# Do you believe that we are now or will soon be overpopulated?



## Pedro de San Patricio

Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?


----------



## Moonglow

I helped over populate the Earth, so I have done my duty...


----------



## Pedro de San Patricio

So... Yes?


----------



## Luddly Neddite

Yes.


----------



## g5000

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?


I think resource distribution is the problem, not over-population.

There is plenty of food to go around for everyone.  It just doesn't get to everywhere it is needed, for various reasons.

So, no.  We do not have an over-population problem at this time.

The first real crush we will feel, as far as population goes, will be sources of fresh water.   We are going to need to find a way to economically desalinate ocean water in the near future, I think.


----------



## sealybobo

Moonglow said:


> I helped over populate the Earth, so I have done my duty...


Because of this issue I have become a liberal Republican. I believe we are overpopulated and I believe their policies will discourage people who can't afford kids from having them.


----------



## 2aguy

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?




No...some areas are overpopulated...like Japan.....but the world is not overpopulated.  And the birth rates for western democracies are going down, not up....as countries become wealthier, their people stop producing large families..so if you want lower population levels, embrace freedom, capitalism and the rule of law.....they will lead to wealth and prosperity for all, and lower birth rates.....


----------



## peach174

Nature will always balance itself out with epidemics, be it animals or humans.
We are not over populated.


----------



## toomuchtime_

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?


My opinion on this subject varies according to who I'm standing next to.


----------



## Silhouette

Yes.  If we were animals on a farm or in an micro ecosystem, the "Farmer" would've culled most of us long ago.

Is The Reversible Vasectomy The Magic Bullet For A Thousand Ills? (Abortion, Single Moms, Etc.)


----------



## sealybobo

2aguy said:


> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No...some areas are overpopulated...like Japan.....but the world is not overpopulated.  And the birth rates for western democracies are going down, not up....as countries become wealthier, their people stop producing large families..so if you want lower population levels, embrace freedom, capitalism and the rule of law.....they will lead to wealth and prosperity for all, and lower birth rates.....
Click to expand...

There was a time in America when the more kids you had the better. Farmers wanted lots of kids.

And our industrial boom needed more bodies so we came up with public schools to encourage people to have kids.

We've even given tax breaks for having kids.

Those days are over. Today we don't want to encourage poor people to have more kids so public schools would be a good thing to defend. Same way if we don't give foodstamps maybe a poor girl who has one mistake won't have two.


----------



## LaDexter

Indeed, the Earth is already overpopulated with humans.  The fresh water shortages are the tip of the iceberg.  It will only get worse.

At a minimum, we should do the following.

first 2 kids are tax deductible
third kid is not but the first two still are
have a fourth kid and that wipes out the entire deduction - want a big family? fine = YOU pay for it


----------



## yiostheoy

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?


Where is your poll ???

Do you not know how to set up a poll ???


----------



## yiostheoy

sealybobo said:


> There was a time in America when the more kids you had the better. Farmers wanted lots of kids.
> 
> And our industrial boom needed more bodies so we came up with public schools to encourage people to have kids.
> 
> We've even given tax breaks for having kids.
> 
> Those days are over. Today we don't want to encourage poor people to have more kids so public schools would be a good thing to defend. Same way if we don't give foodstamps maybe a poor girl who has one mistake won't have two.


As long as there was free land then subsistence farming and meat production ranching were feasible and more kids was plausible because more land was free too.

Once the land all got grabbed this ceased to be the case and most people became city dwellers and slaves to wages by capitalist monopolists.

Land redistribution might lessen the burden now, but overpopulation of the Earth as manifest by over emigration and immigration are the modern plague of locusts.

People are the locusts now.

We need a really big war like WW1 or a really big plague like The Black Death to curb the population.


----------



## yiostheoy

peach174 said:


> Nature will always balance itself out with epidemics, be it animals or humans.
> We are not over populated.


You have offered no support nor proof of your whimsical fantasy.

List of fallacies - Wikipedia


----------



## PredFan

Yes, I believe the world is. We see it in the prevalence of hunger around the world. But this is a natural population control and shouldn't be corrected.


----------



## peach174

yiostheoy said:


> peach174 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nature will always balance itself out with epidemics, be it animals or humans.
> We are not over populated.
> 
> 
> 
> You have offered no support nor proof of your whimsical fantasy.
> 
> List of fallacies - Wikipedia
Click to expand...



Basic history we all know.
Black Plague
Typhoid
Flu of 1918
Just to name a few.
With travel done so easily world wide now you could easily see 1/3 rd of the world  or more wiped out.


----------



## Maryland Patriot

yiostheoy said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> There was a time in America when the more kids you had the better. Farmers wanted lots of kids.
> 
> And our industrial boom needed more bodies so we came up with public schools to encourage people to have kids.
> 
> We've even given tax breaks for having kids.
> 
> Those days are over. Today we don't want to encourage poor people to have more kids so public schools would be a good thing to defend. Same way if we don't give foodstamps maybe a poor girl who has one mistake won't have two.
> 
> 
> 
> As long as there was free land then subsistence farming and meat production ranching were feasible and more kids was plausible because more land was free too.
> 
> Once the land all got grabbed this ceased to be the case and most people became city dwellers and slaves to wages by capitalist monopolists.
> 
> Land redistribution might lessen the burden now, but overpopulation of the Earth as manifest by over emigration and immigration are the modern plague of locusts.
> 
> People are the locusts now.
> 
> We need a really big war like WW1 or a really big plague like The Black Death to curb the population.
Click to expand...

what do you mean by land redistribution? Im not exactly sure how you mean this or what you have pictured in your mind when you say it.


----------



## Redfish

The USA----------no
China-----------yes
India------------yes
Indonesia-------------yes
parts of Africa-----------yes
parts of central and south America------------yes
Europe-------------no
Greenland------------no


----------



## Rexx Taylor

Moonglow said:


> I helped over populate the Earth, so I have done my duty...


i hope i dont live to see the day where I will see my neighbors as dinner


----------



## LaDexter

Religion is the number one problem here.  This idiot pope said the Earth is underpopulated.  That was not only false but incredibly irresponsible, and shows what really matters to religious leaders - more of their own donating on Sundays.


----------



## AnCap'n_Murica

Not even.


----------



## Unkotare

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?





It is not now, nor has it ever been a problem. A perennial false crisis.


----------



## JQPublic1

Some scholarly calculations indicate the state of Texas could hold the entire human population of the earth. And, it wouldn't be standing room only!


----------



## Unkotare

2aguy said:


> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No...some areas are overpopulated...like Japan.........
Click to expand...




That's about the worst example you could come up with. One of the most significant issues Japan is facing is precisely the opposite.


----------



## 2aguy

Don't worry guys.....I have the recipe for Soylent Green.....we'll make a killing....do you want in at the ground floor?


----------



## Maryland Patriot

LaDexter said:


> Religion is the number one problem here.  This idiot pope said the Earth is underpopulated.  That was not only false but incredibly irresponsible, and shows what really matters to religious leaders - more of their own donating on Sundays.


dont worry about what the pope says, he is really not a very good representation of what Christians should strive to be. The whole Vatican thing is obscene to a real Christian, how much of the catholics offering plate is used to keep the vatican going? seems that wealth is the number one concern for the Catholic church elders.
 as far as the pope thinking that the earth is underpopulated? I suspect he is just trying to look out for the priests to make sure they have an ample supply of children to pick from for their molestation needs.
 (P.S.
 No offense intended toward the Catholic 'church')


----------



## BluesLegend

Not with the murderous left aborting 50 million babies and climbing.


----------



## Unkotare

Maryland Patriot said:


> LaDexter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Religion is the number one problem here.  This idiot pope said the Earth is underpopulated.  That was not only false but incredibly irresponsible, and shows what really matters to religious leaders - more of their own donating on Sundays.
> 
> 
> 
> Christian, how much of the catholics offering plate is used to keep the vatican going? seems that wealth is the number one concern for the Catholic church elders.
> as far as the pope thinking that the earth is underpopulated? I suspect he is just trying to look out for the priests to make sure they have an ample supply of children to pick from for their molestation needs.
> (P.S.
> No offense intended toward the Catholic 'church')
Click to expand...




Maryland Patriot said:


> LaDexter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Religion is the number one problem here.  This idiot pope said the Earth is underpopulated.  That was not only false but incredibly irresponsible, and shows what really matters to religious leaders - more of their own donating on Sundays.
> 
> 
> 
> dont worry about what the pope says, he is really not a very good representation of what Christians should strive to be. The whole Vatican thing is obscene to a real Christian, how much of the catholics offering plate is used to keep the vatican going? seems that wealth is the number one concern for the Catholic church elders.
> as far as the pope thinking that the earth is underpopulated? I suspect he is just trying to look out for the priests to make sure they have an ample supply of children to pick from for their molestation needs.
> (P.S.
> No offense intended toward the Catholic 'church')
Click to expand...





