Seems that the global warming post has taken a turn for the worse and headed into population control territory. I thought maybe if we should go that route we could do it here. So far from what I can tell is that every population will hit critical mass unless certain criteria are met. As we human are not exactly immune to the laws of nature, we will sooner or later, throw the system so far out of whack that we will also be facing critical mass on a global scale.
War, disease and famine will probably take care of it. No worries.
Scott Mandrake, do you want population control, population planning or both?
Perhaps it should be pointed out that the greenhouse gasses emissions is more of a serious problem to the industrialized nations than it is to the most populated nations.
Yeah, all the brown poor people (and some white people) producing the largest amount of children will be drafted in wars not of their own making to serve purposes that are not in their interest and will kill each other off. No worries at all! That's the way it's always been done! (And I realize how you meant what you said, Rochelle--just using it as a tipping off point.)
And yet, we are really producing at record rates these days. Suppose this means the war to end all wars is approaching?
Of course, I'm not one to usually go along with 'how things have always been done,' so I recommend the education of girls and women, birth control education, and encouraging a sense of nurturing to mean care for the world and its inhabitants, not just having kids.
I can see where educating people may have a positive impact on our population. Do you feel however that there is enough support for this level of education? Look at the educated countries of the world. Are all these educated people really making a positive contribution to the world? It seems to me that the more primitive human culture is, the more likely they are to develop a symbiosis with their environment.
Lita- It is not the question of white or brown when it concerns the whole humanity. I totally agree with your thoughtful solutions. We can't do anything about those already born but if the future generations can consider more adoptions then that also can ease the population explosion.
And, yes, it was more of an ironic reply-- to provoke responses such as yours.
Scott - the ideal would probably be to limit each family to one child - China did it and I guess it worked with a fair amount of success because of the way things are run there. However, the male:female ratio is getting skewed there!Is that a healthy trend? One wonders!
And on a more practical note, politicians all over the world need a proliferation of the poorer and the less educated to fuel their contiued existence in the corridors of power. So who will bell the cat?
Global warming can be controlled to a great extent through population control and a lot more personal control when it comes to conspicuous consumption - I guess the main problem the world over is the 'You do it first amd maybe I'll follow' kind of attitude!
I do think educated people in general make more of a contribution to societies--that is not across the board, off course. And it is a fact that the more highly educated you are, the more likely you are to have fewer children.
I believe we have lost some knowledge--with the agrarian societies & the industrial revolution--that more primitive peoples had, for one. It has become about consumption on a grand level, and that needs to be changed.... We cannot go backwards, so we must go forwards.
There absolutely is not enough support for education around the world where this is critical. Take Afghanistan and Africa for good examples where even basic education would make a difference in so many ways...
This is interesting: http://www.penniesforpeace.org/home.html. The guy behind it, an educator, wrote a book, Three Cups of Tea detailing his experience teaching girls in Afghanistan... The people looked at his as something of a hero. His book was also on the NYtimes bestseller list for a long time--and it ain't even about conspiracy theories.
I'd like to hear from the population conspiracy theorists, though--to see what the thought is out there.
Lita - sorry we posted at the same time I think - there's something on HubPages I recently read about the book you mention:
http://hubpages.com/hub/Promoting-Peace … -At-A-Time
Yes, Shalini. Now I think this guy is really making a difference in the world.
Almost makes me want to resume my old aspirations of being a teacher... I'm possible better as a writer, though!
You're a great writer - just discovered your hubs
Love your avatar - makes you think of the great Impressionists!
Thank you... I'm not as prolific as some as a writers here--I just find it is hard to put the intensity needed to write really good stuff into my work like that on a regular basis. You are a great writer too--you have a very clean style I noticed right away.
Haha..and my avatar is from my ID card! Kinda funny--sometimes those turn out better than other photos for me, tho I never can smile!...
I guess what I would like to know is how the scientific among us think of this issue, and also the 'conspiracy-like' thinkers... And what is being done in places like India, for instance. Do they still have large problems with population control?
If you wish to take a scientific view of the population situation, one only needs to stand in a farmers boots for a moment. All education aside, the only thing that is going to keep people alive on this planet is food. Once we can no longer sustain the world with our food supply, people will die. I'm not talking a few people either. I'm talking billions of people.
