Room for one more? World population to reach 7 BILLION in next few days

The title is lame but the video is very good. It's simple arithmetic!

I'm going to post something that I will probably be embarrased to admitting because it runs counter to my beliefs in many ways be here it is: A newspaper ran an article about a pregnant women shot and killed trying to shield her two children that she had along with her during a shoot out crossfire. It was a very heroic act and an act that saved her children. So whats the embarrassing part? Well as I read further down is indicated that she had 13 FREAKING kids with a 14th one along the way and judging by the pictures of her and her friends and family (along with the neighborhood) I know for a fact she was poor. So that meant she was on public assistance yet was still churning out babies like a factory. So instead of feeling sorry for her, my mind was distracted by the fact that she had 13 kids with a 14th on the way with no way of supporting them. Knowing what I know about population problems it pissed me off.

Originally posted by InfaRedMan

Originally posted by jeichelberg

Originally posted by InfaRedMan
One question I've never seen answered by the populationalists to any degree of satisfaction is why do we need a world with 10 billion people? Why in a world of depleting natural resources is 10 billion preferable over 4 or 5? We can't even manage a balance with under 7 million. FFS! Drop the insane, utopian fantasies!

What we need is a major reduction.

IRM

First, in order to adequately answer your question, you would need to provide a list of what natural resources you are so concerned about...I have been hearing this nonsense about overpopulation for half a century, so be careful about what you provide...

No. You don't need that information to tell me why 10 billion (arbitrary number) is preferable to 4 or 5. I set the rules of discourse by asking the initial question. Either you play by those rules or don't play at all.

Yet another person who uses lazy tactics when they can't provide an answer to a simple question.

IRM

Lazy tactics??? Who wrote the following words..."preferable," and then, "arbitrary," when describing 10 billion people? No...you sir are simply trolling...

reply to post by kwell


Statements like these dont use any common sense whatsoever.

If you took all the people in the world, and put them on one square foot of land, they wouldn't even fill Texas.

BUT

we don't require one foot of space, we require acres.

Land is needed for your job, to build the trucks that haul your food, cars, paper, computers. to grow and harvest your food, paper, to dig and haul the minerals for your computer, to refine gas and oil to run your car and home. To dispose of wastes.

You get the point....

reply to post by nixie_nox


But, we could put all the people in the world, along with homes of 1400 sq ft each, in an area the size of Oregon...Four people per home...Thus, leaving us AMPLE room for the other things required...We have the technology available to grow food, harvest food, and live, in peace...we do not choose to use it...and threads like this do not help drive people toward this ideal...the OP was crying about TOO many people in the world, but clearly exposed his/her self when he/she wrote that 1400 sq ft was not a BIG ENOUGH condo for just one person...namely HIM/HER...this is laughable!!!

reply to post by nixie_nox

Land is needed for your job, to build the trucks that haul your food, cars, paper, computers. to grow and harvest your food, paper, to dig and haul the minerals for your computer, to refine gas and oil to run your car and home. To dispose of wastes. You get the point....

This measure is called ecological footprint, and according to UN estimates, we are already using 1.4 Earths worth of land.

en.wikipedia.org...

Thus everyone should stop with the Texas nonsense already. Once again, nobody is saying that there is not enough space. But physical space is just one resource of many a functional society requires.

Originally posted by jeichelberg
Lazy tactics??? Who wrote the following words..."preferable," and then, "arbitrary," when describing 10 billion people? No...you sir are simply trolling...

Is that the best you can do? That has absolutely nothing to do with anything. Your ad homonym is terrible lazy and shows you have no argument. You added nothing but more nonsense to the thread.

Yawn!

IRM

Originally posted by ashtonhz8907

Originally posted by steveknows
Did you know that humanty would not have this level of technology or lifestyle without there being the amount of people in the that there is today? Give or a take a million.

In order for us to do our day to day things and to have what we have it takes thousands of people working for you to do it. And those thousands need thousands.

One person puts a pc mouse together in a factory but it took thousands of people to get it there in the first place from hundreds of different industries.

If not for thousands of people working for you you would not have. A bed, bed clothes, clothes, a shower, a house, a car, a road, a shop, food on the shelves, a tv, a stereo, a microwave, a phone and everythign else you use and need.

If the population dropped to say a billion tomorrow so would the level of living and technology.

I understand but there has to be a point that we stop, we can't expand forever.

think about this... how many of those children being born in a day will actually advance us humans in technology or medical or whatever else? It's like a crap shoot... how many of those babies will die early death's due to drunken driving? Take all these stats into consideration... because who knows... that 1 more baby you'd like to kill off just might be the 21st century's Albert Einstein!

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by InfaRedMan

 

You don't need that information to tell me why 10 billion (arbitrary number) is preferable to 4 or 5.

Id say 2-3 billion max is ideal, and even that is pushing it. To come up with this number, I just need to look around the world and see how many people live a medium-high quality of life lifestyle.

Then there is the question of oil, the major factor fueling population explosion. If peak oil coincidences with peak population in the future, the results would be disastrous.

The world has shown itself repeated to be completely inept at managing it's finite resources. The human race is killing off the planet (and thousands of other innocent species with it) in the same fashion as an aggressive, malignant tumour kills it's host. If cancer could talk it would probably be making the same arguments as these guys as to why it should be allowed to expand into more areas of the host.

While people within this thread like to pull magical numbers out of their hats claiming the world can sustain billions more people than we already have, the truth is actually much different to the utter nonsense they like to scribble out on their little pieces of paper. They must walk around with blinkers on in a complete state of denial.

IRM

Originally posted by InfaRedMan

Originally posted by jeichelberg
Lazy tactics??? Who wrote the following words..."preferable," and then, "arbitrary," when describing 10 billion people? No...you sir are simply trolling...

