago
@defgill
You just disqualified yourself from civilized mankind with your immature statement.
flamifer1 4 months ago
heard we are not replacing the population in some countries. Overpopulation is a myth as it stands now.
defgill 4 months ago
@defgill
>>Overpopulation is a myth as it stands now
The world's population is growing at 2% (about 80 mio) per year. Traditionally it has been growing until hunger, war and diseases kept it in check. Now we are trying to break this pattern by trying to convince women to have less children and to stabilize world population. We do so against strong opposition of religious traditions and short-sighted economic interests. And: Do we really want even more people on the planet right before peak-oil?
flamifer1 4 months ago
@flamifer1 i think we have already reached peak oil. We still have nuclear and coal and some oil here in the US. But our rate of consumption in everything (food, energy, etc) to meet our indulgent lifestyle is unsustainable, if we can learn to live within our means Population would not be a huge issue.
defgill 4 months ago
There are a lot of people who believe that more people means more scientists and they will solve any problem that will ever occur due to an ever increasing population.
And what do scientists? They warn the world from the dangers of overpopulation and recommend to have less babies.
Isn't common sense enough to understand, that avoiding the problem is far better than mend it forever?
flamifer1 4 months ago
As for resources wasted in Iraq; What about all other war zones? All other countries? Military excercises? Apollo used a much smaller bite of the worlds resources.
Bill1275w 4 months ago
@Bill1275w
I agree, that the resources wasted in wars would be much better invested in education and research. But that's not the topic here.
One of the problems with overpopulation is, that it develops slowly and that its consequences remain hidden behind social conflicts, natural disasters and market prices. Overpopulation does not become obvious before it is way too late to do anything about it. Overshooting can peak three times above the carrying capacity of an environment.
flamifer1 4 months ago
I don't take Leonaro seriously. The Rennaisance Man was a Jack but never a master. By your logic space travel is even older because even before that a Chinese king blew himself up in a rocket chair trying to reach the stars.
Bill1275w 4 months ago
@Bill1275w
Yes, and what makes you so confident that the problems of mass space travel will be solved before 2050? Faith in scientific progress alone?
And if we can not make it before 2050, who are you going to blame? The scientist for not being smart enough or the governments for wasting money in wars or the multinationals for being so greedy? And why never the irresponsible proletarians who are the reason for the short time frame? Because they are such loving parents? Where do you live?
flamifer1 4 months ago
WHAT A LOAD OF SHIT!!
MightyMick77 4 months ago
@Flamifer1 as for problems with space travel; There are problems with air travel too, but we do it every day.
Bill1275w 4 months ago
@Bill1275w
Invalid argument. The problems of space travel are not solved yet.
The people of Rapa Nui (like the Haitians) cut down all the forests on their island to grow more food for their growing population. And when the overused soil had eroded and left the land infertile I am sure they would have wanted to leave. But unfortunately they had no wood left to build boats by then.
flamifer1 4 months ago
The "population research center" not only has nothing to do with any research. Not even the anti-abortion propaganda behind this fanatic religious group is real. Their true goal is to manipulate Christians into having more babies in order to start a population race against the fast growing Muslim community. Any person with some brains can imagine where this insanity would end up. The poorest and most miserable people are the most fervent believers. And these ### live off the world's suffering.
flamifer1 4 months ago
Beware!!
There is no real "Population Research" going on. This video series is merely following the growing trend to disguise religion behind a mask of "science."
But there is no science. It's cleverly designed anti-abortion propaganda. There is no ecology. There is no sustainibility findings. Even the predictions they make are purely speculative.
You're free to have any opinion you want about abortion, but the "Population Research Institute" has nothing to do with those last two terms.
influxrift 4 months ago
@influxrift I am atheist and support women's reproductive rights whether they want 0 kids or 50. If this video is from a religious group, I will use skepticism. I know many religious groups wrap their fantasy in a little truth to promote their brand of mental slavery.
Bill1275w 4 months ago
@Bill1275w
Are a woman's reproductive rights more important than clean water, ample natural grown food, and a healthy natural environment for their children to grow up in? Most women will choose the second option. But a lot of education can and has to be done. Women in an overpopulated slum, who are having more than two babies are to be called by their neighbours as what they are: dirty sluts.
flamifer1 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
WE CAN CHANGE IT! I suggest that everyone watch documentary movie 'Zeitgeist moving forward' here on youtube and see that we have a practical option to change it. It's up to us to change it. Not politicians. Remember to tell to other peoples about the movie so everyone will be aware that’s we can change it.
stamstuff 4 months ago
@mosquitobight No land no problem. Ever heard of hydroponics? And well need more builders
Bill1275w 4 months ago
@Bill1275w
What a nonsense. Even if you could house and feed thousands of people sustainably per square kilometer. Who would want to live there? How much space would you allocate as nature reserves? What would you do to keep the climate stable and above all: What would people trade in for the loss of pristine nature?
You people, who want mankind to spread like a virus over the planet never mention life quality? How come?
flamifer1 4 months ago
@flamifer1 People have fled the country to enjoy learning and prosperity in cities for centuries. NYC is infested with our "virus", and its the most valuable land in the world. Many building projects to deal with the "problems from too many people" have brought even more jobs and prosperity. Thanks to one, the subway, people make less CO2 than they would driving big pickups through the country. Great museums inspire new geniuses. Barriers between races and religions collapse! Ppl=Prosperity!
