Are we heading for disaster or will nature take a kinder course with us? The third world countries will always take the brunt of the shit but their over accelerated expansion has repercussions all over the planet. Any thoughts?
A related site about life expectancy, have a look because its chock full of interesting info…
I remember the doomsayers in the 80s saying that by the year 2000 there would be 13 billion people. I’m not sure where but it was one of those things that was in the news one day as well as the paper and a couple of magazines.
I think extrapolating current population (at that time) and figuring out the projected population later wouldn’t be very hard, so being off by that much just basically makes me feel no fear about a larger and larger population.
I think the scientists (or at least the environmentalists etc.) that talk about large populations as though it’s a looming disaster do it in a way to make it look more dangerous than it really is.
For example, they probably look at how much food a city or country imports or grows for itself, then say “They only make enough to feed 5,000,000 now…they cannot feed more than that!”
I think they can, the people that order/grow the food will increase production if the population calls for it. They’ve already done that many, many times.
I think there can be an agenda even behind something like population. I think there’s an environmentalist agenda based on guilt (for being an evil homo sapiens) behind this.
Check that old mistake “The Population Bomb” by Paul R. Ehrlich.
When you’re poor, live in a corrugated metal shack with no running water or toilets, have no modern conveniences, I guess fucking is about all the entertainment you’ve got.
[quote]Nards wrote:
I remember the doomsayers in the 80s saying that by the year 2000 there would be 13 billion people. I’m not sure where but it was one of those things that was in the news one day as well as the paper and a couple of magazines.
I think extrapolating current population (at that time) and figuring out the projected population later wouldn’t be very hard, so being off by that much just basically makes me feel no fear about a larger and larger population.
I think the scientists (or at least the environmentalists etc.) that talk about large populations as though it’s a looming disaster do it in a way to make it look more dangerous than it really is.
For example, they probably look at how much food a city or country imports or grows for itself, then say “They only make enough to feed 5,000,000 now…they cannot feed more than that!”
I think they can, the people that order/grow the food will increase production if the population calls for it. They’ve already done that many, many times.
I think there can be an agenda even behind something like population. I think there’s an environmentalist agenda based on guilt (for being an evil homo sapiens) behind this.
Check that old mistake “The Population Bomb” by Paul R. Ehrlich. [/quote]
A couple of things to consider:
There is plenty of food it just is distributed poorly. Obesity is as much a problem as malnutrition and not having enough to eat. There is more money to be made with the slogan of “need to grow more” than “need better distribution.”. Look at how much corn is grown in the US that is meant for animal feed or to be made into HFCS rather than edible to humans.
As much as people have criticised China’s one child policy, it has been successful at slowing population growth.
A 3rd world war is fucking necessary. A war so fucking destructive, at least 2 billion people will die. The war should take place in India and China preferably. Anywhere in Asia is good too. India vs China for example would be perfect. Assistant from any other country should be kept to a minimal. No nuclear or biological weapon use. The perfect war, for the exact needs of mankind. After about a decade of warfare, world will be a better place. But in advance, Every factory there should be guarded by forces united by all EU countries, US and Canada, so they remain intact and their working capability remain to a maximum.
P.S. I am a dickhead who is against Nazi, and see what I am proposing.
P.S. 2 It is supposed to be a joke, but with some truth in it.
[quote]niksamaras wrote:
A 3rd world war is fucking necessary. A war so fucking destructive, at least 2 billion people will die. The war should take place in India and China preferably. Anywhere in Asia is good too. India vs China for example would be perfect. Assistant from any other country should be kept to a minimal. No nuclear or biological weapon use. The perfect war, for the exact needs of mankind. After about a decade of warfare, world will be a better place. But in advance, Every factory there should be guarded by forces united by all EU countries, US and Canada, so they remain intact and their working capability remain to a maximum.
P.S. I am a dickhead who is against Nazi, and see what I am proposing.
P.S. 2 It is supposed to be a joke, but with some truth in it.[/quote]
[quote]Nards wrote:
I think the scientists (or at least the environmentalists etc.) that talk about large populations as though it’s a looming disaster do it in a way to make it look more dangerous than it really is.
For example, they probably look at how much food a city or country imports or grows for itself, then say “They only make enough to feed 5,000,000 now…they cannot feed more than that!”
I think they can, the people that order/grow the food will increase production if the population calls for it. They’ve already done that many, many times.[/quote]
I saw an interesting BBC programme ‘Megacities’ and to feed the population of London it would take the land area the size of Britain…
Check out the sewage problem in Mexico (35 minutes in), holy shit! They had this one guy whos only job it was to unblock the main outlet from the city. He has to pull out bodies, dead animals etc. he wears a radioactive style deep sea divers suit and is spray disinfected after every job.
