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
Ashotep

Population Bomb

51 posts in this topic

A Stanford professor and author of the Population Bomb recently published a paper in a scientific journal re-emphasizing climate change and population growth pose existential threats to humanity and in an interview with Raw Story said that giving people the right to have as many children as they want is “a bad idea.”

“The only criticism we’ve had on the paper is that it’s too optimistic,” said Paul Ehrlich, Bing professor of population studies at Stanford University and president of the Center for Conservation Biology. “You can’t negotiate with nature.”

‘Population Bomb’ scientist: ‘Nobody’ has the right to ‘as many children as they want’

I didn't know where to put this. I finally chose this forum because over population will have an effect on the environment. It will cause more pollution and lack of natural resources. I will effect our quality of life, our ability to feed our families.

I think this professor is right the days of having 6 kids is over. What to do about it is another thing. Much higher taxes for those that chose to have more. A tax that is a percentage of your salary so it would be equally hard on the wealthy. Sterilization of anyone that has fathered or given birth to three kids. That would be harsh but starvation would be equally harsh.

There's absolutely no reason to have 6 or 8 kids anymore. Half of them aren't going to die from childhood diseases like they once would of. As a matter of fact now by having such large families you may be causing someone else to go without enough food. Because like it or not this planet is at its capacity and something has to be done.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I kind of disagree with the premis of over population. but completely agree with eliminating social and religious promotions of having large families.. Untill humanity can learn to feed & take proper care of the children they have there should be some sort of world wide control put in place to eliminate religious and social promotions of having large families.. One needs to attack these aspects... not attack the actual families by exta taxes or something insane like that because at the end of the day the only thing you would achieve is more hungry mouths..

Edited by Professor T
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This backs up my thread about the booming births in England. Its not rocket science to see what the future holds if nothing is done. But we have a lot of selfish people in the world who think its their right to breed as much as they like, they do not even want to think of the effect it will have on anything else, planet or tax payers, and they do not even care.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So we should do what China does 1 family 1 child?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I kind of disagree with the premis of over population. but completely agree with eliminating social and religious promotions of having large families.. Untill humanity can learn to feed & take proper care of the children they have there should be some sort of world wide control put in place to eliminate religious and social promotions of having large families.. One needs to attack these aspects... not attack the actual families by exta taxes or something insane like that because at the end of the day the only thing you would achieve is more hungry mouths..

Hiya professor T,

would just like to know why you disagree with the premise of over population?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So we should do what China does 1 family 1 child?

Remember that China is a touch larger than England, so using England as an example, YES, if we carry on like we are now, its on the cards that that will need to be done.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No I'm not saying be like China. I think 3 kids could be allowed, and would satisfy most people, because there will still be people that will not want kids at all and accidents.

If there isn't some sort of punishment why would you abide by the law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hiya professor T,

would just like to know why you disagree with the premise of over population?

I believe that the Earth coupled with our current level of technology can support a much higher human population than it does now.. The only reason why we have issues with food sources and supply now is the economic systems we have in place actively supports and promotes the false scarcity of produce, supplies & demands. In short, It's in Bankers, Manufacturers & owners best interests to create false scarcity to pump up the price of their products.. The same goes with current technologies which are Designed to fail for cyclical consumption..

Like it or not, this world revolves around the Dollar.. Humans unfortunately don't even come into the equation, and as a result we suffer..

Edited by Professor T
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No I'm not saying be like China. I think 3 kids could be allowed, and would satisfy most people, because there will still be people that will not want kids at all and accidents.

If there isn't some sort of punishment why would you abide by the law.

I agree in part, today. But i think its more of a case that if those 3 children had 3 children each and then they have 3 children etc etc etc , thats when things start getting out of hand, and as professor T has pointed out, one we have eliminated social and religious promotions of having large families, its not going to get better. How we tell people to stop and if they will is another story, at the end of the day we are not China!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that the Earth coupled with our current level of technology can support a much higher human population than it does now..

The only reason why we have issues with food sources and supply now is the economic systems we have in place actively supports and promotes the

false scarcity of produce, supplies & demands. In short, It's in Bankers, Manufacturers & owners best interests to create false scarcity to pump up the price of their products.. The same goes with current technologies which are Designed to fail for cyclical consumption..

Like it or not, this world revolves around the Dollar.. Humans unfortunately don't even come into the equation, and as a result we suffer..

on this explanation I agree. Also when I watch programmes on Africa and how rich the land is in many places, i wonder why those in barren areas are not encouraged to move.