The world had an approximate population of 4.6 billion in 1983. As it stands, the scientists are predicting that we will have a world population of over 8.3 billion by the year 2030. I will be 47 years old then, approximately half of my estimated lifespan. This means that in half my life, I will have seen the population of this planet double. In my entire life, I may even see the population of this planet triple or quadruple.
Right this moment, we are losing more agricultural soil each year than we are able to replace. By 2030, we will have to grow roughly 30% more grain than we did this year. How can we expect to feed all these billions of people with no soil to grow food in?
I think that even if we were able to limit child birth in developed countries to one child per family, we still would not be able to support the entirety of the worlds population. All the countries that we rely on to export their foods so we can eat, will start having to feed their own people instead. Where will we be then?
You say that we can only move forwards, not backwards. I am inclined to disagree as the only direction once we hit critical mass will be downwards. About six feet downwards
Morelocks and Eloi?? LOL
Education is of course one step, and I believe the most important for a long time solution.
As far as land--I don't see the shortage--at least here in the USA. There is so much land here out west and in the Midwest that is undeveloped, it was really beyond my expectations when I moved west. And I don't think of over population as a developed nation issue--maybe I'm wrong?
Obviously, we have to concentrate on sustainability and new ways of growing food (urban farming is a very cool idea & would solve a lot of other problems). As someone pointed out, it isn't just carbon emissions, either, that is causing global warming, it is methane gas--yep, cows and other meat animals with gas.
I am sure that there will be more wars in areas that need it in the near future that will take care of some of the excess population that you predict. On that level, I am fairly cynical--or more obviously, realistic.
Well, maybe we'll find someway to save ourselves if this does threaten us. Sir Richard Branson has created a spaceship and plans to make a hotel on the moon. If they work faster and actually create a viable living option on the moon, we could be headed there.
Not to undermine you in anyway, but that has got to be the most ridiculous idea I've ever heard. Please understand I say that with the utmost respect for your opinion, dreams and aspirations.
First, in order to live on the moon, we would have to adopt sustainability tactics that would/could/should be already in place here on earth.
Second, the cost of moving the population of earth, even if we only take the few people we like, to the moon would far outweigh the cost of creating a sustainable habitation pattern here on earth.
Third, if Sir Richard Branson was gonna take anyone to the moon with him, it probably wouldn't be the earth pollutin' money grubbers that created all the mess in the first place.
In short, why move to the moon when it would be easier to fix our mess here?
These people don't think so http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_base .That's of course, as a last resort if we can't solve the problem at home, which I prefer, because the moon is just not as beautiful, if at all. I love my earth. Do you think we can prevent the extinction of the human species? It may be possible but it's getting increasingly dangerous.
Or simply return to Imperialism. Nothing like taking what you need, humans excel at this time tested survival technique.
That 'brown people' statement is kind of a well-known ironic thing to say among US university types, said very tongue in cheek aiming at the inhumanity of it all.
I'm not a racist of any sort! Promise.
I know once I have been told by one European student tongue in cheek (when I was doing my MS) that Indians/Chinese keep themselves very busy (since the present populations are so high). Not many people realize that Indians never traveled like Europeans to all the other continents like N/S America & Australia and other places till couple of decades back.Hence the huge concentration of people without migration has resulted in huge population in certain countries.
I know you are not a racist and I just wanted to say that the problem affects the whole of humanity.
I love your sense of humor. lol
As for saving the humans, no need to worry about that. Small pockets of humans survived the last ice age. They did not have the resources that we have today, but lets explore a bit how our current resources may or may not help us should the proverbial shite hit the fan.
Technology; will play a few roles in the survival of the species. In some cases it will allow those who otherwise lack the instinct for survival, to thrive en masse. For others however, technology will give them a false sense of security and lead them unto their demise.
Knowledge; in this day and age is for the most part theoretical. Some will be able to put this knowledge into working practice in order to facilitate their survival. Others however, will lack the required physical traits necessary for survival and either depend on those who do, or die.