The likely hood of not having enough food is small what with GM foods but sadly the quality of food will inevitably go to shit (sorry paleo people)
[quote]Nards wrote:
I think there can be an agenda even behind something like population. I think there’s an environmentalist agenda based on guilt (for being an evil homo sapiens) behind this.
Check that old mistake “The Population Bomb” by Paul R. Ehrlich. [/quote]
I would agree with you about the a hidden agenda thing. There is always some angle of control being subtly fed to us.
[quote]niksamaras wrote:
A 3rd world war is fucking necessary. A war so fucking destructive, at least 2 billion people will die. The war should take place in India and China preferably. Anywhere in Asia is good too. India vs China for example would be perfect. Assistant from any other country should be kept to a minimal. No nuclear or biological weapon use. The perfect war, for the exact needs of mankind. After about a decade of warfare, world will be a better place. But in advance, Every factory there should be guarded by forces united by all EU countries, US and Canada, so they remain intact and their working capability remain to a maximum.
P.S. I am a dickhead who is against Nazi, and see what I am proposing.
P.S. 2 It is supposed to be a joke, but with some truth in it.[/quote]
According to UN projections, world population will peak in 2075 at 9.22 billion. Then they think there will be a slight decline, and we will be around 9 billion again in 2300.
So have we hit the point where people are jumping in saying we need to do something to remove all the assholes crowding this planet? You know, without mentioning what it is they have accomplished that makes them so damn special*?
*Aside from, of course, not being born with a weird skin color in a part of the world that doesn’t afford them the comfort of a lifestyle that has made those of us overpopulating the interwebz oh-so enlightened and “worthy”?>
Me? I’ll putting my money (amongst other things) where my mouth is… by getting back in the motherfuckin’ pile.
edit: OK, gif won’t go through. southparkgayorgy.gif
[quote]niksamaras wrote:
A 3rd world war is fucking necessary. A war so fucking destructive, at least 2 billion people will die. The war should take place in India and China preferably. Anywhere in Asia is good too. India vs China for example would be perfect. Assistant from any other country should be kept to a minimal. No nuclear or biological weapon use. The perfect war, for the exact needs of mankind. After about a decade of warfare, world will be a better place. But in advance, Every factory there should be guarded by forces united by all EU countries, US and Canada, so they remain intact and their working capability remain to a maximum.
P.S. I am a dickhead who is against Nazi, and see what I am proposing.
P.S. 2 It is supposed to be a joke, but with some truth in it.[/quote]
P.S. 3 Since Greece harbored the incubation of Western democracy it seems appropriate that Greece take the lead in regards to solving the world population “problem” preferably in the manner you described. In fact, as tough as the times are in your country a “fucking necessary” war there would be the perfect little laboratory experiment.
Lead on, Greece.[/quote]
I am honored by the proposal, but wouldn’t USA be the perfect candidate for starting that war? With the experience USA have in starting wars in developing countries for “the sake of democracy and homeland security”, which is a great excuse by the way, the propaganda that USA is able able to do and the weapon resources USA has, they are the perfect candidate. I feel honored, but I will pass it to the best.
[quote]niksamaras wrote:
A 3rd world war is fucking necessary. A war so fucking destructive, at least 2 billion people will die. The war should take place in India and China preferably. Anywhere in Asia is good too. India vs China for example would be perfect. Assistant from any other country should be kept to a minimal. No nuclear or biological weapon use. The perfect war, for the exact needs of mankind. After about a decade of warfare, world will be a better place. But in advance, Every factory there should be guarded by forces united by all EU countries, US and Canada, so they remain intact and their working capability remain to a maximum.
P.S. I am a dickhead who is against Nazi, and see what I am proposing.
P.S. 2 It is supposed to be a joke, but with some truth in it.[/quote]
P.S. 3 Since Greece harbored the incubation of Western democracy it seems appropriate that Greece take the lead in regards to solving the world population “problem” preferably in the manner you described. In fact, as tough as the times are in your country a “fucking necessary” war there would be the perfect little laboratory experiment.
Lead on, Greece.[/quote]
I am honored by the proposal, but wouldn’t USA be the perfect candidate for starting that war? With the experience USA have in starting wars in developing countries for “the sake of democracy and homeland security”, which is a great excuse by the way, the propaganda that USA is able able to do and the weapon resources USA has, they are the perfect candidate. I feel honored, but I will pass it to the best.[/quote]
The problem with your premise is the US has started no wars in developing countries for “the sake of democracy and homeland security.” None. Zilch.
[quote]Quick Ben wrote:
Greece can’t afford guns, what are you smoking Push? :)[/quote]
Greece has the greatest soldiers to civilians ratio in Europe, also the second best Air Force in Europe (behind UK), and the best Military Navy. So I think we are more than capable of defending ourselves. Don’t forget, Artemis 30 anti-aircraft system is Greek.
Don’t they have slingshots with Olives as weapons in Greece? Along with all those lazy young punks throwing cocktail bombs at each other. Maybe they will just kill each other off.