....spoken like a true bigot


----------



## Maryland Patriot

Unkotare said:


> Maryland Patriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LaDexter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Religion is the number one problem here.  This idiot pope said the Earth is underpopulated.  That was not only false but incredibly irresponsible, and shows what really matters to religious leaders - more of their own donating on Sundays.
> 
> 
> 
> Christian, how much of the catholics offering plate is used to keep the vatican going? seems that wealth is the number one concern for the Catholic church elders.
> as far as the pope thinking that the earth is underpopulated? I suspect he is just trying to look out for the priests to make sure they have an ample supply of children to pick from for their molestation needs.
> (P.S.
> No offense intended toward the Catholic 'church')
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maryland Patriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LaDexter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Religion is the number one problem here.  This idiot pope said the Earth is underpopulated.  That was not only false but incredibly irresponsible, and shows what really matters to religious leaders - more of their own donating on Sundays.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> dont worry about what the pope says, he is really not a very good representation of what Christians should strive to be. The whole Vatican thing is obscene to a real Christian, how much of the catholics offering plate is used to keep the vatican going? seems that wealth is the number one concern for the Catholic church elders.
> as far as the pope thinking that the earth is underpopulated? I suspect he is just trying to look out for the priests to make sure they have an ample supply of children to pick from for their molestation needs.
> (P.S.
> No offense intended toward the Catholic 'church')
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ....spoken like a true bigot
Click to expand...

doesnt matter what you think actually, anyone that does not agree with your warped view is a bigot, or racist or sexist or (pick any derogatory name and place here)


----------



## xyz

kind of, yes, maybe

What? 
The US, no.
NYC, yes.

The world? 
Don't know, but too many plastic bags and trash. People should cut down on packaging.


----------



## Maryland Patriot

xyz said:


> kind of, yes, maybe
> 
> What?
> The US, no.
> NYC, yes.
> 
> The world?
> Don't know, but too many plastic bags and trash. People should cut down on packaging.


we definitely need to stop packaging people.


----------



## Unkotare

Maryland Patriot said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maryland Patriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LaDexter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Religion is the number one problem here.  This idiot pope said the Earth is underpopulated.  That was not only false but incredibly irresponsible, and shows what really matters to religious leaders - more of their own donating on Sundays.
> 
> 
> 
> Christian, how much of the catholics offering plate is used to keep the vatican going? seems that wealth is the number one concern for the Catholic church elders.
> as far as the pope thinking that the earth is underpopulated? I suspect he is just trying to look out for the priests to make sure they have an ample supply of children to pick from for their molestation needs.
> (P.S.
> No offense intended toward the Catholic 'church')
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maryland Patriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LaDexter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Religion is the number one problem here.  This idiot pope said the Earth is underpopulated.  That was not only false but incredibly irresponsible, and shows what really matters to religious leaders - more of their own donating on Sundays.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> dont worry about what the pope says, he is really not a very good representation of what Christians should strive to be. The whole Vatican thing is obscene to a real Christian, how much of the catholics offering plate is used to keep the vatican going? seems that wealth is the number one concern for the Catholic church elders.
> as far as the pope thinking that the earth is underpopulated? I suspect he is just trying to look out for the priests to make sure they have an ample supply of children to pick from for their molestation needs.
> (P.S.
> No offense intended toward the Catholic 'church')
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ....spoken like a true bigot
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> doesnt matter what you think actually, anyone that does not agree with your warped view is a bigot, or racist or sexist or (pick any derogatory name and place here)
Click to expand...




Nope, just bigots are bigots. You are welcome to be one, but don't piss and moan when it's recognized.


----------



## Remodeling Maidiac

The liberal shitholes are as well as poor nations.


----------



## Mustang

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?




As I recall, it's estimated that the Earth reached 1 billion inhabitants for the first time in 1804 which, by the way, was prior to the industrial revolution.

It took another 123 years for the Earth to reach 2 billion inhabitants in 1927.

In spite of WWII, it only took 32 years to reach 3 billion inhabitants in 1959.

Since that time, the world has added another billion people approximately every 12-15 years. 

We are now at approximately 7.4 billion with an estimate of reaching 8 billion ten years from now.

What do you think?


----------



## Unkotare

Unkotare said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No...some areas are overpopulated...like Japan.........
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's about the worst example you could come up with. One of the most significant issues Japan is facing is precisely the opposite.
Click to expand...

.


----------



## Maryland Patriot

Unkotare said:


> Maryland Patriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maryland Patriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LaDexter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Religion is the number one problem here.  This idiot pope said the Earth is underpopulated.  That was not only false but incredibly irresponsible, and shows what really matters to religious leaders - more of their own donating on Sundays.
> 
> 
> 
> Christian, how much of the catholics offering plate is used to keep the vatican going? seems that wealth is the number one concern for the Catholic church elders.
> as far as the pope thinking that the earth is underpopulated? I suspect he is just trying to look out for the priests to make sure they have an ample supply of children to pick from for their molestation needs.
> (P.S.
> No offense intended toward the Catholic 'church')
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maryland Patriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LaDexter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Religion is the number one problem here.  This idiot pope said the Earth is underpopulated.  That was not only false but incredibly irresponsible, and shows what really matters to religious leaders - more of their own donating on Sundays.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> dont worry about what the pope says, he is really not a very good representation of what Christians should strive to be. The whole Vatican thing is obscene to a real Christian, how much of the catholics offering plate is used to keep the vatican going? seems that wealth is the number one concern for the Catholic church elders.
> as far as the pope thinking that the earth is underpopulated? I suspect he is just trying to look out for the priests to make sure they have an ample supply of children to pick from for their molestation needs.
> (P.S.
> No offense intended toward the Catholic 'church')
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ....spoken like a true bigot
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> doesnt matter what you think actually, anyone that does not agree with your warped view is a bigot, or racist or sexist or (pick any derogatory name and place here)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nope, just bigots are bigots. You are welcome to be one, but don't piss and moan when it's recognized.
Click to expand...

Im not pissing and moaning, Im just pointing out that you have called so many people on here bigots for not agreeing with you that your doing so has no concern to anyone at this point.
 Its fine if you want to call people names you are certainly within your rights to do so, just dont get upset when nobody actually cares about what you say about them. 
 I think that as long as I understand your view, and you understand mine as far as this matter is concerned, we should have no problems with each other. 
 Carry on.


----------



## Unkotare

Maryland Patriot said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maryland Patriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maryland Patriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LaDexter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Religion is the number one problem here.  This idiot pope said the Earth is underpopulated.  That was not only false but incredibly irresponsible, and shows what really matters to religious leaders - more of their own donating on Sundays.
> 
> 
> 
> Christian, how much of the catholics offering plate is used to keep the vatican going? seems that wealth is the number one concern for the Catholic church elders.
> as far as the pope thinking that the earth is underpopulated? I suspect he is just trying to look out for the priests to make sure they have an ample supply of children to pick from for their molestation needs.
> (P.S.
> No offense intended toward the Catholic 'church')
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maryland Patriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LaDexter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Religion is the number one problem here.  This idiot pope said the Earth is underpopulated.  That was not only false but incredibly irresponsible, and shows what really matters to religious leaders - more of their own donating on Sundays.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> dont worry about what the pope says, he is really not a very good representation of what Christians should strive to be. The whole Vatican thing is obscene to a real Christian, how much of the catholics offering plate is used to keep the vatican going? seems that wealth is the number one concern for the Catholic church elders.
> as far as the pope thinking that the earth is underpopulated? I suspect he is just trying to look out for the priests to make sure they have an ample supply of children to pick from for their molestation needs.
> (P.S.
> No offense intended toward the Catholic 'church')
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ....spoken like a true bigot
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> doesnt matter what you think actually, anyone that does not agree with your warped view is a bigot, or racist or sexist or (pick any derogatory name and place here)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nope, just bigots are bigots. You are welcome to be one, but don't piss and moan when it's recognized.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Im not pissing and moaning, Im just pointing out that you have called so many people on here bigots for not agreeing with you that your doing so has no concern to anyone at this point.
> Its fine if you want to call people names you are certainly within your rights to do so, just dont get upset when nobody actually cares about what you say about them.
> I think that as long as I understand your view, and you understand mine as far as this matter is concerned, we should have no problems with each other.
> Carry on.
Click to expand...




You sure seem to care, bigot.