We may very well lose civilization as we know it. However, humans will persist. Though we are mammals, we do tend to exhibit several traits in common with cockroaches, and they will survive anything.
ps. Writer Rider, I recognize that you are only stating someone else's idea and I would never assume that such an absurd notion would be the product of a mind as brilliant as yours. Cheers
Well, this overpopulation thing is a tricky business... I do not support forcibly making people not have children, have abortions, sterilization, etc. I believe in human rights for all. Therefore, education is imperative.
But I do know that India is one of the most populous countries--and the little girl I support there is VERY poor. I mean her family makes $40 per month w/o my monetary help. So I am asking a legitimate question when I ask what is being done in India.
As I mentioned earlier that Indians never migrated like the Europeans and social reasons like compulsion to have kids(on the married couple from parents/relatives) also drives it to a certain extent.
In India 3 decades back the son of the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi Sanjay advocated compulsory family planning for those couples having two children but soon their was a huge hue and cry. The then government collapsed. Slowly but surely through greater education on these matters and more choices in the hands of females the population growth rate has declined. Their are many initiatives taken by the government and the root philosophy is "persuasion and not coercion". But in India any government that makes anything mandatory like China's one child policy would be removed from power. http://www.prb.org/Articles/2002/Declin … Slows.aspx
It is a great thing that you are supporting a girl and hope every dollar you send is used to the benefit of that poor girl. I just would like to mention that India is sometimes projected as way too backward to get the necessary funds from western donors by the various NGO's/missionaries. I am not saying India is an advanced country but the truth lies somewhere in between.
I'm sure that is the case--about India--as I have met very accomplished Indian people. Actually, to not meet one that is accomplished in the U.S. would be unusual...
I've got friends from all over the world, so I'm not as naive as I know some Americans are! (I have more foreign policy experience than Sarah Palin, lol.) And I've worked for nonprofits (see, I'm just a fountain of a little bit of everything, haha) so I know how they work with overhead, etc.
Thanks for the info. I will look at it.
Lita- Not all Indians are accomplished. I am just an average person working as an ordinary employee in a software company. Well I am sure you do have more foreign policy experience but the comparison barometer of Sarah Palin isn't too flattering(Binoculars won't help to see Russia from Arizona maybe telescope might help)
I wasn't saying all NGO's are not credible but some of them do take gullible people for a ride. I am sure you are not one of them.
The reason I mentioned adoption is that their are many people in orphanage but still parents insist on "own" grand kids. I don't know if educated couples will be open to this idea.
I really learn so much from your posts and I know you are not only jack of all but "master of all"
ps. Writer Rider, I recognize that you are only stating someone else's idea and I would never assume that such an absurd notion would be the product of a mind as brilliant as yours. Cheers
Thanks Scott, but as a last resort necessity, us cockaroachs just might choose that route. After all, what if we had no other option. It could seem like paradise under the right conditions and no options are ludicrous if they are far and few between. However, that may not be necessary if we successful turn this disaster around.
Scott - I tend to see Lita's point of view. Maybe it's not just the one thing or two. Maybe it's got to be a bit more complex than pinning the reasons to just population or a resources crunch. Right now, the 'critical mass' really does take on an alarming slant when viewed as density in certain areas. If there were a more equitable distribution given the land mass we have, it wouldn't seem so bad. And I'm not just talking America where you have vast tracts of uninhabited land. I'm talking about India and China - large populations and yet, most of them are huddled around the cities and towns. Not because they want to but because they have to - there isn't enough development in the hinterlands. A more balanced spread would also perhaps see a more judicious use of resources.
Finally, the change we need has to be attitudinal - will it be through education? Will it be through awareness? Will it be through experience - bitterly gained? Sustainable development is possible - if we all pull together!
Lita: Population in India especially is politicised. The minority communities want their ratio upped and the lower castes want to proliferate in order to take advantage of the many benefits they have. The poor just do it - sufficient unto the day.....who has the time to think of tomorrow and its consequences? The result of this apathy is vote banks for the largely criminalised political class.
I guess change all over needs to be at the grassroots level and it has to be relevant and sustainable. Can we do it? I hope we can echo the words of your President-elect: Yes, we can!