Bill1275w 4 months ago
@Bill1275w
The argument, that problems are so good because they create jobs is just ridiculous. And you are simply lying to yourself, when you say, that you prefer a sardine-can ride in the subway to one in your own Mercedes on an empty road.
Great museums can be enjoyed much more without fighting your way through the crowd to see. And racial conflicts don't get better when people live in slum-ghettos. You need education to solve social problems.
Stop confusing QUALITY with QUANTITY.
flamifer1 4 months ago
Actually, more people means more solutions to any problems that could possibly result from overpopulation. Advocates of "population control' assume that all those people aren't capable of being educated to develop solutions such as expanding our species into space, skyscrapers, clean energy, supercrops, and water purification. If you think humans are a problem and that overpopulation will hurt us, then kill yourself. It's that simple.
Bill1275w 4 months ago
@Bill1275w
"more people means more solutions to any problems that could possibly result from overpopulation"
That's a classic pyramid scheme. Farmers and fishers have more kids, more hands to reap the grain and pull the net, more brains to invent better nets and better tractors, more drillers to drill oil to feed the machines, more wells and canals to get irrigation water, more miners to dig fertilizers, more, more, more... Oops, now there's no land left to plow, no fertilizer, no oil...
mosquitobight 4 months ago
@mosquitobight We don't need Land, fertilizer, or oil. Haven't you seen Big Oil flooding your television with how we can do everything with natural Gas? As for fertilizer, more people = more urine and feces. And finally land. If NASA didn't just do its job when it wanted to beat Russia, we'd be on Mars. Then farming fish and using that dirty water to hydroponically grow crops in space by now while heading to hd85512b for all the land and water we'll ever need.
Bill1275w 4 months ago
@Bill1275w
And why would we want to have to do all that, if we can just have not so many babies and get the fish right out of a clean ocean? BTW Natural gas is a finit natural resource. Your dreams about growing crops in space show me about how much you know about the availability of natural resources and human needs.
flamifer1 4 months ago
@flamifer1 Why? because we are intelligent life, not just life, not grizzlies content to wave our claws around in clear water for a fish. We do the hard things! We think ahead. You have the computer you're typing anti future B.S. on because of the space exploration that you're belittling here. Space or extinction is our destiny. People aren't volunteering for sterilization. Out there are unlimited resources.
Bill1275w 4 months ago
@Bill1275w
>> We do things the hard way!
That's intelligent? In contrast to animals we have the option to limit our numbers.
>> Space or extinction is our destiny
Then why use up all the necessary raw material to do it for TV-sets and cars?
>> People aren't volunteering for sterilization
And why should they? Ever heard of anti-contraceptives?
flamifer1 4 months ago
@flamifer1 If we remain earthbound, extinction is inevitable. Every few million years, there are mass extinction events such as impacts with large heavenly bodies, ice ages, periods of massive volcanism, and anoxic periods. These typically eliminate large land animals (us) and would, even if minor, destroy human civilization. It's close to time for another such period. If you want your grandkids looking, dumbfounded at the doom of their era, like the dinosaurs, that's up to you.
Bill1275w 4 months ago
@Bill1275w
You did not answer my question:
How many people do you think we need to conquer space? Is a world population of 5 billion not enough? Give me 25 million educated people and in less than 500 years we can colonize Mars. Pack the world full with 10 billion ever-starving proletarians and we will run out of natural resources in less than 100 years and destroy the earth's environment together with man's future more effectively as any asteroid impact.
>> part 2
flamifer1 4 months ago
@flamifer1 What I've been trying to say for weeks here now is that if we follow our destiny as explorers, inventors and navigators who figure things out, we could have millions living in space by now and be on our way to colonizing Mars and the planets out there that we are discovering in stellar "goldilocks zones". THAT MEANS A SMALLER POPULATION ON EARTH!!!!!!!!!! Unfortunately, we blew all that "reducing the population" IE wars and holocausts.
Bill1275w 4 months ago
>> we could have millions living in space by now
Radiation, long term effects on astronauts and lack of money have prevented it so far.
But even if it was possible: 8 million people e.g. would be no more than 10% of the increase in population each year. At the current growth rate Mars would be as densely populated as earth within 25 years and the nearest other earth like planet is at least 20 light years away.
Do you think, that India would be faster in space if they had even more children?
flamifer1 4 months ago
@Bill pt 2
Even if, with a gigantic effort, mankind could find a way to support 10 or more billion people on earth: How are you going to explain to them how it came that they can't live in a house with garden instead of the tiny flat on floor 12 in block 17? What are you going to tell them why most animal species are extinct and we eat synthesized food with artificial flavour instead real strawberries and oranges. Are you going to tell them that it was to protect the "right" to have 5 children?
flamifer1 4 months ago
@Bill1275w
Natural gas is a limited resource too. If the population keeps growing for another 50 years, we will have double as many people on the planet when the stuff runs out. And the later it does, the more people will be in troubles. Your argument is invalid.
As for space travel: I strongly suggest to read more about it. And I mean not science-fiction.
flamifer1 4 months ago
@mosquitobight If we didn't abandon our future after Apollo to take over France's war with Vietnam, we wouldn't be having this discussion. We need to fund math and science education and we need a SERIOUS MANNED space program. We could afford this if we didn't stake our lives on the profit motive and stopped trying to turn Southwest Asia and North Africa into Mayberry! BTW, the space shuttle was a JOKE. A quarter billion dollars per launch? Are you fucking kidding me?