----------



## Unkotare

Maryland Patriot said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maryland Patriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maryland Patriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LaDexter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Religion is the number one problem here.  This idiot pope said the Earth is underpopulated.  That was not only false but incredibly irresponsible, and shows what really matters to religious leaders - more of their own donating on Sundays.
> 
> 
> 
> Christian, how much of the catholics offering plate is used to keep the vatican going? seems that wealth is the number one concern for the Catholic church elders.
> as far as the pope thinking that the earth is underpopulated? I suspect he is just trying to look out for the priests to make sure they have an ample supply of children to pick from for their molestation needs.
> (P.S.
> No offense intended toward the Catholic 'church')
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maryland Patriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LaDexter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Religion is the number one problem here.  This idiot pope said the Earth is underpopulated.  That was not only false but incredibly irresponsible, and shows what really matters to religious leaders - more of their own donating on Sundays.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> dont worry about what the pope says, he is really not a very good representation of what Christians should strive to be. The whole Vatican thing is obscene to a real Christian, how much of the catholics offering plate is used to keep the vatican going? seems that wealth is the number one concern for the Catholic church elders.
> as far as the pope thinking that the earth is underpopulated? I suspect he is just trying to look out for the priests to make sure they have an ample supply of children to pick from for their molestation needs.
> (P.S.
> No offense intended toward the Catholic 'church')
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ....spoken like a true bigot
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> doesnt matter what you think actually, anyone that does not agree with your warped view is a bigot, or racist or sexist or (pick any derogatory name and place here)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nope, just bigots are bigots. You are welcome to be one, but don't piss and moan when it's recognized.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ... you have called so many people on here bigots for not agreeing with you
> .....
Click to expand...





None


----------



## LaDexter

5 billion is a good long term target.  Beyond that and humans encroach on too much of things like fresh water and wildlife.  We really don't want to get to the point where wars are started just to clear out space.  That's where we are headed right now.  Some people say that Judaism concluded the planet was overpopulated a long time ago.


----------



## EverCurious

Glances around home [Alaska]... Nope.


----------



## Unkotare

yiostheoy said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> There was a time in America when the more kids you had the better. Farmers wanted lots of kids.
> 
> And our industrial boom needed more bodies so we came up with public schools to encourage people to have kids.
> 
> We've even given tax breaks for having kids.
> 
> Those days are over. Today we don't want to encourage poor people to have more kids so public schools would be a good thing to defend. Same way if we don't give foodstamps maybe a poor girl who has one mistake won't have two.
> 
> 
> 
> As long as there was free land then subsistence farming and meat production ranching were feasible and more kids was plausible because more land was free too.
> 
> Once the land all got grabbed this ceased to be the case and most people became city dwellers and slaves to wages by capitalist monopolists.
> 
> Land redistribution might lessen the burden now, but overpopulation of the Earth as manifest by over emigration and immigration are the modern plague of locusts.
> 
> People are the locusts now.
> 
> We need a really big war like WW1 or a really big plague like The Black Death to curb the population.
Click to expand...





Nonsense. There is NO overpopulation.


----------



## hazlnut

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?



Repubs believe God told them to close down women's health clinics.


----------



## Maryland Patriot

hazlnut said:


> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Repubs believe God told them to close down women's health clinics.
Click to expand...

womens health clinics are no longer needed to be funded by taxpayer dollars, its a redundant expense that needs to be cut. Doing so will not affect any service to women at all.


----------



## Unkotare

hazlnut said:


> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Repubs believe God told them to close down women's health clinics.
Click to expand...



Democrats think they're fooling anyone by calling abortion butcher-shops "health clinics."


----------



## Unkotare

LaDexter said:


> Indeed, the Earth is already overpopulated with humans.  ......it




No, it is not.


----------



## Unkotare

PredFan said:


> Yes, I believe the world is. We see it in the prevalence of hunger around the world. .....




There were people starving to death when the global population was half of what it is today, and when it was half of that, and half of that, and half of that...


----------



## Maryland Patriot

it seems overpopulated because most people choose to live in or right outside of cities. The amount of land that is not used on earth is huge.


----------



## PredFan

Unkotare said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I believe the world is. We see it in the prevalence of hunger around the world. .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There were people starving to death when the global population was half of what it is today, and when it was half of that, and half of that, and half of that...
Click to expand...


True, but not whole countries or regions.


----------



## LaDexter

Unkotare said:


> No, it is not.




You are an emotionally charged science invalid who has no basis to even comment on this issue.   You do not understand the planet and the strains that are currently put on it.  You just parrot some liar on Sundays and will never develop the intellectual basis to break out of that religious paper bag over your head.  

It starts with fresh water, and then gets worse very rapidly.


----------



## PredFan

We make things worse with our good natured but I'll advised attempt to feed the hungry. The more we feed them, the more children they make.


----------



## Unkotare

peach174 said:


> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> peach174 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nature will always balance itself out with epidemics, be it animals or humans.
> We are not over populated.
> 
> 
> 
> You have offered no support nor proof of your whimsical fantasy.
> 
> List of fallacies - Wikipedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Basic history we all know.
> Black Plague
> Typhoid
> Flu of 1918
> Just to name a few.
> With travel done so easily world wide now you could easily see 1/3 rd of the world  or more wiped out.
Click to expand...




With information, goods and services done so easily world wide now it is less likely than ever before.


----------



## Unkotare

PredFan said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I believe the world is. We see it in the prevalence of hunger around the world. .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There were people starving to death when the global population was half of what it is today, and when it was half of that, and half of that, and half of that...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> True, but not whole countries or regions.
Click to expand...




Oh yes.


----------



## Unkotare

LaDexter said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, it is not.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are an emotionally charged science invalid who has no basis to even comment on this issue.   You do not understand the planet and the strains that are currently put on it.  You just parrot some liar on Sundays and will never develop the intellectual basis to break out of that religious paper bag over your head.
> 
> It starts with fresh water, and then gets worse very rapidly.
Click to expand...





A swing and a miss! Religion has nothing to do with it. We will NEVER use all the fresh water on this planet.


----------



## Unkotare

PredFan said:


> We make things worse with our good natured but I'll advised attempt to feed the hungry. The more we feed them, the more children they make.




Not so.


----------



## PredFan

Unkotare said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> 
> We make things worse with our good natured but I'll advised attempt to feed the hungry. The more we feed them, the more children they make.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not so.
Click to expand...


So.


----------



## LaDexter

Unkotare said:


> We will NEVER use all the fresh water on this planet.




So sayeth an idiot with no clue or basis to comment initially...


----------



## Maryland Patriot

Unkotare said:


> LaDexter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, it is not.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are an emotionally charged science invalid who has no basis to even comment on this issue.   You do not understand the planet and the strains that are currently put on it.  You just parrot some liar on Sundays and will never develop the intellectual basis to break out of that religious paper bag over your head.
> 
> It starts with fresh water, and then gets worse very rapidly.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> A swing and a miss! Religion has nothing to do with it. We will NEVER use all the fresh water on this planet.
Click to expand...

actually if you think about it, we really cant use all the fresh water on the planet.
 There should be exactly as much water on the planet today as there was a billion years ago. Its recycled, we are drinking the same water the dinosaurs drank and if life on the planet lasts long enough, a billion years from now they will still be drinking the same water that we are today.
 Unless we shoot the water into space, we will always have the same amount


----------



## Unkotare

PredFan said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> 
> We make things worse with our good natured but I'll advised attempt to feed the hungry. The more we feed them, the more children they make.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So.
Click to expand...



As standards of living improve, fertility rates decline so, no.


----------



## LaDexter

Maryland Patriot said:


> we are drinking the same water the dinosaurs drank




LOL!!!

We are taking too much fresh water from nature, and that is causing fires in areas where there is no warming...

The larger the human population grows, the more it will consume, and the less for everything else.  The Syrian civil war started over water, and in an area of the world that has religious idiots cheering on big families...


----------



## Maryland Patriot

LaDexter said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> We will NEVER use all the fresh water on this planet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So sayeth an idiot with no clue or basis to comment initially...
Click to expand...

I dont think it has to be said that Unkotare is not exactly my greatest mentor on this forum but, in this case he is 100% correct. We can NEVER use all the fresh water on this planet. We can pollute it to a point that it will be hard to use, but the water will always be there in the same quantity as it is today. Even the water that end up being converted to salt water end up back at the head of the rivers and streams eventually.


----------



## Maryland Patriot

LaDexter said:


> Maryland Patriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> we are drinking the same water the dinosaurs drank
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LOL!!!
> 
> We are taking too much fresh water from nature, and that is causing fires in areas where there is no warming...
> 
> The larger the human population grows, the more it will consume, and the less for everything else.  The Syrian civil war started over water, and in an area of the world that has religious idiots cheering on big families...
Click to expand...

Is science not your strong point?


----------



## tycho1572

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?


I sure hope we don't become over populated and tip over!!


Fucking democrats. I just had to throw that in there.


----------



## PredFan

Unkotare said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> 
> We make things worse with our good natured but I'll advised attempt to feed the hungry. The more we feed them, the more children they make.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> As standards of living improve, fertility rates decline so, no.
Click to expand...


Not talking about standards of living. We have been giving food to starving nations in Africa for decades and their standard of living has not improved, they just had more babies.