We have established that Obama is the Anti-Christ. Because Obama sounds like Osama, and his middle name is Hussein, like Saddam, it is obvious that he is behind a fiendishly cunning plan to depopulate the world, allowing his Satanic minions to dominate. Using subsonic waves broadcast into every home, through the medium of the Oprah Winfrey show, he is slowly reducing the libido of millions of Americans. Once you guys stop making babies, the time will be right to unleash his wave of Demonic Socialism upon the world. Nations will quail and shrink before his evil Army of Darkness, as the very gates of hell open somewhere near Salem.
To attack Europe, he is using the Hadron Collider, which will send out an intense burst of radiation that will turn nearby Europeans into zombies, wanting to eat each other's brains. The proof for this: Z-O-M-B-I-E has exactly the same number of letters as H-A-D-R-O-N. In addition, neither word repeats a letter. Scary. If the device had not malfunctioned, we would be having brain buffet over here. Only a minor setback before the real blood feast begins.
The rest of the world is easy. Osama/Obama really does intend to make every single Chinese person jump off a chair at the same time. The force from this will cause earthquakes, tidal waves and volcanic eruptions worldwide. The force will be so intense that it may even cause Keanu Reeves to change his facial expression. The evidence for this: The bail-out plan - it was not caused by Wall Street Bankers, but by the cost of shipping one billion chairs to China. I saw the evidence on a blog somewhere, so it must be true.
Makes perfect sense to me, and I challenge anybody to refute the obvious evidence. Act now, before it is too late!
Now I am off to put my tin foil hat on.
This whole line of reasoning sounds very familiar (has it anything to do with Noah's...)
Ok I will thrown in my bit to stir the pot... Hussein rhymes with who is sane
Brilliant, Countrywomen. More evidence to add to my overflowing chalice of proof. As it clearly states in the 'Eric Morecambe' version of the Holy Book, the rapture will soon be upon us. Once every single shop in the world finally becomes a Starbucks, the chosen will be taken to heaven. Woe to the unbelievers.
I am back!!!
I traveled to New Guinea once as a child to visit my Uncle; anyway he took us up into the jungle to visit some cannibals. Pretty peaceful folks actually living in harmony with their environment in a way most neo-hippie's can only dream off.
Here comes the hard part, it seems throughout the years in their little remote spot of the world their tribe would get to large. Whenever that would happen they would be short on food. So getting where this is going right, there method of self correction was just too simply eat each other.
As appalling as that was to us, it made perfect since to them. They understood this simple fact that humans are the only real predator to humans. There was no tribe for them to go to war with, no means of conquest as their island is small and they are all that is there. (I got the inbreeding part pretty quick by looking at them). This also kind of blows a lot of the theories we have about that subject as well.
Our history is replete with this scenario, early human remains often show the all too familiar scrapes of someone using tools to clean the meat from there bones. Where am I going with this, humans have always lived in a strange symbiosis with each other until that critical mass is achieved and something breaks the system. Early digs in the Fertile Crescent region show this collapse of farming and civilization in that region where once was lush is now desert, and yes it is a man made desert. If any doubt the ability of man to make something nice into something uninhabitable need only look at the Sahara.
I believe the Chief reason for the rise of religion and some of the many moral rules we see towards sex evolved from the early ones realizing the trends of birthrate in both power and starvation. Also in the lack of concern with regards of one to the other, for most religions will starve their people in order to achieve or maintain power.
I do believe a tipping point is inevitable, will it be smaller scale or global, I am not sure. As for land usage most of the land that is not being used for farming cannot be used for farming (with current technology) with the exception of the tropical rain forest regions. We all know where that is heading, and that is why despite the outcry no one has stopped the destruction of the rain forest.
As for me, I would like to see a different outcome, but know that is unlikely, the ability to return to our base selves has been bred out of most of us, and educated out of the rest. I will be fine as will many others, but many more will not. That is why the doomsday prophecies have survived so long, they are self fulfilling.
To those without much foresight, it may seem that "greenhouse gasses emissions is more of a serious problem to the industrialized nations than it is to the most populated nations"
However, we can not accurately predict the global ramifications of disruption to this ecosystem. We are dealing with forces of nature well beyond our control or comprehension. A 3 foot rise in sea level doesn't sound so bad... but if it happened in the course of just one year, there would be millions of people dead and displaced. And that would effect any coastal country immediately. The effects on inland areas may not be fully realized until well after the fact.
