I would have the presence of mind to explain that the entire population of the world could fit into the state of Texas with about 1000 square feet per person, leaving the entire rest of the world empty.
The Population of the united state is increasing by 3 million people every year? Big deal. When overpopulation begins to hurt, we will adjust. Not worried.
@usernamelando Is arithmatic the only worthy and applicable discipline for this subject. Look for Wally Wallington on youtube. Why, I saw a Nova program full of scientists, PHDs. They had no explanation. They attempted solving it using the "technology of the day." They pathetically failed. Wally Wallington "RETIRED CONSTRUCTION WORKER figured out a plausible solution proven to work. WHEN THOSE WITHOUT A PHD ARE NOT ALLOWED TO CHALLENGE A PHD in wide open theoretical stuff. . .SAD
@hagsmunamadurinn I agree. I haven't watched the rest of the series yet (and will probably will not) but I doubt he ever addresses the main problems of the world today such as the existence of governments and centralization. There's no need for centralization and never was. There's also no need for governments in fact governments have killed more humans than all other causes combined.
Most people have been brainwashed to believe they cannot survive without government and that is so wrong.
He makes a reactionary malthusian mistake of ignoring the fact that humans are potent. More humans do not equate mere dead weight and a drain on resources. As we multliply there are yet more of us to find and enact solutions to problems and produce value. If our numbers became large enough to more than cover the entire natural dry land surface area of our planet, we would already have been smart enough to have bulit skyskrapers that double the surface area we could habitate
@xmexdf1 Yes, it is the simplest solution, but there is the thing, that some couples would not accept that, because of religion or some concepts they are living in ... and that is the problem.
There is a simple solution dumbasses! ! ! Just have every country limit 1-2 children per couple by law. That way the population will either remain the same or decrease. No war needed.
@bishopdante yup. If he hadn't china would now have 3 - 4 billion people instead of just over 1 billion. Well, it wouldn't because there would have been a catastrophe by now to reduce that population or they would have invaded their neighbours. That one policy has saved the world and china a whole lot of grief. Yet some of us call it unfair government meddling in peoples private lives.
I would have the presence of mind to explain that the entire population of the world could fit into the state of Texas with about 1000 square feet per person, leaving the entire rest of the world empty.
The Population of the united state is increasing by 3 million people every year? Big deal. When overpopulation begins to hurt, we will adjust. Not worried.
cavetrollhead 6 months ago
@usernamelando Is arithmatic the only worthy and applicable discipline for this subject. Look for Wally Wallington on youtube. Why, I saw a Nova program full of scientists, PHDs. They had no explanation. They attempted solving it using the "technology of the day." They pathetically failed. Wally Wallington "RETIRED CONSTRUCTION WORKER figured out a plausible solution proven to work. WHEN THOSE WITHOUT A PHD ARE NOT ALLOWED TO CHALLENGE A PHD in wide open theoretical stuff. . .SAD
cavetrollhead 6 months ago
@hagsmunamadurinn I agree. I haven't watched the rest of the series yet (and will probably will not) but I doubt he ever addresses the main problems of the world today such as the existence of governments and centralization. There's no need for centralization and never was. There's also no need for governments in fact governments have killed more humans than all other causes combined.
Most people have been brainwashed to believe they cannot survive without government and that is so wrong.
kevjay777 9 months ago
He makes a reactionary malthusian mistake of ignoring the fact that humans are potent. More humans do not equate mere dead weight and a drain on resources. As we multliply there are yet more of us to find and enact solutions to problems and produce value. If our numbers became large enough to more than cover the entire natural dry land surface area of our planet, we would already have been smart enough to have bulit skyskrapers that double the surface area we could habitate
hagsmunamadurinn 10 months ago
@xmexdf1 So I guess China doen't seem like such the bad guy after all
salamut2202 1 year ago
@NxsRuin He states facts and sources. You state an indignant attitude. Hmmm, which one should I believe...
joepod 1 year ago
@xmexdf1 Yeah! Great idea! You go do that, and let us know how it works out.
joepod 1 year ago
@xmexdf1 Yes, it is the simplest solution, but there is the thing, that some couples would not accept that, because of religion or some concepts they are living in ... and that is the problem.
iiMPR3SSiiON 1 year ago
There is a simple solution dumbasses! ! ! Just have every country limit 1-2 children per couple by law. That way the population will either remain the same or decrease. No war needed.
xmexdf1 1 year ago
@bishopdante yup. If he hadn't china would now have 3 - 4 billion people instead of just over 1 billion. Well, it wouldn't because there would have been a catastrophe by now to reduce that population or they would have invaded their neighbours. That one policy has saved the world and china a whole lot of grief. Yet some of us call it unfair government meddling in peoples private lives.
TheRadicalLiberal 1 year ago