Anyone over the age of 35 who has made the wise choice of not bringing more children into this world should receive a HUGE tax break. Think of all of the resources that have been saved, all of the pollution that will not be produced, and there will be more natural beauty and more opportunities inside the classroom.
Finely someone that really understand the problems of today and how it affekts the environment. Hleping the environmental problems is done by one simpe action, one child policy. How else are we going to adress the problems with increse population?
Mandate vasectomies for males. And, in some cases, the Octomoms of the world need to be forced to have abortions and to have their uteri cut out. Get tough with breeders.
If you don't support force for MY causes - animal rights and fighting world human overpopulation - then you have NO right to demand that I obey tough laws for YOUR causes.
Mandate vasectomies for males, starting with anyone who votes for Republican, Democrat, and anyone who is insane and irrational to believe in delusional fantasies like "god". If they don't like the law, tough shit. Pot smokers are forced to live with oppressive laws that imprison them for harmless pot smoking. Poor people should not be oppressed by laws that make it illegal for them to use force to take back wealth and resources stolen from them by kleptocrat bankers.
This is crap, you guys are idiots, you know nothing of what the earth can support. Current rates of mortality in the 3rd worldare based on resource mismanagement , theres too many people for whats being made available, if they actually had sustained democracy rather than war tribes and dictators, it would be a different storey. Why don't you actually do some research rather than blaming black people you closed minded freak.
Don't get me wrong. I don't suggest humans "trample" nature. But rather, we need not "apologize" for our huge and growing numbers. Our natural abundance is nobody's fault. Nobody is to blame. It just is. It's what God has caused/allowed/commanded. Let's be grateful that so many humans all get opportunity to live, and not be inventing phony or exaggerated problems or excuses to deny our fellow man, life
Without humans to manage nature, other species might be WORSE off
>>". It's what God has caused/allowed/commanded. "
- but this god can be quite the Malthusian / Eugenecist when he wants to: sending floods to exterminate all but a handfull of carefully selected individuals
>>"Without humans to manage nature, other species might be WORSE off"
@pronatalist Yes. Subhuman trash like you are to blame. If you enjoy people doing whatever they want so much, then you have no right to complain about women having abortions or those of us who support euthanizing severely crippled babies. It's all just part of nature and competition. However, you pro-lifers are the biggest crybaby hypocrites, forcing GOVERNMENT down on abortion doctors and heroes like Dr Jack Kevorkian.
Other species (actually humans are a "kind" as in man-kind) might have some restraint of so-called "carrying capacity," but that doesn't mean nor prove that humans need be subject to that. What for do we humans have intelligence for then?
You suggest I should have fewer children than God might otherwise have me to have, so that a few more squirrels or birds, already of abundant number, might exist? Doesn't that mock God, to so feign diminishment of the value of man?
Too many of any given species? Now what does that have to do with humans? Are you not aware that humans are special, created in God's image, or do you feign ignorance, so as to be a faithful adherent to the false religion of atheism/evolution?
If we be "too many" humans, compared then to what? Did I mention that we are special, and commanded of God to multiply? If we be "too many," then nature can just naturally bend to make way for us.
@pronatalist Religionists like you are mentally inferior to humans. That is because you cannot get your own circular logic. Each individual is free to assign whatever rights to whatever other individuals they want. Period.
There is nothing special, for instance, about the founders of the USA and to whom THEY assigned rights.
PETA assigns rights to non-humans. I do it slightly differently than PETA. Native Americans had different laws, too.
You claim there is a lot more humans than the world can comfortably support. So what?, and yet I don't even agree with that. Comfortably support? What a VAGUE word "comfort" is. What is its measure? Just mere OPINION of eco-freak nature worshipers? If we want to talk truth, science, or whatever, maybe we need something we can measure, and "comfort" is too abstract and undefinable for that. Rather, is it possible via technology to support so many people? Then what "overpop" problem?