Bill1275w 4 months ago
@Bill1275w
I don't see a connection between the space program and the current environmental destruction caused by overpopulation. If you want more smart people, then you don't need more people - Just a better educational system.
flamifer1 4 months ago
@Bill1275w
>> Actually, more people means more solutions to any problems that could possibly result from overpopulation
If we pack a scientist on the bus at each stop, the bus will never be full. right?
I am telling you this because you obviously have strong faith in science:
It's scientists who are warning of the dangers of overpopulation because they know how far we are from space colonisation. Sorry to disappoint you.
flamifer1 4 months ago
@flamifer1 Yes, I have absolute faith in science. It's why I'm alive today. As for the bus analogy, you can only get so many scientists on the bus, but the engineer, steelworker, and machinist can make more busses. Lets call those busses MARS, space stations, and the new planets we're discovering in "Goldilocks Zones" throughout the galaxy. You are working for an elite group of ASSHOLES that want to control the number of slaves on their plantation so we don't revolt or run away.
Bill1275w 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Bill1275w
>> Yes, I have absolute faith in science
Me too, but I also know, that one needs to have it BEFORE it can be applied. And we don't. Until then it would be very unwise to increase world population any further. With a stable population our earth will serve us for another million years. That's more than enough time to develop space travel. But if we overshoot it's straight back to the stone-age on an impoverished world.
BTW: You can't escape from social problems on Mars either.
flamifer1 4 months ago
if you believe in overpopulation then kill yourself! ^_^
BoredomFX 4 months ago
@BoredomFX
If you think more people is always better, then invite 100 people to live with you.
mosquitobight 4 months ago
Comment removed
BoredomFX 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mosquitobight yeah that would be great! there's a vacant house right next door and 3 more at the other block, if you want you can live with me either!... THERE'S STILL A LOT OF SPACE IN THIS WORLD!
USE YOUR BRAIN!!!
BoredomFX 4 months ago
@BoredomFX
>> THERE'S STILL A LOT OF SPACE IN THIS WORLD!
Cool that there is so much space left! I would like to have a hectare of property in Costa Rica for $10 or so with access to the beach and a spring of fresh water please. Talking about it: I need more space for forests and endangered species in general. Can you provide that too?
And then, because you are obviously using your brain so well, please explain why we want to fill up the remaining space? I forgot.
flamifer1 4 months ago
@flamifer1 because people like you always on whining on overpopulation needs to be removed from the population?
BoredomFX 4 months ago
@BoredomFX
You said: THERE'S STILL A LOT OF SPACE IN THIS WORLD!
My question: Please explain why we want to fill up the remaining space?
Your answer: "because people like you always on whining on overpopulation needs to be removed from the population?"
Your answer does not match the question.
I noticed, that people who are for a higher population never answer these 2 questions:
"How many are enough?" and "Why fill up the remaining space?"
What is the reason, I wonder?
flamifer1 4 months ago
@flamifer1 it seemed your the one who doesnt understand my answer. i bet you cant even answer your own questions and why would i answer questions that is based on the questioner's subjective perspective? the logic is simple "If you think its overcrowded then, MOVE!"
if you still cant understand the logic, then you may be having a problem with people... :-(
BoredomFX 4 months ago
BoredomFX
My question was: "Why fill up the remaining space?"
Your first reaction was an irrational threat, then you simply denied to answer the question with this excuse:
>> why would i answer questions that is based on the questioner's subjective perspective?
You could have either answered by denying that there was a limit. Or you could have stated reasons why we should strive for maximum population density. The question maybe inconvenient but it is objective.
flamifer1 4 months ago
@flamifer1
my answer is not an excuse, i just dont like leaded questions that falls on to the advantage of the opponent. by the way, congratulations! you just answered your own question. ^_^
there is no such thing as overpopulation, but only mismanaged control of the population and resources available. one nation may suffer overpopulation but it doesn't apply to all other nations.
either way overpopulation propaganda is another way of masking racism and prejudice to other people.
BoredomFX 4 months ago
@BoredomFX
>> i just dont like leaded questions that falls on to the advantage of the opponent.
I understand that you do not answer my questions because you do not want to admit that the world's resources are not limitless and that there is a maximum number of people it can support.
Just to remind you: It's scientists who have been warning of the dangers of overpopulation and religious fanatics and racists who deny it. (The makers of this movie e.g.)
flamifer1 4 months ago
@BoredomFX
By the way: "leaded questions". In contrary to you, you may ask me any kind of question no matter how "leaded" they are and I will truthfully answer them. The problem is: Any question you may ask will make it only more obvious, that overpopulation really is a problem and that we are in troubles.
With no real arguments left for your cause, I fear you will have to resort to more threats and insults and finally will have to give up.
flamifer1 4 months ago
@flamifer1 yep there's no argument of that overpopulation is troublesome but the WORLD is not overpopulated. even 3rd graders can understand that but you seemed not.
remember, we see the world differently so dont force yourself to be the victor over our argument cause that would make you look pathetic. arguments exercises our reasoning skills and doesnt guarantees both opponent will agree each other.
and it seemed dat your last statement was wrong... i havent met your expectations... ^_^
BoredomFX 4 months ago
>> there's no argument of that overpopulation is troublesome
What the children now in 3rd grade will see is how "troublesome" it can get, when the world's economies are going to try and replace oil with alternative energy sources.