----------



## LaDexter

Maryland Patriot said:


> We can NEVER use all the fresh water on this planet




Yeah, just continue to steal it from plants, trees, and...  nevermind...

Like the Federal debt, the general public is way too stupid to understand these type of issues, and won't learn until someone is shooting at them for a small parcel of land to use... or the government check bounces at the liquor store...


----------



## The Sage of Main Street

EverCurious said:


> Glances around home [Alaska]... Nope.


*High IQ Inventors Saved Humans From Dying Out, But Are Treated Like Freaks and Losers*

If Alaska had the same population density as Texas, it would have 700 million people.  And you don't need global warming to make that happen, just improved heating technology.


----------



## LaDexter

Maryland Patriot said:


> Is science not your strong point?




The actual H2O molecules consumes by dinosaurs are all over the planet, in glaciers, in trees, in mud etc.

We live on a finite planet with a finite amount of sustainable life.  When we ignore the warning signs and just sing a song, it doesn't make the problem go away..

Where is habitable land where no humans live?

That's the first problem...


----------



## Maryland Patriot

The Sage of Main Street said:


> EverCurious said:
> 
> 
> 
> Glances around home [Alaska]... Nope.
> 
> 
> 
> *High IQ Inventors Saved Humans From Dying Out, But Are Treated Like Freaks and Losers*
> 
> If Alaska had the same population density as Texas, it would have 700 million people.  And you don't need global warming to make that happen, just improved heating technology.
Click to expand...

and illegals to shovel the cars out.


----------



## EverCurious

List of U.S. states by population density - Wikipedia


----------



## tycho1572

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?


On a serious note, the taxpayers can only afford so much. There is a limit to how many people we can help.


----------



## Unkotare

LaDexter said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> We will NEVER use all the fresh water on this planet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So sayeth an idiot with no clue or basis to comment initially...
Click to expand...



What makes oust that?


----------



## ErikViking

If the definition of overpopulation is that we, as humans, are no longer able to sustain all human life to a certain standard, then yes. 

And it's not like "we could, if we wanted ". On a global scale our abilities are bounded by our "will", inherited limitations to the human mind if you like. Or instinct to survival.


----------



## The Sage of Main Street

Maryland Patriot said:


> The Sage of Main Street said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EverCurious said:
> 
> 
> 
> Glances around home [Alaska]... Nope.
> 
> 
> 
> *High IQ Inventors Saved Humans From Dying Out, But Are Treated Like Freaks and Losers*
> 
> If Alaska had the same population density as Texas, it would have 700 million people.  And you don't need global warming to make that happen, just improved heating technology.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> and illegals to shovel the cars out.
Click to expand...



I meant to write "same population density as New Jersey."  Texas is in the middle of population density, so Alaska would have 70 million then.


----------



## LaDexter

New Jersey does not self sustain.  You are taking a piece of overpopulated land that eats food made in CA and other states and saying we can pack every inch of the planet that way.  It doesn't work.  You need land to grow crops and feed the animals we eat.  Your idiocy doesn't account for that.


----------



## EverCurious

The Sage of Main Street I think you might not realize just how huge Alaska is.  663,267 sq miles for 70,000,000 folks is 105 persons per square mile... or roughly the population density of the state of Ohio, and still not at the top density for the US (New Jersey)


----------



## Borillar

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?


I would say that some countries are over populated, but not the earth as a whole.


----------



## LaDexter

Alaska is mostly frozen mountains.

If you would like to experience -40F with 50 mph winds, then move there and give it a try...


----------



## Unkotare

LaDexter said:


> Alaska is mostly frozen mountains.
> 
> If you would like to experience -40F with 50 mph winds, then move there and give it a try...



Have you?


----------



## EverCurious

I've lived here in Alaska 40+ years, I regularly note that I don't want to live anywhere else.  It actually can get to -70F but that's why they make insulation heh


----------



## LaDexter

Unkotare said:


> Have you?



No, but I have been in -33F and I don't wish to do that again.


----------



## LaDexter

EverCurious said:


> It actually can get to -70F




Good for you.  Alaska is a "net exporter" of mainly seafood.  It feeds more than it houses.


----------



## Unkotare

LaDexter said:


> EverCurious said:
> 
> 
> 
> It actually can get to -70F
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good for you.  Alaska is a "net exporter" of mainly seafood.  It feeds more than it houses.
Click to expand...



and?


----------



## Campbell

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?



You ever been out west? There's enough land and production in this country to support a billion souls. People who think small just don't have it right.


----------



## AnCap'n_Murica

ErikViking said:


> If the definition of overpopulation is that we, as humans, are no longer able to sustain all human life to a certain standard, then yes.
> 
> And it's not like "we could, if we wanted ". On a global scale our abilities are bounded by our "will", inherited limitations to the human mind if you like. Or instinct to survival.


Or by idiotic/despotic governments, that don't allow people to freely trade.


----------



## EverCurious

GRRR stupid thing... Sorry bout that






I live on the far side of the lake there.  I love my city very much  (and yea that's most of the city there on the left side, we're kind of a suburb of JBER military base) 

Most of our money is oil and tourism


----------



## LaDexter

Unkotare said:


> and?




Believe it or not, we need "net exporters" of food to feed the "net importers" like New Jersey....  that MATH problem of yours....


----------



## AnCap'n_Murica

LaDexter said:


> ]
> 
> 
> Believe it or not, we need "net exporters" of food to feed the "net importers" like New Jersey....  that MATH problem of yours....


Japan has been a net importer of foods for decades.


----------



## LaDexter

Campbell said:


> People who think small just don't have it right.




Yeah, I mean, when the planet is entirely like NYC, you'll be happy.... NOT.

These sub humans think you can do that, that as long as people are not starving in NYC, we can just cover the planet with one giant city, and everything will be great.... want some bread?  Sorry, no farmland growing grain anymore...


----------



## LaDexter

AnCap'n_Murica said:


> Japan has been a net importer of foods for decades



Japan exports what it can like Alaska - seafood.


----------



## AnCap'n_Murica

LaDexter said:


> Japan exports what it can like Alaska - seafood.


Irrelevant to the fact that they are a net importer and have been for decades.


----------



## LaDexter

AnCap'n_Murica said:


> Irrelevant to the fact that they are a net importer and have been for decades




You can do that when you generate WEALTH and run a huge TRADE SURPLUS which means your country gets WEALTHY enough to buy more imported food.  So what.  Japan was able to self sustain before WW2.  Whether it could now with its additional humans is debatable.


----------



## Unkotare

LaDexter said:


> AnCap'n_Murica said:
> 
> 
> 
> Irrelevant to the fact that they are a net importer and have been for decades
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can do that when you generate WEALTH and run a huge TRADE SURPLUS which means your country gets WEALTHY enough to buy more imported food.  So what.  Japan was able to self sustain before WW2.  Whether it could now with its additional humans is debatable.
Click to expand...



Could? Yes, but that would not be the best economic decision at this time.


----------



## AnCap'n_Murica

LaDexter said:


> You can do that when you generate WEALTH and run a huge TRADE SURPLUS which means your country gets WEALTHY enough to buy more imported food.  So what.  Japan was able to self sustain before WW2.  Whether it could now with its additional humans is debatable.


That they have been doing so for well over 60 years obviates the debatability.


----------



## EverCurious

I have to correct myself I forgot that we got mining restrictions listed - turns out zinc is Alaska's top export now heh - State Exports from Alaska

Just for ref - top imports Alaska State Imports


----------



## LaDexter

AnCap'n_Murica said:


> That they have been doing so for well over 60 years obviates the debatability.




Then go move to Tokyo...

john kerry exit polls - Google Search


the above link searches for "Tokyo overcrowding" and hits a lot of results...


----------



## AnCap'n_Murica

LaDexter said:


> Then go move to Tokyo...
> 
> john kerry exit polls - Google Search
> 
> 
> the above link searches for "Tokyo overcrowding" and hits a lot of results...


Japan is in negative population growth.


----------



## LaDexter

AnCap'n_Murica said:


> Japan is in negative population growth




The Japanese understand MATH and operate with a TEAM ATTITUDE.  They know their island is already overpopulated and are initiating policy and practice to slow/stop it.  

We should at least start by chopping off the tax deductability of kid #3.


----------



## AnCap'n_Murica

LaDexter said:


> The Japanese understand MATH and operate with a TEAM ATTITUDE.  They know their island is already overpopulated and are initiating policy and practice to slow/stop it.
> 
> We should at least start by chopping off the tax deductability of kid #3.


Technological advancement has taken care of the problem in Japan, as it has in every other "first world" nation.


----------



## ErikViking

AnCap'n_Murica said:


> ErikViking said:
> 
> 
> 
> If the definition of overpopulation is that we, as humans, are no longer able to sustain all human life to a certain standard, then yes.
> 
> And it's not like "we could, if we wanted ". On a global scale our abilities are bounded by our "will", inherited limitations to the human mind if you like. Or instinct to survival.
> 
> 
> 
> Or by idiotic/despotic governments, that don't allow people to freely trade.
Click to expand...