What do you mean it is not natural? It's natural for humans to eat food, It's natural for their blood to pump through the arteries, veins, capillaries. It's natural for married humans to mate and have babies. God commanded people that they multiply. How is it not natural?
World isn't "overpopulated." That would imply that some people are unimportant or not valuable. But every human life is sacred and is valuable.
Humans being populous is good. We being omnivores is good for us.
@pronatalist - its natural for many creatures to follow a "boom-bust" curve, population explosion then collapse with mass starvation, intra-species violence, canibalism when their resource base is exceeded.
@pronatalist There is actual proof and evidence of Bigfoot and of aliens with advanced technology.
There is no logically self-consistent proof of this "god" thing.
And it is natural for different political groups to vie for and demand power. Therefore ALL political groups - e.g. the Socialist Party, Communist Party, PETA, the IPCC - are all sacred and valuable.
But, you conservatard hypocrites absolutely never mention them, because you're selfish trash.
also taking rock out of parts of the earth where there are rock quarry's and putting it in other parts of the earth in the form of concrete and other building materials is causing a huge unbalanced spin which is heating up the earth more from the inside than the volcanoes can disperse, on day it will go boom....
Obviously the pollution humans are creating both above and below the oceans will wipe out mankind before the birthrate can cram individuals on every spare part of the earth/sea. Saying that there is more space available is stupid. Who cares, when we are killing off all other plant/animal species & ourselves before the last uninhabitable space can be filled!
@dmckenz1 That's why we allover the world need to pot our resouces from military and other programs that get more then they need and develope space exploration technology. Mars if terraformed could be inhabeted by up to 5 billion.
>>"Mars if terraformed could be inhabeted by up to 5 billion."
1. more likely we'll teraform Earth into something more like Mars (not vica versa), so soon it will be uninhabitable.
2. Earth's sustainable carrying capacity is 1-2billion maybe? Mars is physically smaller so you'd be lucky to get 0.5billion there if you sucessfully teraformed it.
3. overpopulation on earth diverts resources away from space exploration, wasting it on basic subsistence
Entire world population could each be given 2 acres in Australia.
Every man woman and child now living on the planet could live on one continent and there would still be 1/3rd of Australia's land mass uninhabited, along with no one living on the other 6 continents.
Statements made to imply the world is overpopulated are lies or ignorance.
Corruption is mental kryptonite. Make the penalty for politicians and officials who murder the truth, equal to the crime.
If Politicians & Public Officials had to pass lie detector tests while wired to electric chairs and World Bankers were appropriately labeled World Terrorists with their wealth divided equally all Nations, 90% of the worlds problems would be resolved.
"Entire world population could each be given 2 acres in Australia."
Now, I'm not good at math. I admit that straight up. But if that was true, then -according to my calculator, the global population would have to be less than two million. And that'd leave no spare room what so ever.
So, with all due respect, I think you're wrong. Even if possible, overpopulation has nothing to do with how many people you can cram onto the Earth, but the extent to which they tax the supporting biosphere.
@Glargl 2 acers is approximitly 7 840.8 m2, or 1/127.53 of a square kilometer. That would be about 51 825 677.27 suare kilometers. So yes, this is more then the 7.6 million square kilometers in australia (wikipidia). It would be 2 acres from Australia, Canada, US, Russia, and China.
@waketheoblivious But the "2 acres" statment is wrong, in my other comment I explain why 2 acers for everyone would be needed from australia, Canada, Russia, US And China, this NOT including water. It would still leave litte if any room for anything else.
If you start driving across Texas at Sunrise, there's a good chance you won't have crossed the state of Texas by sunset after having driven the entire day. As your driving notice Thousands of acres of tillable land that is not presently used for agriculture other then grazing. only 17% or the land State of Arizona is deedable land, the rest is Federal, Indian Reservations or State land. Of the deedable only a fraction is used for agriculture although easily could be.
