Overpopulation is NOT a MYTH - OVERCONSUMPULATION

According to the millennium ecosystem assessment's four volumes of scientific peer reviewed journals (http://www.maweb.org/en/index.aspx) humans are using ecosystem service resources faster than they are replaced or recycled leading to degradation of the Earth's bank of savings. This leads to the majority of the worlds environmental and some social problems. The solution is to reduce the 78 million unintended births that occur every single year through increasing funding for voluntary contraception and education. With a population of 2 Billion the world could support everyone at an average European standard of living, we passed 7 Billion this year.......

Footage courtesy of Bruce Phillips brucethomasphillips@hotmail.com (copyrighted footage)and Space shots from NASA. Music by Nick Ingman / Terry Devine-King, "MARS" from the Audio network, licence paid.

More info: http://royalsociety.org/Does-population-matter/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IAP_statement_on_population_growth

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/12/world/12abortion.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8213884.stm

http://www7.nationalacademies.org/cpop/

http://oregonstate.edu/ua/ncs/archives/2009/jul/family-planning-major-environ...

http://www.unfpa.org/rh/planning.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_ecological_footprint

http://www.unep.org/geo/geo3.asp

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• overpopulation
• unsustainable
• world
• global
• bank
• crisis
• biodiversity
• contraception
• wildlife
• war
• famine
• disaster
• canon
• hv20
• 550d
• kissx4
• t2i
• film
• camera
• environment
• 2012
• Green
• economy
• Energy
• Warming
• Climate
• Change
• Free
• BBC

[superdeadrat]

@phillips78 Why "solve" the 100 year problem when we will only another, perhaps greater, greater problem for ourselves down the track?

[phillips78]

@superdeadrat The 100 year problem comes first so of course we deal with it first. If we can manage our own population voluntarily ourselves we can also increase it if necessary should the need occur in a few thousand years.

[MrPhilthen]

yes it is :)

[phillips78]

@johnnyappleseedism "the enviroment seems fine. i dont see the enviroment being destroyed" - so by that logic anything you personally haven't seen hasn't happened?!. The worlds biggest survey of ecosystems found that the majority of ecosystems are in decline and /or degraded due to human overuse of services provided by ecosystems.

[johnnyappleseedism]

@phillips78 you just need a hoe to plant seeds. i live in amish country, and besides the smell, the enviroment seems fine. i dont see the enviroment being destroyed, did you hear that on monsanto website?

[phillips78]

@texaswoodsmith I have lived and worked in countries with extreme poverty, it is very much a reality I can assure you. As stated the average American requires 8-9 hectares of bioproductive land to support their full needs (not just food). Seeing as there is just under 2 hectares available per human on the planet, we are overpopulated.

[phillips78]

@johnnyappleseedism Most people need/use/have more than just food, shelter and water to live a happy existence. We cannot support 7 billion at a desirable lifestyle long term, with just 2 billion we could however. Farms are just as environmentally destructive as factories.

[phillips78]

@superdeadrat Humans are 10,000 times more common than any similarly sized mammal, we are in no danger of extinction. Worry about the next 100 years, not an unlikely event in 10,000.

[phillips78]

@superdeadrat "their consumption and boost production levels" boosting production means greater consumption, not less?! "new technology that can aid with the recovery of ecosystems" the cost of doing so is enormous especially when ecosystem damage can be reduced by the use of voluntary contraception. We should deal with causes, not invent tech to deal with expanding consequences.

If humans were as inventive as suggested we wouldn't be in such an environmental problem in the first place.

[superdeadrat]

@phillips78 Also, you say that people are capable of making informed choices. Why can they not choose to limit their consumption and boost production levels? Why can they not put their brains together to create new technology that can aid with the recovery of ecosystems? You seem to downplay the capabilities of the human mind.