Every single idiotic or despotic government you can think of has one thing in common: it's a product of a collective human effort. On a global human scale everything we do, good and bad, defines us. It is quite obvious that our rate of reproduction isn't met by our ability to sustain it. Not right now, at least.


----------



## AnCap'n_Murica

ErikViking said:


> Every single idiotic or despotic government you can think of has one thing in common: it's a product of a collective human effort. On a global human scale everything we do, good and bad, defines us. It is quite obvious that our rate of reproduction isn't met by our ability to sustain it. Not right now, at least.


The answer is technological advancement. I cant think of a so-called first world nation that isn't at zero or negative population growth.

Stupid governments (the socialist democracies of the EU) and despotic governments (most African nations) prevent the industrious in Africa from advancing both technologically and economically.


----------



## FJO

g5000 said:


> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> I think resource distribution is the problem, not over-population.
> 
> There is plenty of food to go around for everyone.  It just doesn't get to everywhere it is needed, for various reasons.
> 
> So, no.  We do not have an over-population problem at this time.
> 
> The first real crush we will feel, as far as population goes, will be sources of fresh water.   We are going to need to find a way to economically desalinate ocean water in the near future, I think.
Click to expand...


First,  those who starve, come and get North America's food surplus. And don't forget to pay for it.

Second, similar "problems" were voiced 40-50 years ago, claiming that cooling of the Earth will lead to global hunger.

Third, water does not disappear. Any kid in third grade who knows about the tale of Water Drop knows this.

Fourth, desalinating sea water only works for countries who are indecently rich with natural wealth they never earned.

Additionally: If you object to coal, work on developing clean way to burn it, rather than daydreaming in wind mills and cloudy day sun panels. 

BTW, where does your Prius or $80,00.00 Tesla  get its power?


----------



## ErikViking

AnCap'n_Murica said:


> ErikViking said:
> 
> 
> 
> Every single idiotic or despotic government you can think of has one thing in common: it's a product of a collective human effort. On a global human scale everything we do, good and bad, defines us. It is quite obvious that our rate of reproduction isn't met by our ability to sustain it. Not right now, at least.
> 
> 
> 
> The answer is technological advancement. I cant think of a so-called first world nation that isn't at zero or negative population growth.
> 
> Stupid governments (the socialist democracies of the EU) and despotic governments (most African nations) prevent the industrious in Africa from advancing both technologically and economically.
Click to expand...


#1
Good point, and the reason would most likely be a combination of education and knowledge/acceptance of the limitations at hand. In less developed countries it seems that getting that fifth child when already at the breaking point keeps the negative spiral going. I wonder if the reason is that an extra pair of hands in a couple of years feels safer, especially considering the low life expectancy. 
Education, economy and technology would most likely be helpful!


#2
Africa still suffers from the European colonial history. As for the rest, I'm not that certain. What government right now is really social democratic? If EU is repressive towards African trade it's most likely because it's good business. Buy cheap, refine, sell with profit.


----------



## HenryBHough

A simple two-step process to thwart overpopulation:

Encourage liberals belief that vaccinations are an invasion of one's safe space.

Unleash Smallpox.


----------



## AnCap'n_Murica

ErikViking said:


> #2
> Africa still suffers from the European colonial history. As for the rest, I'm not that certain. What government right now is really social democratic? If EU is repressive towards African trade it's most likely because it's good business. Buy cheap, refine, sell with profit.


The EU nations, especially France, are very economically xenophobic. They subsidize internal products and tariff the shit out of imports. Even the relatively stable nations along the Nile have a nearly impossible time getting their ag products into Euro markets because of this.


----------



## Unkotare

LaDexter said:


> ...  They know their island is already overpopulated and are initiating policy and practice to slow/stop it. ....




That is amazingly ignorant.


----------



## Unkotare

ErikViking said:


> . It is quite obvious that our rate of reproduction isn't met by our ability to sustain it. Not right now, at least.



Our ability to sustain is far ahead of our rate of reproduction.


----------



## ErikViking

FJO said:


> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> I think resource distribution is the problem, not over-population.
> 
> There is plenty of food to go around for everyone.  It just doesn't get to everywhere it is needed, for various reasons.
> 
> So, no.  We do not have an over-population problem at this time.
> 
> The first real crush we will feel, as far as population goes, will be sources of fresh water.   We are going to need to find a way to economically desalinate ocean water in the near future, I think.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> First,  those who starve, come and get North America's food surplus. And don't forget to pay for it.
> 
> Second, similar "problems" were voiced 40-50 years ago, claiming that cooling of the Earth will lead to global hunger.
> 
> Third, water does not disappear. Any kid in third grade who knows about the tale of Water Drop knows this.
> 
> Fourth, desalinating sea water only works for countries who are indecently rich with natural wealth they never earned.
> 
> Additionally: If you object to coal, work on developing clean way to burn it, rather than daydreaming in wind mills and cloudy day sun panels.
> 
> BTW, where does your Prius or $80,00.00 Tesla  get its power?
Click to expand...


First,  those who starve, come and get North America's food surplus. And don't forget to pay for it.

_With what? Their children's organs?_


Second, similar "problems" were voiced 40-50 years ago, claiming that cooling of the Earth will lead to global hunger.

_Yeah, just as the "problem" of cancer, the "problem" of immigration, the "problem" of getting blown up by bombs has been discussed earlier. Or, perhaps it is only a "problem" if we don't suffer?_


Third, water does not disappear. Any kid in third grade who knows about the tale of Water Drop knows this.

_If only the children that doesn't live to the age of three knew that, then they wouldn't have to be thirsty?_

Fourth, desalinating sea water only works for countries who are indecently rich with natural wealth they never earned.

_Yes, that needs to be worked on. Also, dumping the high concentrated salt back creates other accute problems for marine life which have a negative impact on fishing._

Additionally: If you object to coal, work on developing clean way to burn it, rather than daydreaming in wind mills and cloudy day sun panels. 

There's a need to develop an array of technologies, if you want to dig up coal, I suggest to find a better use for it than burning it.


----------



## ErikViking

Unkotare said:


> ErikViking said:
> 
> 
> 
> . It is quite obvious that our rate of reproduction isn't met by our ability to sustain it. Not right now, at least.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Our ability to sustain is far ahead of our rate of reproduction.
Click to expand...


Is see. Then it's a matter of will. Which we don't have. Because we are unable to feel enough to make the the changes needed. Unable. Lack of ability.


----------



## ErikViking

AnCap'n_Murica said:


> ErikViking said:
> 
> 
> 
> #2
> Africa still suffers from the European colonial history. As for the rest, I'm not that certain. What government right now is really social democratic? If EU is repressive towards African trade it's most likely because it's good business. Buy cheap, refine, sell with profit.
> 
> 
> 
> The EU nations, especially France, are very economically xenophobic. They subsidize internal products and tariff the shit out of imports. Even the relatively stable nations along the Nile have a nearly impossible time getting their ag products into Euro markets because of this.
Click to expand...


You could be right, I'm not sure, I live in the EU and it's hard to make an objective view on your self. At least, on a smaller scale, I know you are right (we seem to like free movement and trade as long as it beneficial to ourself)


----------



## Unkotare

ErikViking said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ErikViking said:
> 
> 
> 
> . It is quite obvious that our rate of reproduction isn't met by our ability to sustain it. Not right now, at least.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Our ability to sustain is far ahead of our rate of reproduction.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Is see. Then it's a matter of will. Which we don't have. Because we are unable to feel enough to make the the changes needed. Unable. Lack of ability.
Click to expand...




We DO have the ability.


----------



## AnCap'n_Murica

ErikViking said:


> Is see. Then it's a matter of will. Which we don't have. Because we are unable to feel enough to make the the changes needed. Unable. Lack of ability.


Necessity is the mother of invention.


----------



## ErikViking

AnCap'n_Murica said:


> ErikViking said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is see. Then it's a matter of will. Which we don't have. Because we are unable to feel enough to make the the changes needed. Unable. Lack of ability.
> 
> 
> 
> Necessity is the mother of invention.
Click to expand...




Unkotare said:


> ErikViking said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ErikViking said:
> 
> 
> 
> . It is quite obvious that our rate of reproduction isn't met by our ability to sustain it. Not right now, at least.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Our ability to sustain is far ahead of our rate of reproduction.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Is see. Then it's a matter of will. Which we don't have. Because we are unable to feel enough to make the the changes needed. Unable. Lack of ability.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We DO have the ability.
Click to expand...


Alright, perhaps I paint a picture too dark, but we haven't really shown what we are capable of yet. But looking ahead, I believe you might be right.


----------



## MarathonMike

Most countries are not. For the countries that are, it is an enormous problem with no obvious solution. China tried the one child limit, what are they at 1.5 billion?