Evolution rode in on a Hoax. A deliberate, calculated manipulative effort that was planned, organized, implemented and controlled. An evil diabolical agenda to get an Evil Illusion taught as fact. Piltdown Man was not an innocent mistake. Those posing as Scientists to create this Illusion are more Evil then any Genocidal Maniac ever pruned a few million "sheeple" from the tree of humanity. "Blinded you with Science, Science, Science.." TDolby's Satanic Mockery of humanity's present situation
Kill poor people, they are the ones causing overpopulation. Rich people can feed their kids so there is no problem, it is the poor people having kids they can't sustain causing the problems today.
That's just bloody stupid. Who do you think is using the most resouces - the lump of redundant American protoplasm in his bigass Hummer or the dirtpoor farmer in some forgotten backwater deep in Africa? We the rich first worlders may not procreate to the extent they do in the third world, but our individual claim on global resources is many many times larger. Thus, we are the problem. Not them.
Let me tell you what doesn't fit into a serious or "scientific" discussion. Vague feelings of overpop. Of course "scientists" seem to be without a clue, as to what size pop is "just right," and which is "too many" people. No proper definition, no consensus, just a bunch of "scare tactics" prattle.
What is "optimum" sized pop? Consider Utilitarian Principle, that often the best thing to do is that which most benefits most people. "Nearly as large as possible."
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Let babies push out naturally. More and more people would be glad to live, so encourage large families worldwide, so that far more people may enjoy life. Welcome people to reproduce at the level of fecundity, having just as many babies as their bodies want to produce, or "all the children God gives."
If population growth is NATURAL and coming, that's all the more reason to EMBRACE it. A more pronatalist mindset helps better ADAPT the people and the environment to hold lots more people.
And perhaps "nature" has a different "idea" about that?
Human beings being social creatures, and highly adaptable, and how many other evidences, suggest that humans are designed to potentially eventually become incredibly populous and extremely dense, if or as need be.
I think cities are far more "natural" than some claim, as they are the obvious mild "population arcologies" that may help to house a burgeoning world population growing supposedly "out of control." Nature likes beautiful cities.
I think I heard it already. I'm on dial-up, so I can't rewatch every boring speech video that could have been done as mere text.
There's no logical reason why energy should have to be either scarce or expensive. There's so many ways to produce energy or electricity to do productive work for man's helpful labor-saving machines.
The planet is naturally becoming more dense with people, and more urban. What do so many people in cities then need to prosper? Cheap, dependable, affordable energy.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Yes, I know what exponential population growth means. It means that the more of us there are, the faster our numbers grow. Parents having more children in the past, means more women of childbearing age now, and more birth canal paths from which babies may emerge. But I am pretty sure that was God's idea from the start, for Adam & Eve's descendents to also inherit the ability to reproduce.
Each year, there's some 76 million more people. Naturally put them in between all the people already living
Hmmm. People could live on this planet forever, just like a baby can live in the womb forever, eh? I think not. There comes a time to "grow up," including the naturally-growing size of the human race. We can't stay "small" forever. That would be just too weird.
Where do the people get their food? Green Revolution, better production methods, synthetic.
Fiction? Human populations are growing as we speak.
The Bible clearly indicates that humans are extremely valuable.
We are dying off like flies. When children are sucking on their hands as a substitute for food to the point their flesh is rotting off. I am not grateful for the lungs full of pollution nor the tons upon tons of diapers piled high in forests. Or the trees being cleared in the rainforest to help create more for the over consumption of growing populations. You want talk about God's intent for Adam and Eve and our way of living? I don't recall skyscrapers in the bible, I remember a garden.
Tons upon tons of diapers piled high in forests? Where is this?
Now what for would Adam & Eve or Moses need to know anything about skyscrapers? Imagine climbing all those stairs. No elevators back then.
God's intent for Adam & Eve and humans? Genesis 1:28, 9:1 Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth. Not far into the Bible, and already humans are building cities. Sounds like the natural proper way, way back when or whatever, was pushing babies out, and still is.