>> but the WORLD is not overpopulated
As long as it's not you who has to live in a mega-slum yourself and who has to line up for a bucket of dirty water. Now you are down to plain denial because you have no valid arguments to support your irrational attitude.
flamifer1 4 months ago
@flamifer1 "As long as it's not you who has to live in a mega-slum yourself and who has to line up for a bucket of dirty water. Now you are down to plain denial because you have no valid arguments to support your irrational attitude." <<now now dont go on too emotional on me buddy, blame your GOVERNMENT! Not me nor the PEOPLE!
i thought i was the one who's gonna flare up first? but it seemed the other way around. now your telling me i have irrational attitude? yeah right!
I
BoredomFX 4 months ago
@BoredomFX
>> blame your GOVERNMENT! Not me nor the PEOPLE!
Is it the government who has the babies?
Millions of people every year have to leave the farms where they are born to end up in the slums of a city because they were so unlucky to be child no. 5 or 6. You are entertaining the convenient attitude to blame the government for being overwhelmed by the endless problems caused by this situation while you have nothing else to offer for a "solution" but to help them have even more babies.
flamifer1 4 months ago
There are some things, that you over-shooters all have in common: A complete lack of interest in the beauty of this planet and its biodiversity and a fervent religious belief that technological progress will always solve in time all problems and shortages caused by a fast growing demand of an ever growing population.
And if it does not work out you are the first ones to cry for blood: Blame the government, blame the multis, immigrants, communists, environmentalists... I am properly disgusted
flamifer1 4 months ago
@flamifer1 auuhh i was right, you got problem... tsk tsk
BoredomFX 4 months ago
@BoredomFX
Only with people with a criminal attitude like you.
flamifer1 4 months ago
@flamifer1 me criminal? your the one who wants to get rid of the people!!
NOW WHO"S THE CRIMINAL NOW? ASSHOLE!!!
BoredomFX 4 months ago
@BoredomFX
Still trying to sell family planning as holocaust? Sorry, the old "birth control=murder" lie won't work any more.
Too many people know already, that birth control has nothing to do with killing people and that using condoms is NOT a crime, while not to inform girls about their rights and the advantages of birth control is.
You have utterly failed to explain why you want to pack more people on this planet right before peak-oil. More fun is not a good enough reason to risk extinction.
flamifer1 4 months ago
@BoredomFX
>> mismanaged control of the population and resources available.
Yes, you can pack ten times more people on this planet. If they work very hard and super-efficient for their daily handful of Monsanto-rice, take there every morning sardine-can ride to work, live in their tiny little flats in Block 217 and take their holidays in balconia. And ... (now comes the best part) are by law forbidden to have more than 2 children.
What are you trying to achieve with your denial?
flamifer1 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@BoredomFX
>> the logic is simple "If you think its overcrowded then, MOVE!"
Your "logic" is simple as these:
"If you don't have clean water, drink beer!" or
"If you need more fish send more fishing boats out!" or
"If you want to see animals go to the zoo!" or
"If there is no land left for you to inherit go to the city"
All these are simple answers.
>> then you may be having a problem with people... :-(
Another one of your simple answers.
flamifer1 4 months ago
@mosquitobight
Excellent suggestion. We should send all proletarians to an island and see what happens.
flamifer1 4 months ago
@mosquitobight u are stupid! insted of living in a house u could live in a 20 story apartment thats room for 20 more people in the same area
1997seanmac 4 months ago
@1997seanmac
Why would anybody prefer to live in an ugly multistory building and share the same little appartment with 20 more people, if he can have a house with a garden and a swimming pool instead? Would you?
flamifer1 4 months ago
@flamifer1 ammm dipshit i said have a 20 story apartment block with a apartment on each floor! its not that hard and id rather live in a mulitystory apartment. a house in the subarbs is like a island soronded by asfelt
1997seanmac 4 months ago
@1997seanmac
Who said anything about suburbs? I live in a house with a big garden. On one side I have a view to a coffee plantage, on the other side are bananas and on the third side is a meadow. The next asphalt road is 200m away. But of course the area it is threatened to turn into city as always.
flamifer1 4 months ago
@flamifer1 I love the big city! That's where the good museums, entertainment, best food, best schools, opportunity, diversity, etc,etc are. I love people! The more the merrier! From NYC! BROOK BROOK BROOKLYYYYYYYN!!!! I'm unfortunately stuck in a boring, quiet suburb.
Bill1275w 4 months ago
@Bill1275w
>> BROOKLYYYYYYYN!!!!
Yes, much fun. As long as supply from the outside runs freely and in abundant quantities. Not so much if not any more. Neither in the suburbs, where the infrastructure is built on cheap gasoline.
But I guess, it is no use to tell that a techno-believer. A person who is convinced, that god and technology will always provide for an ever growing population.
flamifer1 4 months ago
@flamifer1 your actually a dip shit alge is now being used as petrol in most european countries so ya technology can fix everthing. its saveing forests with the computer
1997seanmac 4 months ago
@1997seanm
>> a dip shit alge is now being used as petrol in most european countries
By how much has the total yearly amount of petrol used in Europe DECREASED using the algae?
>> ya technology can fix everthing
No it can't. Due to the growing population and demand, alternative energies have not even been able to reduced the yearly consumption of petrol.
>> save forests with the computer
For how long?
flamifer1 4 months ago
@flamifer1 in ireland by 13% this year and an estimates 20% next year plus on the estmated 2000 electric cars which alone reduce 1040 liters a year.ammm ya they have so before you get facts shut up becauz im sick and tired of listening to you and im only wasting electricity replying! go get an education or some bit of brains before you start bull shitting over a farm and too many cars. you can fix them problems extremly easy.