----------



## Unkotare

MarathonMike said:


> Most countries are not. For the countries that are, it is an enormous problem with no obvious solution. China tried the one child limit, what are they at 1.5 billion?



Do you know what demographic problem China is facing?


----------



## Norman

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?



That's exactly what it looks like:






Overpopulation won't be an issue.


----------



## initforme

More and more young married working couples are choosing not to have kids.they realize their employerssimp!y don't believe in families....so they put all their energy into working and retirement.  Kids and careers in america do not mix.


----------



## Campbell

FJO said:


> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> I think resource distribution is the problem, not over-population.
> 
> There is plenty of food to go around for everyone.  It just doesn't get to everywhere it is needed, for various reasons.
> 
> So, no.  We do not have an over-population problem at this time.
> 
> The first real crush we will feel, as far as population goes, will be sources of fresh water.   We are going to need to find a way to economically desalinate ocean water in the near future, I think.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> First,  those who starve, come and get North America's food surplus. And don't forget to pay for it.
> 
> Second, similar "problems" were voiced 40-50 years ago, claiming that cooling of the Earth will lead to global hunger.
> 
> Third, water does not disappear. Any kid in third grade who knows about the tale of Water Drop knows this.
> 
> Fourth, desalinating sea water only works for countries who are indecently rich with natural wealth they never earned.
> 
> Additionally: If you object to coal, work on developing clean way to burn it, rather than daydreaming in wind mills and cloudy day sun panels.
> 
> BTW, where does your Prius or $80,00.00 Tesla  get its power?
Click to expand...


Instead of just blowing bullshit out your arse why don't you occasionally post a reference......if you have any!


----------



## there4eyeM

The present excess of human population will inevitably lead to sudden reduction of numbers, doubtlessly involving widespread suffering.


----------



## Dr.Traveler

g5000 said:


> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> I think resource distribution is the problem, not over-population.
> 
> There is plenty of food to go around for everyone.  It just doesn't get to everywhere it is needed, for various reasons.
> 
> So, no.  We do not have an over-population problem at this time.
> 
> The first real crush we will feel, as far as population goes, will be sources of fresh water.   We are going to need to find a way to economically desalinate ocean water in the near future, I think.
Click to expand...

I'd agree with this, at least in the mid to short term.  We have enough food, water, and energy.  We just do a piss poor job of getting those resources around to folks.  Or moving folks around to those resources.  

In the long term, we are probably screwed if we don't figure out how to get off the planet and colonize more.  The Earth is by definition finite.  Population growth is logistic when you have limited resources.  Folks won't like what happens when you start to hit that sustainability threshold.  There's a reason we have hunting seasons for deer.  It's because what happens when nature reigns in their population is far far crueler than a hunter with a gun.  As people we need to either expand our resources or take control of our growth because if nature solves the problem, it will get ugly fast.


----------



## Dr.Traveler

Unkotare said:


> MarathonMike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Most countries are not. For the countries that are, it is an enormous problem with no obvious solution. China tried the one child limit, what are they at 1.5 billion?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you know what demographic problem China is facing?
Click to expand...

Yeah, their population growth is about to get throttled hard.


----------



## Dr.Traveler

initforme said:


> More and more young married working couples are choosing not to have kids.they realize their employerssimp!y don't believe in families....so they put all their energy into working and retirement.  Kids and careers in america do not mix.


As folks become educated the marriage age and age when you have your first child go up.  That's a good thing.  You can't have a family of 7 kids (My grandfather's generation) or 4-6 kids (My parent's generation) when your first kid is born and you're in your mid 30's.


----------



## bendog

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?


Only minorities that won't work and illegals.  (-:


----------



## CowboyTed

g5000 said:


> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> I think resource distribution is the problem, not over-population.
> 
> There is plenty of food to go around for everyone.  It just doesn't get to everywhere it is needed, for various reasons.
> 
> So, no.  We do not have an over-population problem at this time.
> 
> The first real crush we will feel, as far as population goes, will be sources of fresh water.   We are going to need to find a way to economically desalinate ocean water in the near future, I think.
Click to expand...


G,

Don't normally disagree with you but on this one I must, even only slightly...

The problem with over-population is not humans directly but on the environment we live in... 

"According to a 1998 survey of 400 biologists conducted by New York's American Museum of Natural History, nearly 70% believed that the Earth is currently in the early stages of a human-caused mass extinction,[40] known as the Holocene extinction. In that survey, the same proportion of respondents agreed with the prediction that up to 20% of all living populations could become extinct within 30 years (by 2028). Biologist E. O. Wilson estimated [10] in 2002 that if current rates of human destruction of the biosphere continue, one-half of all plant and animal species of life on earth will be extinct in 100 years.[41] More significantly, the current rate of global species extinctions is estimated as 100 to 1000 times "background" rates (the average extinction rates in the evolutionary time scale of planet Earth),[42][43]while future rates are likely 10,000 times higher.[43] However, some groups are going extinct much faster."

Look at Bees alone... 
*“The fact is that of the 100 crop species that provide 90 per cent of the world’s food, over 70 are pollinated by bees.”- UN report.*







Lets face it we are humans and as a collective are idiots because we adhere to the lowest... 

We will probably populate to the point a virus comes about and we probably killed the cure somewhere...


----------



## Campbell

Dr.Traveler said:


> initforme said:
> 
> 
> 
> More and more young married working couples are choosing not to have kids.they realize their employerssimp!y don't believe in families....so they put all their energy into working and retirement.  Kids and careers in america do not mix.
> 
> 
> 
> As folks become educated the marriage age and age when you have your first child go up.  That's a good thing.  You can't have a family of 7 kids (My grandfather's generation) or 4-6 kids (My parent's generation) when your first kid is born and you're in your mid 30's.
Click to expand...


In the old days folks had a lot of kids so they could help raise enough to eat.


----------



## Dr.Traveler

Campbell said:


> Dr.Traveler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> initforme said:
> 
> 
> 
> More and more young married working couples are choosing not to have kids.they realize their employerssimp!y don't believe in families....so they put all their energy into working and retirement.  Kids and careers in america do not mix.
> 
> 
> 
> As folks become educated the marriage age and age when you have your first child go up.  That's a good thing.  You can't have a family of 7 kids (My grandfather's generation) or 4-6 kids (My parent's generation) when your first kid is born and you're in your mid 30's.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In the old days folks had a lot of kids so they could help raise enough to eat.
Click to expand...

And because a lot of those kids would die.  Infant mortality has taken a nose dive.  That's a good thing, as it means in order to have 2 kids make it to adulthood you probably only need to have 2.  In the old days you'd probably need to have 3-4 kids to make sure you had 2 make it.

Also, if you get married at 17 (my grandparents) I guarantee you're going to have more kids. You have a longer span where kids are possible as well as a lot of hormones right there are the start that taper off as you get older.


----------



## Campbell

Dr.Traveler said:


> Campbell said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr.Traveler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> initforme said:
> 
> 
> 
> More and more young married working couples are choosing not to have kids.they realize their employerssimp!y don't believe in families....so they put all their energy into working and retirement.  Kids and careers in america do not mix.
> 
> 
> 
> As folks become educated the marriage age and age when you have your first child go up.  That's a good thing.  You can't have a family of 7 kids (My grandfather's generation) or 4-6 kids (My parent's generation) when your first kid is born and you're in your mid 30's.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In the old days folks had a lot of kids so they could help raise enough to eat.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And because a lot of those kids would die.  Infant mortality has taken a nose dive.  That's a good thing, as it means in order to have 2 kids make it to adulthood you probably only need to have 2.  In the old days you'd probably need to have 3-4 kids to make sure you had 2 make it.
> 
> Also, if you get married at 17 (my grandparents) I guarantee you're going to have more kids. You have a longer span where kids are possible as well as a lot of hormones right there are the start that taper off as you get older.
Click to expand...


Seems like I vaguely remember that hormonal activity


----------



## The Sage of Main Street

EverCurious said:


> The Sage of Main Street I think you might not realize just how huge Alaska is.  663,267 sq miles for 70,000,000 folks is 105 persons per square mile... or roughly the population density of the state of Ohio, and still not at the top density for the US (New Jersey)


That's what I said, correcting it for Texas's density.  With New Jersey's, which I meant to say in the first place, it would be around 700 million.