It's in the Oceans. They clear forest land to make way for land fills to keep up with such things as the diapers. LISTEN TO WHAT I AM TELLING YOU....WE ARE NOT ALL CHRISTIANS. WE DON'T ALL GIVE A RIGHTS HINY ABOUT YOUR PERSONAL HOLY BOOK. IT DOES NOT FIT IN WITH A SCIENTIFIC DEBATE. Though, the bible was written thousands of years ago, when there were far fewer people. When it became a problem such as it is, I think God would prefer us to then stop.
Diapers are a small percentage of landfills. I think like maybe 1%. Anyway, cost of disposing of trash is trivial compared to immense value of each and every human life. Even landfills could be more numerous and bigger, if it helped all the more people be able to come alive.
God's commandment to multiply has not been rescinded. Most everybody said that, to my little survey. God is not impressed with our imagined overpop. Bad news sells too easily, but what about truth?
I'm a pagan....I don't believe in Adam and Eve. I also believe in a Goddess...so uh...your argument just went out the window for me. But my personal spiritual beliefs are not relevant in a discussion such as this and neither is yours.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Population control freaks are very cruel. They go against nature with crazy over-educated crackpot theories that deny recognizing the sacredness of each and every human life, created in the image of God.
In the Left Behind CD dramatization of the book series, the Anti-Christ scolded the developing nations for letting their populations "balloon" in size. Sounds like an anti-christ thing to do. Conversely, what's the humane thing to do? Invite the nations to balloon to hold lots more people!
Anyone over the age of 35 who has made the wise choice of not bringing more children into this world should receive a HUGE tax break. Think of all of the resources that have been saved, all of the pollution that will not be produced, and there will be more natural beauty and more opportunities inside the classroom.
MrBeautifulba1 9 months ago
@MrBeautifulba1
Finely someone that really understand the problems of today and how it affekts the environment. Hleping the environmental problems is done by one simpe action, one child policy. How else are we going to adress the problems with increse population?
Se my article on the matter
wwwenvironmentinfocuscom
danze78 8 months ago
Mandate vasectomies for males. And, in some cases, the Octomoms of the world need to be forced to have abortions and to have their uteri cut out. Get tough with breeders.
If you don't support force for MY causes - animal rights and fighting world human overpopulation - then you have NO right to demand that I obey tough laws for YOUR causes.
mphello 11 months ago
Mandate vasectomies for males, starting with anyone who votes for Republican, Democrat, and anyone who is insane and irrational to believe in delusional fantasies like "god". If they don't like the law, tough shit. Pot smokers are forced to live with oppressive laws that imprison them for harmless pot smoking. Poor people should not be oppressed by laws that make it illegal for them to use force to take back wealth and resources stolen from them by kleptocrat bankers.
mphello 11 months ago
This is crap, you guys are idiots, you know nothing of what the earth can support. Current rates of mortality in the 3rd worldare based on resource mismanagement , theres too many people for whats being made available, if they actually had sustained democracy rather than war tribes and dictators, it would be a different storey. Why don't you actually do some research rather than blaming black people you closed minded freak.
Cylixx3 1 year ago
@jolsteiner (Part 3 of 3):
Don't get me wrong. I don't suggest humans "trample" nature. But rather, we need not "apologize" for our huge and growing numbers. Our natural abundance is nobody's fault. Nobody is to blame. It just is. It's what God has caused/allowed/commanded. Let's be grateful that so many humans all get opportunity to live, and not be inventing phony or exaggerated problems or excuses to deny our fellow man, life
Without humans to manage nature, other species might be WORSE off
pronatalist 1 year ago
@pronatalist
>> "Our natural abundance is nobody's"
- we can use our brains to avoid it.