1997seanmac 4 months ago
@1997seanmac
I confirm: Ireland has reduced consumption of petrol by 13% this year. This is a development in the right direction. I estimate that it can even be cut in half. 2,000 electric cars in 3,000,000 (0,6%) vehicles is still a drop in the ocean, but showing at least a little bit of effort. Thank you for the good news.
Now I would like to know why you think that Ireland is not overpopulated with 4.5 million people, how many will be enough and why to increase the population any further?
flamifer1 4 months ago
@flamifer1 ur ar fucking stupid ireland has 2.5million cars not 3 million and actually nearer to 6 million according to the last figures we have 80 people per killiometre it could suport 3500 per square killiometre and have room for tourism i duno u do the math! and thats with todays technology with tommorows that number will be way higher
1997seanmac 4 months ago
>> Ireland could support 3500 people per km2
No, it could not. Ireland does not have enough raw materials and energy sources to support 246 millon people sustainably.
And why should the tourists come? To see the uniform multi-story buildings, to listen to the noise of the traffic or to squeeze tight into an overcrowded train? Maybe they are interested in the industrial complexes or power-stations? Or in a tour around the seawater desalination or sewage plants?
flamifer1 4 months ago
@flamifer1 ireland has no need for energy materials wave energy alone would be able to power all of asias energy needs for the next 20 years in one day with hidroponics and verticle farms u could feed all of europe in an area half of wat we grow our food in right now. and other resorces ar so valuable we will do anything to get them even if that means space mining (not my words stephen hawkins) and that was found in surveys done by europe and the american goverment.
1997seanmac 4 months ago
@1997seanmac
You know what is the worst part of your science fiction horror? That it not only meant to end all biodiversity of this planet committing the greatest genocide in history, but that there were also no escape from this nightmare.
In your world, there would be no differences. Everything and everyone would be uniform, endlessly repeated. And with the loss of diversity also goes creativity. Even if there were any freedom left: What could be done with it?
No thank's!
flamifer1 4 months ago
@flamifer1 ohhh so new york is so uniform. rio deginero has no wild life and lonod has no parks. people could take up a tiny percentage of the world and still have a house with a garden. only the size of texas is needed but no people like you dont like city or country planning
1997seanmac 4 months ago
@1997seanmac
>> new york is so uniform
Yes, it is. The modern parts of any city in the world are so uniform that it is impossible to know one's location at a glance. They are boring at best. The "wildlife" of the slums of Rio de Janeiro consist of dogs and chicken and try to set up your tent and fireplace in a London park.
flamifer1 3 months ago
@1997seanmac - part 2
>> only the size of texas is needed
The size of Texas is about 700,000 km2, equally distributed to 7 billion people you get 100 m2 per person. In the reality of capitalism that means 50% of the land for 90% of the population. = 200 m2 for a family of 4 to have a house with garden. The market price for properties would be in the thousands per square centimeter. And I don't even want to know how you intend to stack the poorest billion of people.
No thanks!
flamifer1 3 months ago
@flamifer1 was i talking about who has money no! god all you seem to think about is money this and not living in a apartment that! actually i was talking about new yorks people not the city and if people dont like modern areas so much then why ar they buying million doller apartments. rio actually has a ton of monkey who live around the forests that surround the city and in london i know people who went caming in a park with no troule.
1997seanmac 3 months ago
@1997seanmac
You have not answered my question why tourists should come to your science fiction Ireland because you know exactly, that there would be nothing left to see.
flamifer1 4 months ago
@flamifer1 havent you heard of city planning or goverment planning. were not stupid we know not to build on tourist destonations thats why the vast magority of irelands population live in randstads or very densly populated regions of infertile land unfit for tourism or farming. they are now home to 60% of the population and by 2050 over 89% will live there. so start thinking not acting
1997seanmac 3 months ago
@1997seanmac
So 89% of the population will have to live on land unfit for tourism or farming. In other words: in the ugliest places. As I said before: Life quality seems to be no factor in your calculation. And when that space will be occupied, then you just stack higher up, shut people away from daylight and fresh air. And after that? What other plans do you have to make people's lives even more miserable?
flamifer1 3 months ago
@flamifer1 look you ar slow beond belief! were smart enough to build on unusable land that we makes parks and living areas for. im sure the tourist destionation wouldnt be so nice if 5million people were there thats why we build on land that is fit for dense cities. and if you think other wise you need a reality check right now because ur stupid as hell
1997seanmac 3 months ago
@1997seanmac
>> you ar slow beond belief!
I understand the idea very well. What you have not thought through is, that the concept has its limitis too and the main point that continually seems to slip your grasp is: THERE IS NO NEED to store away the poor part of the population in ugly sattelite cities if you simply do not create them in the first place.
That's why education is so important. People need to know, that many children creates poverty and education means prosperity.
flamifer1 3 months ago
@flamifer1 no matter how much you educate people there will always be poor and what we ar seening in almost all of europe (except germany) family sizes ar growing in the native populations in all categories no matter rich or poor. and we all knw overpopulation wont happen the sad fact is that our goverments would just let off a super virus that would kill half the world. i mean sadly they ar that mental. anyway they expect ebola to hit lagos any day soo and when it hits there everyone is fucked
1997seanmac 3 months ago
@1997seanmac
>> family sizes ar growing no matter rich or poor.
That is not correct. The poorer and the less educated people are, the bigger their families.
The explanation is simple: They just make love without considering the consequences. It also does not help that priests encourage their sheep to have many children and/or forbid to use contraceptives.