----------



## The Sage of Main Street

EverCurious said:


> GRRR stupid thing... Sorry bout that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I live on the far side of the lake there.  I love my city very much  (and yea that's most of the city there on the left side, we're kind of a suburb of JBER military base)
> 
> Most of our money is oil and tourism


*The Thrilla From Wasilla*

From your command post
In an igloo
You'll turn Russian pilots
Into MiG-glue


----------



## The Sage of Main Street

FJO said:


> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> I think resource distribution is the problem, not over-population.
> 
> There is plenty of food to go around for everyone.  It just doesn't get to everywhere it is needed, for various reasons.
> 
> So, no.  We do not have an over-population problem at this time.
> 
> The first real crush we will feel, as far as population goes, will be sources of fresh water.   We are going to need to find a way to economically desalinate ocean water in the near future, I think.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> First,  those who starve, come and get North America's food surplus. And don't forget to pay for it.
> 
> Second, similar "problems" were voiced 40-50 years ago, claiming that cooling of the Earth will lead to global hunger.
> 
> Third, water does not disappear. Any kid in third grade who knows about the tale of Water Drop knows this.
> 
> Fourth, desalinating sea water only works for countries who are indecently rich with natural wealth they never earned.
> 
> Additionally: If you object to coal, work on developing clean way to burn it, rather than daydreaming in wind mills and cloudy day sun panels.
> 
> BTW, where does your Prius or $80,00.00 Tesla  get its power?
Click to expand...

*Whoever Controls Language Controls Thought*

Pollution is one of those biased words that should instead be neither bad or good.  It's more rational to call it "by-products."  Up to a certain level, it is actually antiseptic.  "Clean Air" (another biased term) is full of viruses and other harmful elements that pollution kills.  Beneficially polluted air is like driving down a rocky road; natural air is like driving down a road where a mob is next to it throwing rocks at you.


----------



## The Sage of Main Street

AnCap'n_Murica said:


> ErikViking said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is see. Then it's a matter of will. Which we don't have. Because we are unable to feel enough to make the the changes needed. Unable. Lack of ability.
> 
> 
> 
> Necessity is the mother of invention.
Click to expand...

*Prometheus Spat Upon*

People with no respect for inventors, or who get rich off those Cash Cows for Corporate Cowboys, invented that myth of an impersonal force.  The inventive mind belongs to the new species that has been evolving out of the human race ever since its inventions ended the Stone Age.  If HIgh IQs are not treated better, necessity will be sterile.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

Yes, there are way too many progressives and liberals here.


----------



## The Sage of Main Street

CowboyTed said:


> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> I think resource distribution is the problem, not over-population.
> 
> There is plenty of food to go around for everyone.  It just doesn't get to everywhere it is needed, for various reasons.
> 
> So, no.  We do not have an over-population problem at this time.
> 
> The first real crush we will feel, as far as population goes, will be sources of fresh water.   We are going to need to find a way to economically desalinate ocean water in the near future, I think.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> G,
> 
> Don't normally disagree with you but on this one I must, even only slightly...
> 
> The problem with over-population is not humans directly but on the environment we live in...
> 
> "According to a 1998 survey of 400 biologists conducted by New York's American Museum of Natural History, nearly 70% believed that the Earth is currently in the early stages of a human-caused mass extinction,[40] known as the Holocene extinction. In that survey, the same proportion of respondents agreed with the prediction that up to 20% of all living populations could become extinct within 30 years (by 2028). Biologist E. O. Wilson estimated [10] in 2002 that if current rates of human destruction of the biosphere continue, one-half of all plant and animal species of life on earth will be extinct in 100 years.[41] More significantly, the current rate of global species extinctions is estimated as 100 to 1000 times "background" rates (the average extinction rates in the evolutionary time scale of planet Earth),[42][43]while future rates are likely 10,000 times higher.[43] However, some groups are going extinct much faster."
> 
> Look at Bees alone...
> *“The fact is that of the 100 crop species that provide 90 per cent of the world’s food, over 70 are pollinated by bees.”- UN report.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lets face it we are humans and as a collective are idiots because we adhere to the lowest...
> 
> We will probably populate to the point a virus comes about and we probably killed the cure somewhere...
Click to expand...

*Nothing in Nature Is Where It Belongs Unless Man Put It There*

I wish that these unfit Zero-Growth academic gurus would go extinct first. The highly placed Eco-Eunuchs are bitter nerd losers who have poisoned our minds.  We wouldn't miss 99% of the other useless species; sympathy for worthless malignancies is the really reason motivating these nature freak pseudo-scientists.  Despite their pushy bossiness, they know what misfits they are and want to drive the rest of us into their suicidal worldview about all that vermin and vegetation.


----------



## EverCurious

The Sage of Main Street said:


> EverCurious said:
> 
> 
> 
> GRRR stupid thing... Sorry bout that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I live on the far side of the lake there.  I love my city very much  (and yea that's most of the city there on the left side, we're kind of a suburb of JBER military base)
> 
> Most of our money is oil and tourism
> 
> 
> 
> *The Thrilla From Wasilla*
> 
> From your command post
> In an igloo
> You'll turn Russian pilots
> Into MiG-glue
Click to expand...


Actually I live in a French Tutor and I don't mind Russians.  If you look in the picture straight out center-ish you can see the bombing range where troops from all over the world (including Russians used to) come to practice joint training missions. However, since Russia backed off/out of the US/EU globalist NWO that doesn't happen anymore.  

Still, I regularly listen to them target practice and also get to watch them jump out of planes all year long.  -30 and our boys are jumping out of planes... US soldiers are amazing ~salutes~


----------



## initforme

Considering most employers don't believe in the family units people will choose to have one or even no children as a family cannot survive on one salary if its a mere pittance of fifty thousand dollars.  Not possible unless you want to live in poverty or paycheck to paycheck ads most do because their wages are low and getting lower.


----------



## Unkotare

there4eyeM said:


> The present excess of human population will inevitably lead to sudden reduction of numbers, doubtlessly involving widespread suffering.





Nonsense


----------



## there4eyeM

Nature.


----------



## Unkotare

There is no " present excess of human population."


----------



## there4eyeM

Like a high speed vehicle in a freeway, inertia means the stopping point is already far in front. The earth's population had already doubled two times in my lifetime. It cannot double again. Of course, anyone is free to believe anything one can imagine. Perhaps a kind and gentle Creator will intervene and spare humanity from natural law.


----------



## owebo

CowboyTed said:


> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> I think resource distribution is the problem, not over-population.
> 
> There is plenty of food to go around for everyone.  It just doesn't get to everywhere it is needed, for various reasons.
> 
> So, no.  We do not have an over-population problem at this time.
> 
> The first real crush we will feel, as far as population goes, will be sources of fresh water.   We are going to need to find a way to economically desalinate ocean water in the near future, I think.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> G,
> 
> Don't normally disagree with you but on this one I must, even only slightly...
> 
> The problem with over-population is not humans directly but on the environment we live in...
> 
> "According to a 1998 survey of 400 biologists conducted by New York's American Museum of Natural History, nearly 70% believed that the Earth is currently in the early stages of a human-caused mass extinction,[40] known as the Holocene extinction. In that survey, the same proportion of respondents agreed with the prediction that up to 20% of all living populations could become extinct within 30 years (by 2028). Biologist E. O. Wilson estimated [10] in 2002 that if current rates of human destruction of the biosphere continue, one-half of all plant and animal species of life on earth will be extinct in 100 years.[41] More significantly, the current rate of global species extinctions is estimated as 100 to 1000 times "background" rates (the average extinction rates in the evolutionary time scale of planet Earth),[42][43]while future rates are likely 10,000 times higher.[43] However, some groups are going extinct much faster."
> 
> Look at Bees alone...
> *“The fact is that of the 100 crop species that provide 90 per cent of the world’s food, over 70 are pollinated by bees.”- UN report.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lets face it we are humans and as a collective are idiots because we adhere to the lowest...
> 
> We will probably populate to the point a virus comes about and we probably killed the cure somewhere...
Click to expand...

I think it's sad people are no longer taking up bee keeping as a business.....


----------



## Unkotare

there4eyeM said:


> Like a high speed vehicle in a freeway, inertia means the stopping point is already far in front. The earth's population had already doubled two times in my lifetime. It cannot double again. Of course, anyone is free to believe anything one can imagine. Perhaps a kind and gentle Creator will intervene and spare humanity from natural law.




Hysteria-mongers are never happy unless they are in a panic.


----------



## there4eyeM

Non sequitur.


----------



## Unkotare

there4eyeM said:


> Non sequitur.



False premise.


----------



## there4eyeM

Tell that to nature.


----------



## LaDexter

Unkotare said:


> There is no " present excess of human population."




Indeed, until the entire planet is a city like Coruscant (Star Wars), you will babble along.

Meanwhile, there are extreme issues like fresh water shortages all over the planet that, according to your bullshit, have nothing to do with humans sucking up all the fresh water...


----------



## rhodescholar

The world is badly overpopulated, and if I could press a button that would bring the pop down to 500 MM, eliminating all of china, russia, africa, the mideast (except Israel), and south america, I'd hit that button with a hammer.

I have given this a lot of thought over the years, and the maximum amount of people the world could sustain if everyone was producing the same amount of pollutants and using the same amount of resources like water as an american, would be about 500 MM.