>>". It's what God has caused/allowed/commanded. "
- but this god can be quite the Malthusian / Eugenecist when he wants to: sending floods to exterminate all but a handfull of carefully selected individuals
>>"Without humans to manage nature, other species might be WORSE off"
- this statement is backwards.
walter0bz 1 year ago
@pronatalist Yes. Subhuman trash like you are to blame. If you enjoy people doing whatever they want so much, then you have no right to complain about women having abortions or those of us who support euthanizing severely crippled babies. It's all just part of nature and competition. However, you pro-lifers are the biggest crybaby hypocrites, forcing GOVERNMENT down on abortion doctors and heroes like Dr Jack Kevorkian.
If you're not vegan, you don't care about life.
mphello 11 months ago
@pronatalist God probably doesn't exist you subhuman moron. Learn2logic.
batmanpronz 9 months ago
@jolsteiner
Other species (actually humans are a "kind" as in man-kind) might have some restraint of so-called "carrying capacity," but that doesn't mean nor prove that humans need be subject to that. What for do we humans have intelligence for then?
You suggest I should have fewer children than God might otherwise have me to have, so that a few more squirrels or birds, already of abundant number, might exist? Doesn't that mock God, to so feign diminishment of the value of man?
pronatalist 1 year ago
@jolsteiner
Too many of any given species? Now what does that have to do with humans? Are you not aware that humans are special, created in God's image, or do you feign ignorance, so as to be a faithful adherent to the false religion of atheism/evolution?
If we be "too many" humans, compared then to what? Did I mention that we are special, and commanded of God to multiply? If we be "too many," then nature can just naturally bend to make way for us.
Other species/kinds do not have HUMAN rights
pronatalist 1 year ago
@pronatalist Religionists like you are mentally inferior to humans. That is because you cannot get your own circular logic. Each individual is free to assign whatever rights to whatever other individuals they want. Period.
There is nothing special, for instance, about the founders of the USA and to whom THEY assigned rights.
PETA assigns rights to non-humans. I do it slightly differently than PETA. Native Americans had different laws, too.
*I* assign rights based on CONSEQUENCES.
mphello 11 months ago
@jolsteiner
You claim there is a lot more humans than the world can comfortably support. So what?, and yet I don't even agree with that. Comfortably support? What a VAGUE word "comfort" is. What is its measure? Just mere OPINION of eco-freak nature worshipers? If we want to talk truth, science, or whatever, maybe we need something we can measure, and "comfort" is too abstract and undefinable for that. Rather, is it possible via technology to support so many people? Then what "overpop" problem?
pronatalist 1 year ago
@jolsteiner
What do you mean it is not natural? It's natural for humans to eat food, It's natural for their blood to pump through the arteries, veins, capillaries. It's natural for married humans to mate and have babies. God commanded people that they multiply. How is it not natural?
World isn't "overpopulated." That would imply that some people are unimportant or not valuable. But every human life is sacred and is valuable.
Humans being populous is good. We being omnivores is good for us.
pronatalist 1 year ago
@pronatalist - its natural for many creatures to follow a "boom-bust" curve, population explosion then collapse with mass starvation, intra-species violence, canibalism when their resource base is exceeded.
walter0bz 1 year ago
@pronatalist There is actual proof and evidence of Bigfoot and of aliens with advanced technology.
There is no logically self-consistent proof of this "god" thing.
And it is natural for different political groups to vie for and demand power. Therefore ALL political groups - e.g. the Socialist Party, Communist Party, PETA, the IPCC - are all sacred and valuable.
But, you conservatard hypocrites absolutely never mention them, because you're selfish trash.
mphello 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
too many people causes a toll on the earth.
it's best if each family has 2 kids or less.
Iamtheman4u2 1 year ago
The Federal Reserve is the ultimate one to blame.
BanGovernment 2 years ago
also taking rock out of parts of the earth where there are rock quarry's and putting it in other parts of the earth in the form of concrete and other building materials is causing a huge unbalanced spin which is heating up the earth more from the inside than the volcanoes can disperse, on day it will go boom....
truckertwotimes 2 years ago
That's why I'm not gonna make children. Because they will have to struggle for space and suffer.