Have you ever thought that a government needed to be very desperate to eliminate half of its tax payers. What could be a possible reason?
flamifer1 3 months ago
@flamifer1 i am talking about europe to day the average birth rate of a native european is going up in britain the rise has been from 1.67 to 2.04 and that has nothing to do with emmigrants
and in europe christianity has no grip here as 20% are atheist and the ammount of people actual chritians like america has is less then 3% who take it seriously EU figures
well actually aging populations as they are already scaring the chinese to shit. china is thinking of abolishing its 1 child policy
1997seanmac 3 months ago
@1997seanmac
>> aging populations as they are already scaring the chinese to shit
The aging problem can not be solved by increasing the population, because young people will become old one generation later.
>> china is thinking of abolishing its 1 child policy
China has changed to a 2 child policy long ago and people can buy the right to have a third child now. Due to birth control 500 million people were not born and China was spared famines of apocalyptic dimensions (so far).
flamifer1 3 months ago
@flamifer1 actually if ur population is growing there is always going to be more kids then old people thats more then obviuse.
and china still has a one child policy but you can buy ur way to a 2 child policy which is out of reach of most chinese.
and even china admites there famin in the 1940's and 50's were man made to control the country even harder by communist rule. nothing to do with there population. 500million more and thats when there population will stop growin. there not worried
1997seanmac 3 months ago
@1997seanmac
>> actually if ur population is growing there is always going to be more kids then old people
until we overshoot. And that means a diminished existence on a destroyed planet for all future generations. You have already said that you want it so. no comment.
>> which is out of reach of most chinese
Couples want a third child only when they can afford to feed it anyway, right?
>> The man made famines in the 50's
You are right. This had nothing to do with overpopulation.
flamifer1 3 months ago
@flamifer1 i said wed never overshoot and thats so dumb just because now we look at the planet and say we cant hold 23billion dosent mean we cant in the future. technology is always powering ahead fact!
to bring up a child in china is €1000 till 15 years of age the fine is 45000 once off the average chinese person makes €6000 a year you do the math
so why are you going on about famines then. theres enough food now to feed 26billion and growing but 5% of ppl eat half of it, all in the USA
1997seanmac 3 months ago
@1997seanmac
>> i said wed never overshoot ... technology is always powering ahead fact!
That is still to be proven. And I told you before, that people are not going to preserve nature and confine themselves to the ugliest areas. There is no rational reason to increase world population any further.
And: If the average chines person makes only €6000 a year, why shouldn't they concentrate on educating their children rather than having another one?
flamifer1 3 months ago
@flamifer1 ya there is having children isnt like buying a car its something you do because they are your mark on the world no matter what you do you will be remembered by your children and the love you fell for them cant be replacated.
you obviusly havent felt that love.
and most children arent planed there like a present and even if there a accident only 2% of wemen will end it in abortion most of them regret it beound belief. any statistic will tell you.
1997seanmac 3 months ago
@1997seanmac
I admire people more that make a mark on the world with noble deeds. If you love your children, you don't have more than you can feed and give a proper education or you will mark yourself as a proletarian. Sorry, you can't put me in the box "traumatized childhood".
You still have not told me about the advantages of increasing the world population to 23 billion people or more. And why shouldn't poor people rather concentrate on education than on having more than 2 children?
flamifer1 3 months ago
@flamifer1 no i said you obviusly dont have kids. Ya but that is only a couple of hundred people and they dont give a shit about you having kids is diffrent it something you cant feel in any other part of society or consumerism and you cant even try to argue that because its the truth.
Ya thats not an issue in western or communist countrys so there they can have as many kids as they want and in poor contrys they have the same right. if you want kids you can have them no one can stop you
1997seanmac 3 months ago
@1997seanmac
Which right is more valuable? The right to have as many children as you want or the a child's right to be born in a family that can feed you and give you a proper education. To me it's clear, that the child is more important than what the parents want.
By now it is quite obvious, that you have no answer to the question what is to be gained by increasing the world's population any further. And that is, what this is all about.
flamifer1 3 months ago
@flamifer1 ur retarded there is free education and free food if your that poor and you can move from a shity country to europe or the USA if your that poor. No its not this is just you bitching about how you want a perfect world filled with no people and you all by your self. the population will keep on rising because people want kids and that is a good enough reson its not your choice and it never will be so just be quiet about, people they want kids you dont want them to now that selfishness
1997seanmac 3 months ago
@flamifer1 every person is diffrent so new thinking. also larger populations usually mean that people are more forward thinking and more open.
also just the fact that people want to have more kidsis a good enough reason. i want a large family is my choice and it wont be changed i live in a country that has enough food and free education,health,transport and everything.
also i am atheist and i feel you only get one chance at life and our main aim is to have kids so they can experience it.
1997seanmac 3 months ago
@1997seanmac
>> also larger populations usually mean that people are more forward thinking and more open.
Nonsense. In a city with 1 million people people can be as forward thinking and open than in a city with 10 million people. The only difference is the amount of landscape destruction and strain of resources.
>> just the fact that people want to have more kidsis a good enough reason
Yes, it's this very selfishness of the individual that causes all this destruction.
flamifer1 3 months ago
@flamifer1 ya it dose because everyone think diffrently meaing there is more opions! ya and in the country side theres usually no thinking and there all stupid backward people. usually larger citys take up the same space as smaller ones and its been found that citys at 5million are at the peak of using resorses and land space as a city grows it usually ends up growing upwards not outwards!
no you trying to take away there human rights is selfish. go to the sahara it has no people.