Of course this is all hypothetical, but it does point out the danger of assuming who is at risk and who isn't. Remember the little bug that went Achoo?
As for population control/planning. We are already seeing both happen in China. For my part, I would see population management which would be both control and planning, though maybe with a bit more focus on human rights.
Right now, children in North America are educated with money making as the primary theme. If you don't grow up to make money, so you can buy lots of crap, you equal nothing. If however, we were to use sustainability as the primary theme of education, we probably would not be having these issues, or at least be better educated to handle them.
Just peeking in- And just a note-
I really do invest and research land properties. Have you all any idea how much land is available in Texas, Missouri and Nebraska that has water and COULD be used for farming? Not to mention South Dakota and North Dakota. Lack of land is one of those myths propagated by people living in cities who cannot really see sometimes. I remember reading in no less than the NY Times that the central Midwest is dying--and that is not true in the sense they were trying to prove.
Yeah, North and South Dakota are not doing so well because of lack of population to make them a go...
Sadly, people cannot be arsed to farm - too much like hard work!
Don't know about the US, but in the EU, it is uneconomical to farm unless you have a lot of land and machinery. In a generation or two, Europe's farmers will be a rare breed.
TMG - Had a friend who lived in New Guinea for 16 years and loved it (apart from the time he was bitten by leeches in a 'delicate' area).
People in this part of Greece, although possessing most of the modern conveniences, still live close to the land. They would not starve if civilization fell, and we learn something new every day.
I have a cave up in the mountains ready for the downfall!
Hmm, speaking as a lifelong Nebraskan, just because a place COULD be farmed doesn't necessarily mean it should be. Most of the Western part of the state requires pretty heavy irrigation to grow anything but beef, and the Ogallala Aquifer is being depleted faster than it's being replenished as a result, especially since the stupid ethanol subsidies went through. They're trying to grow corn in the Sandhills now, which (in most parts) is beyond stupid and well into the realm of crazy.
You drive through there and marvel at the emptiness, but it's empty for a reason. It's really not good for anything but bison... though cattle will do until people wake up and smell the enormous, tasty native ungulate.
The American Midwest is actually one of the greatest economical secrets in the world (Shhh!). LOL. I'm counting on it.
And what you are saying is somewhat true--in the state the world is now. IE, farmers (and we have them in our family) are very effected by globalization and world market prices. Right now, because there is a shortage of bread in developing nations, they are doing 'well.' Small farmers are by default more likely to be local farmers--and yes, much harder to make a living at it.
I see this all as a great big myth settled on the world, and we have to reconfigure how we think. If we do so, I think we will survive. Localization, hydroponics, urban farming (and adding of plants and greenspace), ie.
What makes me mad is stupid human tricks like the rapid population growth in places like Phoenix here in AZ, which have over reached capacity in the d*mn desert. The city started as a resort for movie stars and just grew from there. Interestingly, the canals supporting it are built onto an older Indian civilization's system who vanished when their water dried up.
Lita- US has the third largest population after China and India. Hence at some point population issues would affect even US. Now coming to the arable land (water, soil and temperature conditions) India has more arable land compared to china. Hence Geographical land extent isn't of much use unless it is arable for farming. I agree midwest has sufficient land but when you mention N/S Dakota since lots of snow in winter/spring some few variety of wheat,potato, strawberry and so on maybe grown that too in certain season. Another thing is Farming needs to be a part of culture too and not many people may like to take to it. And the governmental/quasi governmental support in laying the infrastructure for water, electricity(in remote parts), seeds procurement, financing(for equipment and other requirements), marketing of the produce and finally insurance for crop failures need to be strong.
WOW!! I thought lots of people liked phoenix weather and one of my friend who lives their goes to the pool even in December
The environmentalists are not too keen on Phoenix. Believe they have reached over capacity. And I agree. Not to mention, like many western cities--it is nothing but sprawl and big box stores (actually worse than most western cities). I guess if you like seeing Walmarts and you name it--largest and newest you've ever seen, and ridiculous home prices, then you'd like it. The stupid over development (adding to the housing bubble) has always made me sick... My partner designs architecture for a living, but his designs blend into and preserve the land and plants.