I am though not in favour of desecrating our countryside to build more and more housing estates, for one, it will affect the wildlife and 2, many areas are already showing signs of flooding because of areas being build on nearby. We are a small island and here we can not sustain the population increase. We need land to grow food on and if it is built on to accommodate the humans then the alternative would be for us to buy from abroad, this would not help our economy at all. We still need be able to find jobs for people and the more people there are the more jobs are needed, and as we already know, because of our new computer technology, jobs are becoming scarcer.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree in part, today. But i think its more of a case that if those 3 children had 3 children each and then they have 3 children etc etc etc , thats when things start getting out of hand, and as professor T has pointed out, one we have eliminated social and religious promotions of having large families, its not going to get better. How we tell people to stop and if they will is another story, at the end of the day we are not China!

Religion does promote large families and how you would get that stopped remains to be seen. Three kids might still be too many but that is a place to start. Some people will be sterile or not want kids at all or not that many, then there is accidents. I think one place we could start is not allow immigration at all. That way if your country is becoming overpopulated then you will have to stay and address that issue. I know some of my idea's seem harsh but the problem of overpopulation may require it.

If the population would go down oil companies would have no reason to drill in the arctic and places like that. The more people you have, the more oil is needed, the more timber that gets cut for houses and farm land. Its a domino effect.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want kids, is that weird? I just want to live my life and enjoy it without any extra hassles. Maybe someday I would want one, but all of my life conditions and requirements would have to be right, first. Problem is, and I've seen this in all races, even caucasian where irresponsible people do not even consider the ramifications before they have sex! It's crazy, and they just keep popping out child after child, even if they can't take care of them. Why does it always seem like minorities are the worst offenders though? Not trying to sound racist or anything, I'm just pointing out an observation that's been pushed around in the media.

Edited by WoIverine
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want kids, is that weird? I just want to live my life and enjoy it without any extra hassles. Maybe someday I would want one, but all of my life conditions and requirements would have to be right, first. Problem is, and I've seen this in all races, even caucasian where irresponsible people do not even consider the ramifications before they have sex! It's crazy, and they just keep popping out child after child, even if they can't take care of them. Why does it always seem like minorities are the worst offenders though? Not trying to sound racist or anything, I'm just pointing out an observation that's been pushed around in the media.

The problem today is those who keep popping out children after children know that in countries like England, they can because the tax payer will pay for them.

I remember as a child (oh yes) when i was in primary school collecting monies for Africas starving children,,after all these years they are still breeding like rabbits, makes me wonder why they never taught these people about contraception from day one, no doubt their religion will not allow it, but they are happy enough to allow people to give them food, clothes and guns.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some women have this stupid notion that just because someone wants to sleep with them that they love them or will. Some also think if they get pregnant its going to keep him around and it will make him love them. When there is a pregnancy many times the guy takes off and leaves his responsibility up to her, her parents and the tax payers and both parties goes on to repeat this with someone else expecting different results. Here comes the kids that aren't being properly taken care of and often repeat the cycle.

I hate to say it but it's usually poor uneducated people that do this. Not that I think all poor people are like this. I also think poorer children are exposed to the seedier part of life by virtue of being poor. That's why schools need to feed poor children and they need opportunities for better education and access to camps where they can get out of their bleak surroundings even if only for a short period of time.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that the Earth coupled with our current level of technology can support a much higher human population than it does now.. The only reason why we have issues with food sources and supply now is the economic systems we have in place actively supports and promotes the false scarcity of produce, supplies & demands. In short, It's in Bankers, Manufacturers & owners best interests to create false scarcity to pump up the price of their products.. The same goes with current technologies which are Designed to fail for cyclical consumption..

Like it or not, this world revolves around the Dollar.. Humans unfortunately don't even come into the equation, and as a result we suffer..

I'm sorry but I think this planet is at its limits on population. There may be physical space for them but not enough prime farm land or clean water to take care of them.
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem today is those who keep popping out children after children know that in countries like England, they can because the tax payer will pay for them.

I remember as a child (oh yes) when i was in primary school collecting monies for Africas starving children,,after all these years they are still breeding like rabbits, makes me wonder why they never taught these people about contraception from day one, no doubt their religion will not allow it, but they are happy enough to allow people to give them food, clothes and guns.

We have the same problem here in AUS but the Government has a payment that is called the " Baby Bonus " - all new mothers receive it and I think from memory it was around about $1000 per child .

I can recall a show on TV a while ago and they were looking into the baby bonus and especially young mothers with multiple kids and how they were using the money .

Most of the young ones were buying flat screen TV’s and Xbox’s & stuff rather than spend it on a pram or a cribs etc . I can recall one mother in particular that had 6 kids in the last 6 years and she basically said she has them for the bonus ( all 6 kids had different fathers :passifier: )

I can understand why the government have the bonus , for young families getting started it's a big help , I guess they could put a cap of two kids and this might deter some people from abusing the system and popping out kids all over the place

PS - I have to agree that our planet has a population limit , have we reached it ? Maybe , maybe not , the problem as I see it , when we do work out that the planet is over crowded it will be too late and then what ?

TiP.

Edited by tipotep
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry but I think this planet is at its limits on population. There may be physical space for them but not enough prime farm land or clean water to take care of them.

