Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Geomagnetic reversal link to mass extinction


UM-Bot
 Share

Recommended Posts

 

WELL, MAYBE....it will balance out the overpopulation in the world.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I doubt it'll effect us much. We'd be aware of it, and fix all of our tech that's at risk.
I suppose it might mess with migratory animals. Hard to say.
Everything I've read about the idea of pole reversal says it would have little effect.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any newborn living will adapt its body through time. Nothing to worry about. Selection natural FTW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/21/2021 at 11:30 PM, pbarosso said:

WELL, MAYBE....it will balance out the overpopulation in the world.

How many people is too many, in your view?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SeekTruth said:

How many people is too many, in your view?

From a long term environmentally sustainability POV (at western standards on living), we’d ideally need a pop under a billion. :/ 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bavarian Raven said:

From a long term environmentally sustainability POV (at western standards on living), we’d ideally need a pop under a billion. :/ 

Can you expound on your reasoning?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, SeekTruth said:

Can you expound on your reasoning?

To live at western standards requires A LOT of resources per person per year. The earth can only support / regenerate so much per year. The more people living at a higher standard of living, the more resources needed / taken / harvested every year. At the current human population (if everyone was to live at western standards), we would need 6 to 7 earths to live indefinitely. :( Basically, we're using up more resources every year than are being regenerated. :(

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bavarian Raven said:

To live at western standards requires A LOT of resources per person per year. The earth can only support / regenerate so much per year. The more people living at a higher standard of living, the more resources needed / taken / harvested every year. At the current human population (if everyone was to live at western standards), we would need 6 to 7 earths to live indefinitely. :( Basically, we're using up more resources every year than are being regenerated. :(

I'd be curious to see the math involved. I suppose the sooner we can mine asteroids the better!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, SeekTruth said:

I'd be curious to see the math involved. I suppose the sooner we can mine asteroids the better!

Asteroid mining won't really help. It's not so much metals that are in short supply (the earth contains massive massive massive amounts of Iron, etc), its more so deforestation, over fishing, pollution, etc, that are the real problems. I got my degree in environmental and biological sciences. it was depressing. :/

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Bavarian Raven said:

Asteroid mining won't really help. It's not so much metals that are in short supply (the earth contains massive massive massive amounts of Iron, etc), its more so deforestation, over fishing, pollution, etc, that are the real problems. I got my degree in environmental and biological sciences. it was depressing. :/

 

So it is not overpopulation that is your concern so much as it is unsustainable practices.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
2 hours ago, SeekTruth said:

So it is not overpopulation that is your concern so much as it is unsustainable practices.

Both. They’re directly linked. Either we need to lower the pop dramatically ASAP or reduce our standards of living several centuries for the most part :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But why couldn't we in theory have the same population as we have today while also having in place sustainable practices?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, SeekTruth said:

But why couldn't we in theory have the same population as we have today while also having in place sustainable practices?

Well the overall number, if it remained the same, you might, might. The issue becomes the shift in percentages. That meaning how many people live by western standards now as opposed to all? If every single human alive now were to be living by western standards there would be an implosion of critical resources. To prevent this there would have to be some significant changes to how we access and use the available resources

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, SeekTruth said:

But why couldn't we in theory have the same population as we have today while also having in place sustainable practices?

I don't really have numbers to support my view.  

I feel the world is very much overpopulated.   I would be in favor of seeing it at under a billion as Raven said.  Animal species would be able to increase their numbers.   Land would be available for settling.  Pollution would decrease quite a bit.  Using 1/7 as the population, it would allow some cities to successfully power themselves with alternate energy.  A city of 500,000 would be a city of 71,000.   Granted that's not completely accurate because we don't know where people would settle.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Myles said:

I don't really have numbers to support my view.  

I feel the world is very much overpopulated.   I would be in favor of seeing it at under a billion as Raven said.  Animal species would be able to increase their numbers.   Land would be available for settling.  Pollution would decrease quite a bit.  Using 1/7 as the population, it would allow some cities to successfully power themselves with alternate energy.  A city of 500,000 would be a city of 71,000.   Granted that's not completely accurate because we don't know where people would settle.  

And how would you like to see us get to that number?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SeekTruth said:

And how would you like to see us get to that number?

I don't think we ever will outside of massive world wars.  It's more of a wish without any good way to get there.  

I would like to see more efforts in keeping population increases more in check.   Free vasectomies would be nice.  

I would offer anyone in jail some time off their sentence if they get "fixed".   Not much off the sentence though.   Maybe 2 months off a 5 year sentence if you get fixed.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you people think much too highly of humans. we could never hurt the earth. the earth will freaking KILL us all. we have zero chance of hurting it. only hurting ourselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one is hurting the earth. We only inhabit the upper part of its 'skin'. But our presence is most certainly hurting other life forms on this rock.

Link to comment
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
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.