I was born and raised there, too. So, yeah, I know about western Nebraska--and glad to meet another NE liberal--so few of us! I think we actually agree. (As you see I'm not impressed with this what I'd call slightly obscene development in the desert). Though my research of land has lead me to believe that a lack of it or the lack of farm land truly is kind of a myth (I'm actually really impressed with MO).
And the grains and animals that we raise now--the large, large scale hog operations in IA, ie., corn depleting the land--again it is so related to consumption and wealth. I believe we've got to change how we think. The 'lack' is in our minds and in what we have created THUS far. We've got to reconfigure our ways of raising food. I know you promote Buffalo, and that is cool.
Hey, cool, I didn't realize you were Nebraskan too! It is always awesome to find another Nebraska liberal.
My parents aren't farmers, but we lived in a rural area of E. Nebraska and a pretty significant percentage of my acquaintances are or were. My mom still works in a nursery in the town where I grew up. And one of the things that's always struck me, as the daughter of gardeners, is how few farmers in my area could actually grow anything that is directly edible. Like, a lot of these people, especially the younger generations, couldn't grow a tomato to save their lives. They're too busy growing high fructose corn syrup, soybean oil, and livestock feed.
This is something that I think is going to have to change. It's not efficient, it's not environmentally sustainable, and it's killing us to boot. The French and Russians (only foreign countries I've visited for any length of time) seemed a little better than we are at maintaining crop diversity on their farms, but not a lot better.
You can count me in with the Nebraskans. My grandfather homesteaded near Seneca around the turn of the 19th century and later moved to Brownlee which as you may know is about 60 miles south of Valentine. My mother taught in a one room schoolhouse in Brownlee and Wood Lake. I spent 7 summers putting up hay on my grandfather's and uncle's Brownlee ranch.
I read your Hubography. Yes, I grew up in Fremont and Omaha, so we are basically even from the same area, I think. Your mom didn't work for Plumfield's (sp?) Nurseries, did she? Lol. Well, that's a long shot, but so did my dad for a while.
Yes, I come from an immediate family of big gardeners, too. And I admit they also thought outside the box a bit--into sustainable living, as it were, before that was even considered cool. Extended family and grandparents are/were actual farmers.
Having lived in Iowa as well, I know there are actually huge numbers of complainers concerning the methane (and other nasty things) with the huge hog operations... Not sure about the implementation of change on a large level--but I know we can't continue as we are.
Cool, Ralph! Another Nebraskan liberal. We've taken to the internet, evidently.
Does studying in University of Nebraska count. Go Huskers!!
Absolutely! Both my parents were Nebraska graduates. It's a great school not just a football power (former).
Ralph- Thanks for welcoming me into the group. I absolutely love the school and the Football craze was too much all around (P.S: I am not from US but India hence found it way over the top with all that fanfare during those 2 years during my MS).
Try to keep in mind, that many of the "available" land that could be used for farming is either too remote or poor soil quality. For more about soil and deforestation issues go to the thread we have started in the science forum.
Many cities have moved well beyond their population capacity. This is accomplished by trucking or piping in the resources required to live. In some ways this is good, as we reduce some of the sprawl. In some ways this is bad as we have concentrated the pollution. Another drawback is that once this resource infrastructure fails, those who are hopelessly dependent on the system will die.
This is becoming quite a 'reunion.' You were in Lincoln for your M.S.? I was going to go there, but ended up Univ. of NE-Omaha and U. of Iowa. Holy ungulates!
Yes, but here we were talking about 'other tasty ungulates' that are more sustainable, so I thought I'd give it a shot!
What's yer favorite hang out in Lincoln? O street? (Oh, and I too thought the football stuff was a bit over the top. Iowa is better about it.)
Oh my my so many responses for a Nebraskan student. Well I used to go to the O and P street rarely. I just went once with some boys to see the inside of a pub/bar but since I don't drink never spent time their afterwards. I was keen on finishing my MS as soon as possible taking 4 graduate courses per semester (which was tough). I went to Omaha and visited Peter Kiewit Institute. I was doing my summer internship at UP and stayed with some girls in Cross winds close to their university campus. Great to meet so many Nebraskans. Go Red!! Go Huskers!