Is that the best you can do? That has absolutely nothing to do with anything. Your ad homonym is terrible lazy and shows you have no argument. You added nothing but more nonsense to the thread.

Yawn!

IRM

Well, I will spare you and the rest any counter...there is no one here, least of all me, who has stated that your arbirtrary number of 10 billion is preferable to 4 or 5 billion...the OP has already absconded for the hills where he/she belonged in the first place, leaving us to contemplate how 1400 sq ft is insufficient to meet his/her singular needs...and pointing out the choice and use of your adjectives and adverbs is not an ad hominem...the use of the word troll was...

Originally posted by InfaRedMan

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by InfaRedMan

 

You don't need that information to tell me why 10 billion (arbitrary number) is preferable to 4 or 5.

Id say 2-3 billion max is ideal, and even that is pushing it. To come up with this number, I just need to look around the world and see how many people live a medium-high quality of life lifestyle.

Then there is the question of oil, the major factor fueling population explosion. If peak oil coincidences with peak population in the future, the results would be disastrous.

The world has shown itself repeated to be completely inept at managing it's finite resources. The human race is killing off the planet (and thousands of other innocent species with it) in the same fashion as an aggressive, malignant tumour kills it's host. If cancer could talk it would probably be making the same arguments as these guys as to why it should be allowed to expand into more areas of the host.

While people within this thread like to pull magical numbers out of their hats claiming the world can sustain billions more people than we already have, the truth is actually much different to the utter nonsense they like to scribble out on their little pieces of paper. They must walk around with blinkers on in a complete state of denial.

IRM

Oh...an argument from incredulity, and further ad hominem...We have heard the disappearing oil and other arguments for a long time, which reached a near similar crescendo (complete with rationing in the US) during the Carter Administration...You make a statement, "...killing off the planet...," with nothing offered in support of this claim, except to claim humans are like a, "cancer." That is a racist statement...

reply to post by popsmayhem


Why are people more important then animals its our greed that buggers things up not theirs

Originally posted by jeichelberg

Originally posted by InfaRedMan
The world has shown itself repeated to be completely inept at managing it's finite resources. The human race is killing off the planet (and thousands of other innocent species with it) in the same fashion as an aggressive, malignant tumour kills it's host. If cancer could talk it would probably be making the same arguments as these guys as to why it should be allowed to expand into more areas of the host.

While people within this thread like to pull magical numbers out of their hats claiming the world can sustain billions more people than we already have, the truth is actually much different to the utter nonsense they like to scribble out on their little pieces of paper. They must walk around with blinkers on in a complete state of denial.

IRM

You make a statement, "...killing off the planet...," with nothing offered in support of this claim,

As I said, your walking around with blinkers on... or living on an entirely different planet.

except to claim humans are like a, "cancer." That is a racist statement...

Oh FFS! If I were to continue any kind of dialogue with you, I'd old grave fears of a major reduction in my IQ. Just go away and let the adults talk will you. Conversation over!

IRM

Originally posted by InfaRedMan

Originally posted by jeichelberg

Originally posted by InfaRedMan
The world has shown itself repeated to be completely inept at managing it's finite resources. The human race is killing off the planet (and thousands of other innocent species with it) in the same fashion as an aggressive, malignant tumour kills it's host. If cancer could talk it would probably be making the same arguments as these guys as to why it should be allowed to expand into more areas of the host.

While people within this thread like to pull magical numbers out of their hats claiming the world can sustain billions more people than we already have, the truth is actually much different to the utter nonsense they like to scribble out on their little pieces of paper. They must walk around with blinkers on in a complete state of denial.

IRM

You make a statement, "...killing off the planet...," with nothing offered in support of this claim,

As I said, your walking around with blinkers on... or living on an entirely different planet.

except to claim humans are like a, "cancer." That is a racist statement...

Oh FFS! If I were to continue any kind of dialogue with you, I'd old grave fears of a major reduction in my IQ. Just go away and let the adults talk will you. Conversation over!

IRM

I think people will read this final retort from you and arrive at their own sound conclusions as to who has been the adult and what your IQ was going into the matter...believe me, you have nothing to fear about losing any of it...Your original offering to this post was to ask a further question, without offering contextual understanding...you followed that up with an attack, rather than a response...and then you closed with a racist statement...it is on the record and people can come to their own conclusions...

Originally posted by popsmayhem

Originally posted by ashtonhz8907
This is disturbing, I knew we were populating fast but I had no idea.

I know its against "Human Rights" but we need to implement a two child maximum then "Snip Snip", else we are in trouble.

I've always believed over population is what has caused a lot of the problems we face today.

You believed* and that belief is wrong..
Stop drinking the kool aide

2 child maximum how bout we snip snip yours first..

People like yourself who have some delusion that you can just kill of the planet to make way for more human beings .. 'because people are more important' .. are going to be a serious threat to our survival.

Why not, clear the forests, pave over the agricultural land .. you're delusional. The planet is finite, the living standards of people is equal to resources divided by population. So more people is lower quality of life, sure you could have 12 billion in poverty with a world headed for total extinction-great idea.

At some point the population of humans will need to be managed-in my opinion the time is past, and we should be decreasing now, rather than wait and see how much the earth can take.

In the past the increase in population helped to ensure our survival as a species, now it is that same mechanism that threatens it.

To say that using your brain and seeing that a finite place can't hold an exponentially growing population is 'drinking the koolaid' is a sign that the koolaid burned out your synapses long ago.

Yes the human race is just bad and we should all simply kill ourselves and do the planet a favour. Oh hang on a tick, We are the dominant most adaptive species on the planet with obviously the greates will to live.

I think with some of the people on this site their continued bloodline must be a fluke.