1997seanmac 3 months ago
@1997seanmac
>> because everyone think diffrently meaing there is more opions!
What more options do you have in Mexico city (23 million) than in Vienna/Austria? (2 million)
You keep confusing quality with quantity.
And your statement, that that Mexico used up less resources than Vienna shows how far you are detached from reality.
flamifer1 3 months ago
@flamifer1 no theres more opions in mexico city and more opertunites then vienna. and vienna is a city of 2.5million i said citys of 5million are at the peak as city generily then start producing there own food and there ar fewer cars as the transport network improves.
and there is as much quaity in mexico as in vienna. there most famous resident was hitler and he had no qualities so shup because ur some idiot who wants wemen to have no rights if they want 100 kids or zero its not ur choice
1997seanmac 3 months ago
@1997seanmac
Thank you seanmac. That speaks for itself.
flamifer1 3 months ago
@flamifer1 ya so shup trying to make people do shit! its nun of your buissness! get out of peoples bed rooms
1997seanmac 3 months ago
@1997seanmac
What happens to this planet is everyones business. People have no right to destroy and pollute all of nature and the future of our children with it. With the progress of the destruction and more and more people becoming aware of it, more and more people are thinking like me. So you pseudo-liberals are a dying species.
flamifer1 3 months ago
@flamifer1 lmao lovely fantesy world your in to be honest you sound more like a crazy american then a costa rican
it is widly known liberals ar the most open and ar pushing the most for change. also the enviroment of most european countrys is getting better and the whole world is opening its eyes our planet is getting destoried not because of the size of population but because of greed and the top companys in the world such as big coal and oil that ar partners with most goverments.
1997seanmac 3 months ago
@1997seanmac
Yes, and I am saying, that it is not only greed, but also the sheer number of people, greedy or not, that is destroying nature. The environment of most european countries is not getting better. But at least it's not as bad as it would be, if all people had your ambition to leave their mark as a true proletarian.
Just continue to tell the world, that more people need less resources and that the right to have 3 children was more important than the children themselves.
flamifer1 3 months ago
@flamifer1 lmao im not like u i wana live in a highrise apartment i wana be able to walk everywhere and i only want a balcony to grow food on it like most europeans do but no seen as u have no arguments just say im using up all the resorces. 3 children hahaha i want more then that and seen as europe could sustain 3billion theres no fear of people going hungry with free education and liberal inclusive open society i think my children will be fine and happy! and slowly d enviroment is getin better
1997seanmac 3 months ago
@1997seanmac
I wana live in a highrise apartment ... grow food on my balcony
Good for you, that you prefer such a monastic life-style. I suggest, that you try and live for a year off the vegies grown on your balcony and then we can talk about packing 3 or 300 billion people into Europe.
>> 3 children: i want more then that
Yes, I know. To make your mark as a selfish, uneducated, irresponsible, immature proletarian who does not care what becomes of the children he litters the world with.
flamifer1 3 months ago
@flamifer1 did i say that ur just some low life that has nothing better to do then bitch on this about people shouldnt have kids just because you didnt have the oppertunity to have them. and amazingly with hidroponics you could live off a average european balcony for a year.
considering im in d top 0.1% of the population because i have such an IQ then everyone else should be so uneducated they cant breath. Lmao nothings gona happen theyill grow up and get married or cizil unions and be happy
1997seanmac 3 months ago
@1997seanmac
>> just because you didnt have the oppertunity to have them
Yes, thank you they are fine. One is attending a university of tourism and management in the U.S. and our girl is still in school. I admit, that we could not afford to send a third child to university.
>> and amazingly with hidroponics you could live off a average european balcony for a year
Go ahead, do the experiment!
considering im in d top 0.1% of the population because i have such an IQ
I sincerely hope not
flamifer1 3 months ago
@flamifer1 why didnt the third one come to europe vast majority of countrys have no university fees?? and wow arent you the hipocrite you dont even belive the words coming outa your mouth. Its already been done how else would we knw? Haha why because my views arent stupid and have no ground like yours were never going to suffer from over population the worlds population is going to stabelize in 100 years and then there will be people complaing about how aging populations ar destroying the earth
1997seanmac 3 months ago
@1997seanmac
I don't think I need to answer this message. Thank you and have a nice day.
flamifer1 3 months ago
@flamifer1 proble not hope, you have a lovely one too???
1997seanmac 3 months ago
@1997seanmac
>> no you trying to take away there human rights is selfish
Is that so? Is the human "right" to have more than 2 children regardless of the circumstances and the consequences more worth to you than the human right of the child to be born into a world with an intact environment and into a loving family that can feed and give it a proper education?
Remember that a human right ends right there were it starts damaging the one of another person.
flamifer1 3 months ago
@flamifer1 for the 9th time education and food are not an issue if you have a proper goverment. and if you dont have a proper one then wemen cant get contraception so they cant do anything about it!
your right to life is not more important then a babies cause someone in adult hood will never be chosen over a child
1997seanmac 3 months ago
@flamifer1 'the ugly areas' is where most people are and want to be living! citys are the most popular place to live and very few people dont like them there where 98% of growth is going to be and in western countries that figure is even higher so obviusly people dont think there ugly they seem to love them.
theres free education in china and europe and canada along with free health care so no they dont need to focus on that its already marked out for them.
