Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4
Still Waters

David Attenborough-Humans are plague on Earth

119 posts in this topic

is he volunteering to commit suicide to lessen the population?

That's the problem with the idiots who come with offensve phrases such as "humans are a plague" and "their numbers need to be controlled". They aren't prepared to cull themselves but tell other people to do it. It's like Bono telling me to give money to starving children in Africa, yet he is a millionaire and gives the poor of Africa sod all.

Maybe we should start with all the obscenely rich

Yeah, that's the way. Let's kill off all aspirationism and entrepreneurialiship and let's all live poor like those people in Africa. Get rid of all the evil rich and let's like like starving Ethiopians. Being poor is the way forward.

Edited by TheLastLazyGun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the problem with the idiots who come with offensve phrases such as "humans are a plague" and "their numbers need to be controlled". They aren't prepared to cull themselves but tell other people to do it. It's like Bono telling me to give money to starving children in Africa, yet he is a millionaire and gives the poor of Africa sod all.

Yeah, that's the way. Let's kill off all aspirationism and entrepreneurialiship and let's all live poor like those people in Africa. Get rid of all the evil rich and let's like like starving Ethiopians. Being poor is the way forward.

neither Attenborough or anyone else here has advocated "killing of the masses", you are using a straw man to project a false position in those who have thought about this. I ask you the simple question - what would you give up to make the current population sustainable ??

Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The headline sounds sensationalistic, but if you actually read what he said, it turns out he is simply stating a fact.

You can not have unlimited population growth in a limited space.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it helps I have chosen not to have kids. However I will still eat their share of the chocolate. :tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The headline sounds sensationalistic, but if you actually read what he said, it turns out he is simply stating a fact.

You can not have unlimited population growth in a limited space.

So why does he make such an outrageous statement? I think prominent people have a special responsibility to be very careful what they say.

There are a number of problems generated by population growth -- the using up of land is one that can be controlled by getting most people to live as Asians live in apartment complexes (quite luxurious). The problem of food has been a false problem for a long time, as technology has steadily improved diets in spite of the increasing population. Get people to stop eating meat as a main course and only as a condiment and the problem is cut in half (along with about a third of the global warming problem).

My point is not that population can grow indefinitely, but that it isn't a problem now and doesn't appear to be becoming one (with improving living standards family sizes naturally drop, and we've seen this literally everywhere). Modern projects say the earth's population should level off in about 50 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So why does he make such an outrageous statement? I think prominent people have a special responsibility to be very careful what they say.

There are a number of problems generated by population growth -- the using up of land is one that can be controlled by getting most people to live as Asians live in apartment complexes (quite luxurious). The problem of food has been a false problem for a long time, as technology has steadily improved diets in spite of the increasing population. Get people to stop eating meat as a main course and only as a condiment and the problem is cut in half (along with about a third of the global warming problem).

My point is not that population can grow indefinitely, but that it isn't a problem now and doesn't appear to be becoming one (with improving living standards family sizes naturally drop, and we've seen this literally everywhere). Modern projects say the earth's population should level off in about 50 years.

What this misses is that industrial agriculture has been a main driver of habitat loss, soil depletion and climate change. It has caused massive loss of biodiversity. All this happened in the last 40years. So we have not done a remarkably good job in getting to where we currently are - we have conducted inadvertant ecoside. 3 billion extra will likely finish the job.

Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What this misses is that industrial agriculture has been a main driver of habitat loss, soil depletion and climate change. It has caused massive loss of biodiversity. All this happened in the last 40years. So we have not done a remarkably good job in getting to where we currently are - we have conducted inadvertant ecoside. 3 billion extra will likely finish the job.

I don't see what has happened so negatively, and in fact think it is being exaggerated by what I understand are called "tree huggers." Making a deity out of nature is widespread, so that some people think any encroachment must be stopped. Yes large numbers of species have become or are in danger, and I support efforts to slow this, but look at in terms of the numbers of species that exist and one cannot accurately call it ecocide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the cool people should have kids.

If it helps I have chosen not to have kids. However I will still eat their share of the chocolate. :tu:
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two children are about right. Since my wife and I could not have any, we adopted two girls of my brother when they became orphaned during the war. We have since adopted five other children and I am now in the process of getting another (my wife died a few years ago).

That seems to be the standard now in Vietnam, and larger families (other than through adoption), while not legally penalized as they are in China, are still nowadays considered inappropriate.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is not TreeHuggers who are making prediction of dire declines of the biosphere, it is scientists in every field of terrestrial biology.

