It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by stanguilles7
reply to post by TDawgRex
If the West just kills of most of Africa or Asia, we can all enjoy another 50-100 years of bounty.
Originally posted by tothetenthpower
Nope.
Originally posted by AzureSky
Originally posted by tothetenthpower
reply to post by TDawgRex
Nope.
Overpopulation is a myth. There is PLENTY of a arable land to grow the food we need to sustain our current population growth. There is PLENTY of renewable energy sources that can be used in order for each nation to achieve energy independance.
This myth is perpetuated by eugenecists and globalists who want you to believe that we need to fight amongs each other for a piece of the pie, when there's plenty of pie to go around, if it's split up properly.
The problem with these two areas is that they are currently controlled by big corporate entities who have no interest in making food or energy cheap, renewable and available to all.
There's no money in that. So they perpetuate these lies to keep the status quo the way it is.
~Tenth
This. Exactly what i say when i see the depopulation topic come up.
It's a myth, It doesn't make any sense. Eventually it will. We have the land, the technology, to have a population of over 10 billion.
Also: The average birth/death rate will even out around 10 billion, and keep the population stable. Nature is self regulating and we are part of nature. Its just that we're doing it wrong right now.
Originally posted by tothetenthpower
reply to post by TDawgRex
Nope.
Overpopulation is a myth. There is PLENTY of a arable land to grow the food we need to sustain our current population growth. There is PLENTY of renewable energy sources that can be used in order for each nation to achieve energy independance.
This myth is perpetuated by eugenecists and globalists who want you to believe that we need to fight amongs each other for a piece of the pie, when there's plenty of pie to go around, if it's split up properly.
The problem with these two areas is that they are currently controlled by big corporate entities who have no interest in making food or energy cheap, renewable and available to all.
There's no money in that. So they perpetuate these lies to keep the status quo the way it is.
~Tenth
Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by TDawgRex
Just look at the math.
If you have 100 men and 100 women, you'd get X offspring.
Kill 99 men?
That one man could still (theoretically) mate with 100 women and still provide X offspring.
Kill 99 women?
You'd have X-99(n)
Originally posted by TDawgRex
Originally posted by TDawgRex
Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by TDawgRex
Just look at the math.
If you have 100 men and 100 women, you'd get X offspring.
Kill 99 men?
That one man could still (theoretically) mate with 100 women and still provide X offspring.
Kill 99 women?
You'd have X-99(n)
Ok, one man can produce X amount of pregnant women. But if the 100 men and 100 women were a village and only one man was viable, you would still have a downsizing in village population over a period. Hence a lower need for resources to feed and fuel the village.
I'm not arguing for depopulation. I'm saying that resources are not being utilized to the best advantage. And since we (humankind) are not doing so, we are heading for war.
I don't like that idea as I've had my fill of it.
Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by TDawgRex
(I've given this thread some thought)
War is an inefficient means to cull the human population. War primarily is fought by men. A single man can breed with a variety of women and father untold children.
To effectively drop the human population, women would have to be the primary target. Sterilisation, an induced virus, common disease would have to be encouraged.
I'm afraid that regardless of whether anyone believes in over population or not, we're in it for the long haul.
beez