I recycled some dirt data from another blog of mine and put up a hub. For reasons of good form, I will not link it here. I would love to go into some further dirty dirt details, so please bring soil related questions here.
I was just having a look at it... Though my net went all wacked, so I didn't get to read in detail. This soil from the rain forest looked interesting...
Yes, that soil is called Terra Preta. Basically it is the result of ancient Amazonian tribes mixing charcoal into the soil. I will go into greater detail in the soil thread, but I feel it will play a vital role in sustaining the ever swelling population.
earth and it's atmosphere is tired...nature can no longer cleanse earth's water or atmosphere at the rate that its being polluted...man has to curb his pollution, caused by his over population, or perish.
I have to disagree with you. This planet is more than capable of coping with the pollution. Earth as we know it may change. Plants and animals will adapt to the new environment, or die and be replaced by those who can. There are all kinds of natural systems this planet can employ to reset the balance.
The big question is, when the planet finally decides enough is enough, will humans be able to cope? As I mentioned before, humans survived the last ice age, but mother nature has more than a cold snap up her sleeve to be sure.
I don't wish for this to be taken as an authorization to do what you like to the planet. Some respect for our home is definitely in order. I am just saying that in the grand scheme of things, our existence in this universe will go quite unnoticed by the powers that be, and to think otherwise is merely to flex our own ego's.
Yep, that's what Misha is always saying - nature will find a way
Lita, Ralph, and CW, oh, this is awesome! We should make t-shirts or something! Lita, no, it's not Plumfield's, it's in Cass co.
What concerns me is that the more we mess things up, the less we are likely to like how Nature fixes it. I'm pretty misanthropic as an individual, but I don't want to live through millions or billions dying of famine, disease, flooding, or resource wars, nor do I want my children or grandchildren to do so. Humanity sucks, but we also produce stuff like Shakespeare and Mozart and Mother Theresa and I'd really kind of like us to stick around a little while longer.
WOW!! We have quite a Nebraskan crowd here. I agree with you that once we are in hole we should stop digging further and that isn't fixing anything but stopping from spoiling further. Already the air is so polluted in beijing(during olympics they had to strictly enforce traffic guidelines to have fresher air and even the sky wasn't visible) and tokyo (many people openly wears masks and consume oxygen through tubes). And these are just two examples. I agree we have produced a few great minds and it fills us with hope that many could emulate them. But I still feel we don't have to have an ostrich like attitude (ignoring the problem and believing that eventually everything is going to be ok). Ignoring the direct correlation of human population to the environmental degradation could be dangerous.
Well, considering our level of understanding, we are better off leaving the things alone. Trying to fix them will most likely bring even more deaths and suffering...
Got to agree with Misha. Even though that makes me a conservative, neo-socialist dolphin-hater.
I have never seen anything work the way we thought it would work when messing with Mother Nature. I mean, who exactly thought it would be a good idea to feed sheep's brains to cows?
Or build a city where New Orleans is?
The problem is, it is the accountants that make the decisions. Our population will sort itself out one way or the other. Either we get with the program, or the program will do it for us.
I am always being accused of trying to save the planet. I am not worried about the planet. Earth couldn't care less whether the dinosaurs, monkeys or cockroaches are the dominant species.
Why socialist? They always happily mess with the mother Nature, without any regard to consequences... I don't see you doing or proclaiming just that
Well, the moron in the wig was saying that anyone who claims that we are "messing with nature by burning hydrocarbons," was a socialist.
So, I take it you are in favor of not messing with nature - except where it comes to burning all the fossil fuels we find?
One often meets his destiny on the road he takes to avoid it.
All actions have opposite and opposing reactions. The problem we will face is that when the earth starts to react, will it do so over time or rapidly? ie. rapid climate change.
As for watching humanity suffer through famine, resource wars and the like, I find myself sitting on the fence as to whether or not this should concern or entertain me.
You speak like something of a conservative, for being such an angel-face! lol!