From ocean scientists;

http://www.stateoftheocean.org/pdfs/1906_IPSO-LONG.pdf

Entering or already in the sixth mass extinction;

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/03/sixth-mass-extinction_n_830947.html]

Been optimistic seems delusional to me.

As I said - the majority of this decline in ecosystem integrity happened in lock step with the rise of mans population from 3billion to 7billion over the last 50years. Adding a further 3billion cannot improve the situation and may push us into general ecosystem collapse on a level which can be likened to previous mass extinctions.

Br Cornelius

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is not TreeHuggers who are making prediction of dire declines of the biosphere, it is scientists in every field of terrestrial biology.

Quite so. You can add to that list "Some 1,700 of the world's leading scientists, including the majority of Nobel laureates in the sciences". http://www.ucsusa.org/about/1992-world-scientists.html

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We should just all wear chastity belts.

"We have been God-like in our planned breeding of our domesticated plants and animals, but we have been rabbit-like in our unplanned breeding of ourselves."

--Arnold Joseph Toynbee

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So why does he make such an outrageous statement? I think prominent people have a special responsibility to be very careful what they say.

Shock value I would say, like sex, it gets attention, and that is what he is trying to do. As far as plague, maybe he could have used another term but it would be taken as offensive by someone anyway, no pleasing everyone.

Personally I rather like his BBC stuff.

What he proposes is hardly new. For the last few years Australia has been debating a "Big Australia" and a "Small Australia" The optimum choice seems to be very slow population growth. Almost zero. That will maintain lifestyles and spread resources. Maybe if we do go with the smal Australia tat we can be viewed as a model to see how things go.

I know some feel it is the right of every person to have a baby, but zero population growth would benefit the babies that do come into the world, and lessen suffering, which sound like a decent trade of right now.

It's historical record too - that Which Sir David speaks of. From what I understand of American History, when man crossed the Bering straight, and found this paradise, he raped it. When man started starving to death, we caught on. And as such, so many traditions were born into Native American culture, as well as a deep respect for the land, because of you do not respect it, you will starve. Then England Colonised America, and killed what game had been left, and nurtured back into a decent population. and we did it again. Sounds like the same thing on a global scale really.

Same things seems to have happened wherever man settled. New Zealand, and Australia have similar tales of famine from raping an environment as well.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Population growth rates around the world drop automatically when living standards reach certain levels. It has happened in Vietnam without a single law or even propaganda campaign -- merely making early-term abortions available (but not subsidized) and making other contraception methods widely available.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Population growth rates around the world drop automatically when living standards reach certain levels. It has happened in Vietnam without a single law or even propaganda campaign -- merely making early-term abortions available (but not subsidized) and making other contraception methods widely available.

You miss the point. Current populations are unsustainable - add 3billion and things are considerably worse.

A species peaking out on its population curve almost never spots the signs until it is to late. In this case we are a global species and so our overexploitation of the planetary resources effects every single corner of the planet.

Br Cornelius

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's historical record too - that Which Sir David speaks of. From what I understand of American History, when man crossed the Bering straight, and found this paradise, he raped it. When man started starving to death, we caught on. And as such, so many traditions were born into Native American culture, as well as a deep respect for the land, because of you do not respect it, you will starve. Then England Colonised America, and killed what game had been left, and nurtured back into a decent population. and we did it again. Sounds like the same thing on a global scale really.

Same things seems to have happened wherever man settled. New Zealand, and Australia have similar tales of famine from raping an environment as well.

A fine analysis of the situation. The problem is that the European model of society has swept away all sustainable models of society and made the disease which is consumption beyond your means the default approach to life. I suspect that the Western model cannot be reformed and will have to go through a systemic collapse - just as the Native American culture did. Unfortunately that means a global collapse of western values before we can ever hope to see a sustainable future.

Br Cornelius

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Get people to stop eating meat as a main course

Just as an aside, but this will increase the already exponential rate of topsoil loss :unsure2: Not saying we shouldnt cut back on meat, just that it's not a clear-cut solution and has other problems that need addressing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just as an aside, but this will increase the already exponential rate of topsoil loss :unsure2: Not saying we shouldnt cut back on meat, just that it's not a clear-cut solution and has other problems that need addressing.

We should learn from our ancestors and grow most of our food in the immediate vicinity of our houses. The Soviet era russians managed to produce 60% of their food needs from the small gardens around peasant houses. The failures of collectivised farming would have destroyed the Soviet Union if it hadn't have been for the sustainable production of peasants.

We are suffering under another form of collectivised and unsustainable agriculture.

Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just for the record, I agree. The kindest thing anyone can do {short of committing suicide} for the environment is to choose not to have children. If you really care for the environment - don't have children. It's as simple as that.

Art

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.