1997seanmac 3 months ago
@flamifer1 and no why do people go to new york or tokyo or london? for the buzz of energy and life for quesin for cosmopolition life in huge metropolises! look go back to ur church and pray to ur fake god because get over it over population will never affect us will never happen when were brought to the edge we always find a way. it the human nature even this planet isnt home anymore were reaching out into space
1997seanmac 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@1997seanmac
>> population will never affect us will never happen
That's simply not true. It does in this very moment. I can hear the "buzz" of the city all around me I am glad that I can flee up the mountain to escape, something many can not. If you want buzz go and live in Tokyo, but you ant-people have not right to destroy the planet.
>> when were brought to the edge we always find a way
Yes, thank you. I can walk myself.
You have no idea, what you are dealing with.
flamifer1 3 months ago
@flamifer1 i have no idea what i am dealing with....so now you ar treating me. you know as well as i do overpopulation aint gona happen population growth is grownding to a halt and theres more a cance a deadly deases is going to wipe all of us out then population
1997seanmac 3 months ago
@flamifer1 ya and that is a bad thing? if u have such a problem move to mongolia they have 2 people per sqaure kilometre there just because u wana live in the shit arse of no where dosent mean people cant creat with there land what they want stop complaining and move on the more people the better fresh ideas and diversity!
1997seanmac 4 months ago
@1997seanmac
>> ya and that is a bad thing?
Yes, it means noise and dust, the heat of the asphalt, criminality, no parking space, traffic jams, bad air and neighbours complaining about my noise. And it means barking dogs instead of hummingbirds in front of the window, no shady trees, no walks in nature, no fresh bananas or mangoes from the tree....
You don't get it, do you? There is a reason why nobody wants to live in Mongolia or the Sahara. And you don't need 12 million people to fill a city.
flamifer1 4 months ago
@flamifer1 ya thats in a shity city go to london or even paris and you will see huge parks there not polluted and there isnt jams on the streets your thinking in the light that everyone is fat slobs! look at the netherlands they arent at all polluted have massive parks and no traffic! so get out of your suv and start using a bike! its not that hard to make citys work you have to cop on and live sustanibly
1997seanmac 4 months ago
@1997
I am not going to discuss the ugly belts of multi-story buildings around London and Paris housing the masses of poor immigrants who nobody wants. And I am not going to speak about the prices for even a small property in the Netherlands. I will simply ask you why you want to redouble the poor part of the population there?
And how I am supposed to escape the noise and stink of the city without my car? Of course, if the city did not already fill the whole valley, I would not have to climb.
flamifer1 4 months ago
@flamifer1 have you heard of a train? guess not and there called councell estates there free housing for the poor and most are being torn down! no when people live sustanibly. and ya you can i duno look at oktoberfest in munic a city of 5million or all the pride parades in tokyo new york super citys both over 30million. and density brought the berlin wall down it caused the civil rights movement in america and citys ar the best places of refuge for people who ar descriminated against
1997seanmac 4 months ago
@1997seanmac
High population density as a guarantee for freedom and a high standard of living. Can you even come up with a more ridiculous idea? As if you could not have a proper Oktoberfest with less than a million visitors. And following this logic Canada or Australia must be dictaturships like North Korea.
Honestly: How many people do you think can live sustainably on this planet and why push it to the limit?
Ever heard of overshooting?
flamifer1 4 months ago
@flamifer1 if you want to bring it to fact fine so 95% of canadians live in only 10% of canada. no you couldnt have the same oktoberfest with out them million tourists just like you couldnt have the buzz of new york with out its 27 and a half million residence. and you know why they have a dictatorship in north korea because of fear and no diversity vertualy 100% of the population are korean but of course you wouldnt know that. and with todays technology 15 times the population of the earth 2day
1997seanmac 4 months ago
@1997seanmac >> live sustainably
Do you believe you can redouble the population of a country forever as long as it is done in a sustainable way? According to you: When will it be enough?
When most animals have gone extinct?
When we run out of the first major natural resource?
When we can't stand the stink anymore?
or when we run out of food and clean water?
And why go so far? Just to end up with strict birth control laws enforced with cruel methods?
flamifer1 4 months ago
@flamifer1 what ar you on about overpopulation is when no one has food! you ar obviusly very uneducated. im being childish?? well i am 14 so i guess im aloud but the only one whos being childish is you. and by the way im sure that lovely sugar cane farm or what ever you live in was once a rain forest so thanks for take some of my oxygen. Now leave me alone and stop trying to make assumtions with absolutly no fact
1997seanmac 4 months ago
@1997seanmac
Yes, the land I live on used to be rain forest not so long ago. And it would still be, if the Latinos did not have YOUR attitude: The more the merrier! Now the whole valley is city. And this did not improve its beauty. You can believe me that.
Bad news for you: Currently we are working on a project for soft tourism. It means no multi-story buildings in front of the beaches, no discos, no second airport, the preservation of the national park and a lot less tourists.
flamifer1 4 months ago
@flamifer1 i dont have that attitude acctually i want them areas where we get our oxygen to be cept. its selfish people like you who thinks they can do what they want with it and turn it into a farm. ammm what have i been saying to be sustanible which means to preserve. and your the one complaining about your poor fucking farm well soft tourism takes up more land then high density living so cop on birkering with a 14 year old and especially over issues you dont even know anything about
1997seanmac 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@1997seanmac
Don't be childish. You are perfectly aware, that you can have all the fun you want in a city with half a million inhabitants too.
>> just because u wana live in the shit arse of no where...
Thank you. I am living in a very beautiful place right now. I just don't want that to change.
>> dosent mean people cant creat with there land what they want
That's exactly what overpopulation means. If they have land at all.
flamifer1 4 months ago