Zhmenka 2 years ago 3
Obviously the pollution humans are creating both above and below the oceans will wipe out mankind before the birthrate can cram individuals on every spare part of the earth/sea. Saying that there is more space available is stupid. Who cares, when we are killing off all other plant/animal species & ourselves before the last uninhabitable space can be filled!
dmckenz1 2 years ago
@dmckenz1 That's why we allover the world need to pot our resouces from military and other programs that get more then they need and develope space exploration technology. Mars if terraformed could be inhabeted by up to 5 billion.
dave19941000 1 year ago
@dave19941000
>>"Mars if terraformed could be inhabeted by up to 5 billion."
1. more likely we'll teraform Earth into something more like Mars (not vica versa), so soon it will be uninhabitable.
2. Earth's sustainable carrying capacity is 1-2billion maybe? Mars is physically smaller so you'd be lucky to get 0.5billion there if you sucessfully teraformed it.
3. overpopulation on earth diverts resources away from space exploration, wasting it on basic subsistence
walter0bz 1 year ago
@walter0bz When I said 5 billion, I forgot the 0 and point before it, thank you for pointing that out.
dave19941000 1 year ago
Entire world population could each be given 2 acres in Australia.
Every man woman and child now living on the planet could live on one continent and there would still be 1/3rd of Australia's land mass uninhabited, along with no one living on the other 6 continents.
Statements made to imply the world is overpopulated are lies or ignorance.
Corruption is mental kryptonite. Make the penalty for politicians and officials who murder the truth, equal to the crime.
waketheoblivious 2 years ago
If Politicians & Public Officials had to pass lie detector tests while wired to electric chairs and World Bankers were appropriately labeled World Terrorists with their wealth divided equally all Nations, 90% of the worlds problems would be resolved.
waketheoblivious 2 years ago 2
"Entire world population could each be given 2 acres in Australia."
Now, I'm not good at math. I admit that straight up. But if that was true, then -according to my calculator, the global population would have to be less than two million. And that'd leave no spare room what so ever.
So, with all due respect, I think you're wrong. Even if possible, overpopulation has nothing to do with how many people you can cram onto the Earth, but the extent to which they tax the supporting biosphere.
Glargl 2 years ago 6
@Glargl 2 acers is approximitly 7 840.8 m2, or 1/127.53 of a square kilometer. That would be about 51 825 677.27 suare kilometers. So yes, this is more then the 7.6 million square kilometers in australia (wikipidia). It would be 2 acres from Australia, Canada, US, Russia, and China.
dave19941000 1 year ago
@Glargl My calculation say the world pop would be 969 228 000'ish. You may be having trouble converting from Imperial to Metric.
dave19941000 1 year ago
@waketheoblivious But the "2 acres" statment is wrong, in my other comment I explain why 2 acers for everyone would be needed from australia, Canada, Russia, US And China, this NOT including water. It would still leave litte if any room for anything else.
dave19941000 1 year ago
@dave19941000
If you start driving across Texas at Sunrise, there's a good chance you won't have crossed the state of Texas by sunset after having driven the entire day. As your driving notice Thousands of acres of tillable land that is not presently used for agriculture other then grazing. only 17% or the land State of Arizona is deedable land, the rest is Federal, Indian Reservations or State land. Of the deedable only a fraction is used for agriculture although easily could be.
waketheoblivious 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Evolution rode in on a Hoax. A deliberate, calculated manipulative effort that was planned, organized, implemented and controlled. An evil diabolical agenda to get an Evil Illusion taught as fact. Piltdown Man was not an innocent mistake. Those posing as Scientists to create this Illusion are more Evil then any Genocidal Maniac ever pruned a few million "sheeple" from the tree of humanity. "Blinded you with Science, Science, Science.." TDolby's Satanic Mockery of humanity's present situation
waketheoblivious 1 year ago
Doesn't that mean someone new must be killed every four seconds? I propose useless eaters.