You're in good company. Many people have been saying this, the Union of Concerned Scientists among them; which includes "Some 1,700 of the world's leading scientists, including the majority of Nobel laureates in the sciences"

http://www.ucsusa.or...scientists.html

"The earth is finite. Its ability to absorb wastes and destructive effluent is finite. Its ability to provide food and energy is finite. Its ability to provide for growing numbers of people is finite. And we are fast approaching many of the earth's limits. Current economic practices which damage the environment, in both developed and underdeveloped nations, cannot be continued without the risk that vital global systems will be damaged beyond repair."

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

people are destructive towards nature. So it would be reasonable the larger the population the worse off our world is from an environmental point of view.

In the past several centuries wars have decimated generations of people through horrible wars. We have not done this as species for 70 years now so we are seeing the effects of overpopulation.

So we have a couple choices. Use the same barbaric practices of the past to control population.

Or change how we think and live and live for a greater purpose which is preserving this planet. Our only home.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry but I think this planet is at its limits on population. There may be physical space for them but not enough prime farm land or clean water to take care of them.

Sweet as. Dont be sorry.. Your mind is not mine to change..

There are of course limits to population.. I just don't believe we are anywhere near those physical limits..

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sweet as. Dont be sorry.. Your mind is not mine to change..

There are of course limits to population.. I just don't believe we are anywhere near those physical limits..

There are good reasons for saying that at the current population, with the current lifestyle and technology, we are at twice that limit. We currently have billions living in poverty (real, not relative).

Technology has no magic bullets to pull out of the hat to change that situation in the next 40yrs, by which time the earth will be in a very bad way. GMO will not save the aquifers or the soil from depletion. The only option is to change our lifestyle to a none consumptive one. What are you prepared to give up to make society sustainable ? I suspect the answer for most people is - nothing.

Br Cornelius

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This backs up my thread about the booming births in England. Its not rocket science to see what the future holds if nothing is done. But we have a lot of selfish people in the world who think its their right to breed as much as they like, they do not even want to think of the effect it will have on anything else, planet or tax payers, and they do not even care.

the birth rate in england is below replacement levels (replacement level = 2.1 children per woman). the population will decline to zero without immigration.

what made you think otherwise?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the birth rate in england is below replacement levels (replacement level = 2.1 children per woman). the population will decline to zero without immigration.

what made you think otherwise?

Did you not see my thread about the birth rates in England? How can the birth rate return to zero without immigration? unless every British person becomes sterile over night! ................ Have I read your post right, cos I can`t believe you are saying the population will decline to zero without immigration?

PS: We spell England with a capital E. :whistle:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you not see my thread about the birth rates in England? How can the birth rate return to zero without immigration? unless every British person becomes sterile over night! ................ Have I read your post right, cos I can`t believe you are saying the population will decline to zero without immigration?

PS: We spell England with a capital E. :whistle:

it is true to say that at the current birth rate, and no net immigration, the English population would theoretically decline to nothing over many hundreds of years. That scenario is not going to happen because like all things, in the long run population dynamics responds to stimulus from outside and adjusts.

This is what is happening on a global scale at the moment with population predicted to level out at 10billion by 2050 and decline thereafter.

However it took just 40years for the population to rise from 3billion to its current 7billion and destroy most of the environmental supports we currently depend on, so adding half as many people again and waiting another 40years to see the consequences will inevitably cause disasterous collapse of the ecosystem.

Br Cornelius

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it is true to say that at the current birth rate, and no net immigration, the English population would theoretically decline to nothing over many hundreds of years. That scenario is not going to happen because like all things, in the long run population dynamics responds to stimulus from outside and adjusts.

This is what is happening on a global scale at the moment with population predicted to level out at 10billion by 2050 and decline thereafter.

However it took just 40years for the population to rise from 3billion to its current 7billion and destroy most of the environmental supports we currently depend on, so adding half as many people again and waiting another 40years to see the consequences will inevitably cause disasterous collapse of the ecosystem.

Br Cornelius

I am not sure how anyone can work out what the population will be in a few hundred years time and who will be contributing to it. Funny how the stat makers did not predict what is happening today.

I do agree though that the population in England will not grow without some form of immigrant input, but throughout history that has happened. Today we are looking at something new, new races! The interaction between Asians, Africans and Europeans no doubt is far higher than it has ever been before, so what the future holds is difficult to tell, but it does not mean that the whole of the English people will be wiped out.

There are not that many English who have not got some European blood in their veins, but as for Asian and African...thats a different story.....I am not talking about immigrants from Europe, thats nothing new here.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Humanity has to take some responsibilty for itself and stop the proliferation of the species in its tracks and this should be done by forcefully sterilising large sections of the populations who shouldn't be breeding anyway.

There is only so long the natural world can support the burden of the human race.

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.