Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[wierd]

Agreed. 

Also agreed that mass sterilization is not a good answer, and i disagree with "random lots" as well. (the influential will find ways to never be selected by rigging the process.)

IMO, actual disease is the most nonpartisan method. Care should be pallative, not curative. That way people dont suffer unduly, but they dont keep on surviving and contributing to the resource collapse.  Rich and poor alike get sick.

Ironically, by removing the evolutionary pressure on disease organisms to adapt to antibiotic drugs, we stand to halt that trend by doing this as well.

This kind of thinking is not spawned of hatred for people, or worse, some perverse desire to see people die, but as a sober realization that something very undesirable like this is better overall for the human race than the rapid and forceful "bust" cycle that our species has been postponing.

This way at least, civilization as we know it can endure.

[origamiscienceguy]

What is the big issue with this many people anyways? We have plenty of food and living space.

[Willfor]

I quite believe you, MSH. In fact, from your arguments you seem to be one of the good ones advancing this. It's great in theory. In practice, the reaction you get is going to be 99% of all the reactions you're going to get from the people who believe the same problem exists that you do, which is a terribly sad thing indeed. Even worse, we're barely 100 years removed from the last major movement that said there were too many people on the planet, and that's poisoned the well of that particular rhetoric in so many ways. Especially given their own methods of trying to implement the change they wanted.

[redwallzyl]

Agreed. 

Also agreed that mass sterilization is not a good answer, and i disagree with "random lots" as well. (the influential will find ways to never be selected by rigging the process.)

IMO, actual disease is the most nonpartisan method. Care should be pallative, not curative. That way people dont suffer unduly, but they dont keep on surviving and contributing to the resource collapse.  Rich and poor alike get sick.

Ironically, by removing the evolutionary pressure on disease organisms to adapt to antibiotic drugs, we stand to halt that trend by doing this as well.

This kind of thinking is not spawned of hatred for people, or worse, some perverse desire to see people die, but as a sober realization that something very undesirable like this is better overall for the human race than the rapid and forceful "bust" cycle that our species has been postponing.

This way at least, civilization as we know it can endure.

still really dark. would you care to volunteer to have your completely curable injury or disease kill you? i certainly wont and neither will anyone else. you sound like the misguided villain of an action movie. its always the "for the greater good" approach that has lead to the most suffering in history.

[wierd]

actually, we dont.  see prior page where I pointed out why modern farming techniques are not sustainable.

We are able to do it now, at the cost of accellerated climate change, which destroys cropland (and water sources). The green revolution traded the population bomb for the climate bomb. Either way,  Malthus still wins.

Unless we invent both fusion power, on a large scale, and startrek like molecular replication--- we cannot continue to sustain the existing population's needs.


Redwallzyl-- Yes. I already said as much on the prior page.
In fact, I suspect myself of having cancer right now, but will not seek treatment. (I have a genetic disorder that causes me to develop benign lipomas-- fatty tumors. I have several that feel very deep, that have started becoming painful. That's a serious sign that they have become malignant. I will do my part by not seeking treatment.)

[TheBiggerFish]

What is the big issue with this many people anyways?

Do you have numbers to back this stuff up?

[origamiscienceguy]

What is the big issue with this many people anyways?

Do you have numbers to back this stuff up?

uhhh.. No. That is why I asked the question. I was hoping someone else did.

[TheBiggerFish]

I was agreeing with your question and adding my own.

[Shadowlord]

I don't think very many people in developed countries are going to be very receptive to "You should all be living in poverty! You're using too many resources, living too long, and are too healthy!", and when they tell you that you're insane, following up by calling them "RACISTS!" is just going to piss them off more.

wierd: ...

*clicks reply* "NEW POST" *clicks reply* "NEW POST!"

[origamiscienceguy]

I am of the opinion that we've already passed the tipping point of both overpopulation and global warming. Anything we do now is barely even delaying the inevitable- it only really buys us one more generation, and then we're hosed anyway. I'd spend more time trying to get off this planet than trying to save it.

It is my opinion that we let the earth handle it's own climate since it is better at it than we are. But people don't like that for some reason.

[Shadowlord]

I am of the opinion that we've already passed the tipping point of both overpopulation and global warming. Anything we do now is barely even delaying the inevitable- it only really buys us one more generation, and then we're hosed anyway. I'd spend more time trying to get off this planet than trying to save it.

[wierd]

This newsweek article links to some studies, and throws some numbers around.
www.newsweek.com/even-pandemic-wouldnt-create-sustainable-population-study-says-280338

[origamiscienceguy]

Or we could just go on with life as normal and hope that the earth can fix itself.

[Shadowlord]

That's funny, I just get a blank page.

Edit: Ah. It just took a long time to load.

Edit #2: Showing a "limit of 5 free articles per month" overlay despite having javascript off. How dastardly. Guess I can't RTFA!

[Shadowlord]

Thanks. It doesn't sound like they considered whether effects from climate change could cause mass deaths, though I don't know if they would be in the billions. (E.G. from increased wildfires, droughts, food shortages, hurricanes, floods, heatstroke, etc)