HyperIndividualist 2 years ago
Drop condom bombs over India and Latin America! That or else sterilize these nations without them knowing about it.
edelweissnpa 3 years ago 6
Kill poor people, they are the ones causing overpopulation. Rich people can feed their kids so there is no problem, it is the poor people having kids they can't sustain causing the problems today.
demexii1 3 years ago
kill the poor people and you woulfd have the balls to do that ur goin to hell may god have mercy on ur stuborn soul
2timedcomady 3 years ago
That's just bloody stupid. Who do you think is using the most resouces - the lump of redundant American protoplasm in his bigass Hummer or the dirtpoor farmer in some forgotten backwater deep in Africa? We the rich first worlders may not procreate to the extent they do in the third world, but our individual claim on global resources is many many times larger. Thus, we are the problem. Not them.
Glargl 2 years ago 2
To dianaandjackiejfk (continued):
Let me tell you what doesn't fit into a serious or "scientific" discussion. Vague feelings of overpop. Of course "scientists" seem to be without a clue, as to what size pop is "just right," and which is "too many" people. No proper definition, no consensus, just a bunch of "scare tactics" prattle.
What is "optimum" sized pop? Consider Utilitarian Principle, that often the best thing to do is that which most benefits most people. "Nearly as large as possible."
pronatalist 3 years ago
Please change your text next time. Many words are the same color as some of the background and you can't see them. Other than that, good video.
mgilbo1 3 years ago
thanks! I'm sorry about that.
duvalf17 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Let babies push out naturally. More and more people would be glad to live, so encourage large families worldwide, so that far more people may enjoy life. Welcome people to reproduce at the level of fecundity, having just as many babies as their bodies want to produce, or "all the children God gives."
If population growth is NATURAL and coming, that's all the more reason to EMBRACE it. A more pronatalist mindset helps better ADAPT the people and the environment to hold lots more people.
pronatalist 4 years ago
I don't think that it is NATURAL to have an overpopulated world.
duvalf17 4 years ago
And perhaps "nature" has a different "idea" about that?
Human beings being social creatures, and highly adaptable, and how many other evidences, suggest that humans are designed to potentially eventually become incredibly populous and extremely dense, if or as need be.
I think cities are far more "natural" than some claim, as they are the obvious mild "population arcologies" that may help to house a burgeoning world population growing supposedly "out of control." Nature likes beautiful cities.
pronatalist 4 years ago
You should watch the lecture "Arithmetic, Polulation, and Energy" by Dr. Albert A. Bartlett, maybe then you would change your mind.
here on YouTube:
watch?v=F-QA2rkpBSY
HamiDjoukou 4 years ago
I think I heard it already. I'm on dial-up, so I can't rewatch every boring speech video that could have been done as mere text.
There's no logical reason why energy should have to be either scarce or expensive. There's so many ways to produce energy or electricity to do productive work for man's helpful labor-saving machines.
The planet is naturally becoming more dense with people, and more urban. What do so many people in cities then need to prosper? Cheap, dependable, affordable energy.
pronatalist 4 years ago
pronatalist; I guess you still don't realise what exponential population growth means...
HamiDjoukou 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Yes, I know what exponential population growth means. It means that the more of us there are, the faster our numbers grow. Parents having more children in the past, means more women of childbearing age now, and more birth canal paths from which babies may emerge. But I am pretty sure that was God's idea from the start, for Adam & Eve's descendents to also inherit the ability to reproduce.
Each year, there's some 76 million more people. Naturally put them in between all the people already living
pronatalist 4 years ago
And what has your god planed for us when humanity used up this planet, no more room left than a small square per person?
HamiDjoukou 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
You don't actually think people are going to live on this "little" planet forever?
If there's but only a small square per person, hypothetically, didn't you forget that people can be stacked vertically into highrises?
It's God who commanded Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth, so that means God gets to decide the population size for us.
Why do we complain when God allows there to be so many of us to get to live? We would rather be dying off like flies? We like being ungrateful?
pronatalist 4 years ago
They could.