I don't usually label myself, by I guess you are close
With age, one starts to understand that things work the way they work for a reason, even if this reason is beyond our understanding. And messing with the way they work without thorough understanding is a recipe for a disaster
Btw pylos, it refers to birth control, too
Worryingly, I have been receiving a lot of hits on one of my Hubs from a US conservative forum. I must be the new face of the Right Wing. God, Guns and small government - time to goose step into neo-con Nirvana
maybe those with "no sense of economy" will suffer first...like the "stupid right to lifers" and that "debacle religious organization" that demands that its flocks leave their conception gates open, with no place to put more sheep in an already over grazed and polluted planet.
Oh, that jerk! Now I got it
As for the fossil fuels - I never said it is the right thing. All what I am saying is that you gotta use right reasons to promote right things, and GW is the wrong reason, because it's a lie. Well, not lie per se, cause it is a viable hypothesis, but the lie is to present it as a proven theory. And here comes the old question of ends and means
Believe it or not, I think the right way to live is how Milla imagined your life on GW thread. May be except for food - you should include more wild fruits and veggies, you know
And dolphins probably are the head of evolution on this planet, not us, cause they are obviously as smart as us or even smarter, and live in harmony with their environment instead of raping it. They, not roaches, will inherit the Earth. *rant off*
Well, I wouldn't go that far, but I live approaching that ideal. I am fortunate enough to be able to walk to almost all I need, have a lot of friends that grow their own food, only buy locally grown produce and almost never indulge in rubbish like newspapers and magazines.
No insects though......
LOL Most of us wouldn't. We were brought up differently and probably cannot physically handle that kind of life. But yeah, I know that you put your money where your mouth is, as much as you can, and I am trying to do the same
You should try insects, people say they are crunchy
I have and they are, but....... (No yuk smilie)
It is difficult though. And the stupid thing is, I know I am wasting my time. One transatlantic flight wipes out any little things I may do. And when a guy in a Humvee nearly runs you over when you are walking to the market........
Golly this is confusing, you and Misha look so much alike now that if I don't make a supreme effort to read the name of the 'poster' then I am not sure who it is
Sorry to interupt. "Who did your hair, and where did you get the portraits done?"
I love it!
The original post reminded me of the Gaia hypothesis.
The layman's interpretation of this is that Earth is a giant organism, of which humans are just a small components. The Earth (or Nature, whatever you want to call it) will always adapt to ensure its survival - but those adaptations may not suit individual components. We're not as important as we like to think.
Makes me think of the civilization inside the locker in Men in Black, who had no idea there was a race of giants outside their world. You see the Men in Black laughing at their ignorance - then we pull back and see the huge aliens playing football with the Earth.
Whether or not the Earth is actually an essentially living, evolving organism, I do pretty much take it for granted that she'll self-correct as the Gaia Hypothesis posits. It's just important to me that we piss her off minimally so we don't get exterminated in the self-correction and can continue along the ride at least long enough to get the hang of space travel. I wanna meet some aliens, dammit!
Kerry- I pray for you to have 1000 years lifespan to fulfill your dream
I didn't know that so many people believed in Gaia Hypothesis. First I heard it from coldwarbaby: http://hubpages.com/hub/Earth-is-Speaki … You-Listen
And don't forget alien invasion this usually involves explosions of some kind and a close up of an aliens face with the words die human scum,,,population controlled...just waiting until an alien invasion occurs, these things take time!
by Ben Zoltak7 months ago
Do you believe in overpopulation and/or population control?Do you believe there is a humane solution viable of human beings own free will? Many believe and have evidence that certain organized groups impose population...
by luabu7 years ago
There are too many people.We are like marauding ants destroying the worlds natural beauty.We await passively the next natural cull of disease or catastrophe.Millions live half lives full of despair.Isn't it time we...
by alhaji bayoh3 months ago
i would like to know what u think of the above topic
by James Smith3 weeks ago
Are you sure it is not your own finances that you are most concerned with?
by qwark5 years ago
What will the method be that is used to necessarily "reduce/cull" the human population to a level Mother "Gaia" can, comfortably and successfully, nurture it ?
by platinumOwl46 years ago
Is the pill a form of birth control or population control?It is marketed as birth control but it could be a method of controlling the population. Is this dangerous in the long run.
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.