Where do they get their food?
Fiction is no basis for argument.
God does not love humans any more than bears, bison, or beavers. That arrogant, ignorant thinking is the problem our culture is hiding from you.
dnHooligan 4 years ago
Reply to dnHooligan:
Hmmm. People could live on this planet forever, just like a baby can live in the womb forever, eh? I think not. There comes a time to "grow up," including the naturally-growing size of the human race. We can't stay "small" forever. That would be just too weird.
Where do the people get their food? Green Revolution, better production methods, synthetic.
Fiction? Human populations are growing as we speak.
The Bible clearly indicates that humans are extremely valuable.
pronatalist 4 years ago
Only factually, logically, and scientifically...if there weren't too many damned people, and we weren't destroying everything as quickly as possible.
Yeah, scientists are stupid and wrong.
Oh, my...I responded in order. 6.7 billion and growing. TOO many to sustain.
Fiction.
dnHooligan 4 years ago
We are dying off like flies. When children are sucking on their hands as a substitute for food to the point their flesh is rotting off. I am not grateful for the lungs full of pollution nor the tons upon tons of diapers piled high in forests. Or the trees being cleared in the rainforest to help create more for the over consumption of growing populations. You want talk about God's intent for Adam and Eve and our way of living? I don't recall skyscrapers in the bible, I remember a garden.
dianaandjackiejfk 3 years ago
To dianaandjackiejfk:
Tons upon tons of diapers piled high in forests? Where is this?
Now what for would Adam & Eve or Moses need to know anything about skyscrapers? Imagine climbing all those stairs. No elevators back then.
God's intent for Adam & Eve and humans? Genesis 1:28, 9:1 Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth. Not far into the Bible, and already humans are building cities. Sounds like the natural proper way, way back when or whatever, was pushing babies out, and still is.
pronatalist 3 years ago
It's in the Oceans. They clear forest land to make way for land fills to keep up with such things as the diapers. LISTEN TO WHAT I AM TELLING YOU....WE ARE NOT ALL CHRISTIANS. WE DON'T ALL GIVE A RIGHTS HINY ABOUT YOUR PERSONAL HOLY BOOK. IT DOES NOT FIT IN WITH A SCIENTIFIC DEBATE. Though, the bible was written thousands of years ago, when there were far fewer people. When it became a problem such as it is, I think God would prefer us to then stop.
dianaandjackiejfk 3 years ago
To dianaandjackiejfk:
Diapers are a small percentage of landfills. I think like maybe 1%. Anyway, cost of disposing of trash is trivial compared to immense value of each and every human life. Even landfills could be more numerous and bigger, if it helped all the more people be able to come alive.
God's commandment to multiply has not been rescinded. Most everybody said that, to my little survey. God is not impressed with our imagined overpop. Bad news sells too easily, but what about truth?
pronatalist 3 years ago
I'm a pagan....I don't believe in Adam and Eve. I also believe in a Goddess...so uh...your argument just went out the window for me. But my personal spiritual beliefs are not relevant in a discussion such as this and neither is yours.
dianaandjackiejfk 3 years ago
I think that was a good video and it makes sense. I also think that green house gases are a problem.
duvalf17 4 years ago
Mmmm yeah, that is why God invented the skyscraper and toyota.
dianaandjackiejfk 3 years ago
@pronatalist You are mentally ill. You belong in a psychiatric facility under close observation.
batmanpronz 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Population control freaks are very cruel. They go against nature with crazy over-educated crackpot theories that deny recognizing the sacredness of each and every human life, created in the image of God.
In the Left Behind CD dramatization of the book series, the Anti-Christ scolded the developing nations for letting their populations "balloon" in size. Sounds like an anti-christ thing to do. Conversely, what's the humane thing to do? Invite the nations to balloon to hold lots more people!
pronatalist 4 years ago
Well done, France.
Hope you get a good grade!!
(Kasia)
kkatekkate 4 years ago