The world is headed towards a disaster seen in the movies Elysium/Soylent Green, etc; overcrowded, polluted, starving masses, etc.  The africans and the rest of the 3rd world needs to start using birth control.  

It is not the responsibility of the 1st world to be the 3rd world's safety valve for its overpopulation, nor is it to come up with ways to cure its diseases (like AIDS) that spring up in various 3rd world shitholes that would helpt to reduce the pop of these areas as they should.


----------



## The Sage of Main Street

initforme said:


> Considering most employers don't believe in the family units people will choose to have one or even no children as a family cannot survive on one salary if its a mere pittance of fifty thousand dollars.  Not possible unless you want to live in poverty or paycheck to paycheck ads most do because their wages are low and getting lower.


*Walking Tall by Walking All Over People*

One explanation the economic elite don't dare suggest is that the people running the businesses are too incompetent to make them productive enough to pay their employees well.  We have been indoctrinated into believing that anyone who makes it to the top must have reached that position by being better than those competing with him.


----------



## there4eyeM

The standard of consumption cannot use America as the baseline.


----------



## rhodescholar

there4eyeM said:


> The standard of consumption cannot use America as the baseline.



Except the rest of the planet is trying to achieve consumerist parity with the US.


----------



## there4eyeM

Which exacerbates the over population effects.


----------



## Unkotare

there4eyeM said:


> Tell that to nature.




The nature that made it possible for the current number of people to live on earth? 

The nature that far more than sustains us? 

The nature of which humans and their ingenuity are a part?


----------



## Unkotare

there4eyeM said:


> Which exacerbates the over population effects.




There is no overpopulation.


----------



## Correll

rhodescholar said:


> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> The standard of consumption cannot use America as the baseline.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Except the rest of the planet is trying to achieve consumerist parity with the US.
Click to expand...



And Americans all want more.


----------



## Unkotare

LaDexter said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is no " present excess of human population."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meanwhile, there are extreme issues like fresh water shortages all over the planet that, ...
Click to expand...



No there aren't . There are just people living in the wrong parts. We will NEVER use all the fresh water on this planet.


----------



## Unkotare

LaDexter said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is no " present excess of human population."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, until the entire planet is a city like Coruscant ....
Click to expand...


Yeah, you let me know when that happens, C.L.


----------



## Unkotare

rhodescholar said:


> The world is badly overpopulated, and if I could press a button that would bring the pop down to 500 MM, eliminating all of china, russia, africa, the mideast (except Israel), and south america, I'd hit that button with a hammer.
> 
> I have given this a lot of thought over the years, and the maximum amount of people the world could sustain if everyone was producing the same amount of pollutants and using the same amount of resources like water as an american, would be about 500 MM.
> 
> The world is headed towards a disaster seen in the movies Elysium/Soylent Green, etc; overcrowded, polluted, starving masses, etc.  The africans and the rest of the 3rd world needs to start using birth control.
> 
> It is not the responsibility of the 1st world to be the 3rd world's safety valve for its overpopulation, nor is it to come up with ways to cure its diseases (like AIDS) that spring up in various 3rd world shitholes that would helpt to reduce the pop of these areas as they should.





Here you go, false hysteria fans. ^^^^^^. Is this the kind of nut you want to be associated with?


----------



## Unkotare

Correll said:


> rhodescholar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> The standard of consumption cannot use America as the baseline.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Except the rest of the planet is trying to achieve consumerist parity with the US.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> And Americans all want more.
Click to expand...





As we should.


----------



## Correll

Unkotare said:


> rhodescholar said:
> 
> 
> 
> The world is badly overpopulated, and if I could press a button that would bring the pop down to 500 MM, eliminating all of china, russia, africa, the mideast (except Israel), and south america, I'd hit that button with a hammer.
> 
> I have given this a lot of thought over the years, and the maximum amount of people the world could sustain if everyone was producing the same amount of pollutants and using the same amount of resources like water as an american, would be about 500 MM.
> 
> The world is headed towards a disaster seen in the movies Elysium/Soylent Green, etc; overcrowded, polluted, starving masses, etc.  The africans and the rest of the 3rd world needs to start using birth control.
> 
> It is not the responsibility of the 1st world to be the 3rd world's safety valve for its overpopulation, nor is it to come up with ways to cure its diseases (like AIDS) that spring up in various 3rd world shitholes that would helpt to reduce the pop of these areas as they should.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here you go, false hysteria fans. ^^^^^^. Is this the kind of nut you want to be associated with?
Click to expand...



By advocating that the FIrst World NOT research Third World diseases, in order to "reduce" the population of those areas, he is advocating passive genocide.


----------



## Correll

Unkotare said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rhodescholar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> The standard of consumption cannot use America as the baseline.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Except the rest of the planet is trying to achieve consumerist parity with the US.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> And Americans all want more.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As we should.
Click to expand...



Agreed.

People, mostly liberals, act as though all Americans are rich.

But we are not. I have friends who are suffering real hardships.


----------



## there4eyeM

It is absurd to want 'more' all the time, and what the US is doing is impossible to replicate world wide. To 'want' intelligently, to seek beauty, quality, stability, security, health, peace and happiness would be a wonderful use of human potential. Instead, what we see is stupidity, avidity and ugly waste all worshiped.


----------



## owebo

there4eyeM said:


> It is absurd to want 'more' all the time, and what the US is doing is impossible to replicate world wide. To 'want' intelligently, to seek beauty, quality, stability, security, health, peace and happiness would be a wonderful use of human potential. Instead, what we see is stupidity, avidity and ugly waste all worshiped.


Worshiping ugly waste, stupidity and avidity allowed you to make that post technologically speaking, of course......


----------



## there4eyeM

owebo said:


> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is absurd to want 'more' all the time, and what the US is doing is impossible to replicate world wide. To 'want' intelligently, to seek beauty, quality, stability, security, health, peace and happiness would be a wonderful use of human potential. Instead, what we see is stupidity, avidity and ugly waste all worshiped.
> 
> 
> 
> Worshiping ugly waste, stupidity and avidity allowed you to make that post technologically speaking, of course......
Click to expand...

To paraphrase what a philosophy teacher once said, the above post represents an ontological freak-out.


----------



## owebo

there4eyeM said:


> owebo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is absurd to want 'more' all the time, and what the US is doing is impossible to replicate world wide. To 'want' intelligently, to seek beauty, quality, stability, security, health, peace and happiness would be a wonderful use of human potential. Instead, what we see is stupidity, avidity and ugly waste all worshiped.
> 
> 
> 
> Worshiping ugly waste, stupidity and avidity allowed you to make that post technologically speaking, of course......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> To paraphrase what a philosophy teacher once said, the above post represents an ontological freak-out.
Click to expand...

Again, you praise the waste you mock.....good for you.....are you iPad'ing from your cave?


----------



## Unkotare

there4eyeM said:


> It is absurd to want 'more' all the time, and what the US is doing is impossible to replicate world wide. To 'want' intelligently, to seek beauty, quality, stability, security, health, peace and happiness would be a wonderful use of human potential. Instead, what we see is stupidity, avidity and ugly waste all worshiped.


----------



## Correll

there4eyeM said:


> It is absurd to want 'more' all the time, and what the US is doing is impossible to replicate world wide. To 'want' intelligently, to seek beauty, quality, stability, security, health, peace and happiness would be a wonderful use of human potential. Instead, what we see is stupidity, avidity and ugly waste all worshiped.





More health is would require more money and technology.

More quality of life for the nation's poor, and even middle class will require more money.

More security will require doing something about the dangerous crime, which will require money.

Happiness for some, like the poor will require more of the needs to be met. Again money.

NOt every American is in good shape, elitist.


----------



## there4eyeM

Always rewarding to see the right people upset.


----------



## Unkotare

there4eyeM said:


> It is absurd to want 'more' all the time, and what the US is doing is impossible to replicate world wide. To 'want' intelligently, to seek beauty, quality, stability, security, health, peace and happiness would be a wonderful use of human potential. Instead, what we see is stupidity, avidity and ugly waste all worshiped.




I gave my love a chicken that had no bones

I gave my love a story that had no end

I g............!@:$&!!#%!*^!


----------



## The Sage of Main Street

Correll said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rhodescholar said:
> 
> 
> 
> The world is badly overpopulated, and if I could press a button that would bring the pop down to 500 MM, eliminating all of china, russia, africa, the mideast (except Israel), and south america, I'd hit that button with a hammer.
> 
> I have given this a lot of thought over the years, and the maximum amount of people the world could sustain if everyone was producing the same amount of pollutants and using the same amount of resources like water as an american, would be about 500 MM.
> 
> The world is headed towards a disaster seen in the movies Elysium/Soylent Green, etc; overcrowded, polluted, starving masses, etc.  The africans and the rest of the 3rd world needs to start using birth control.
> 
> It is not the responsibility of the 1st world to be the 3rd world's safety valve for its overpopulation, nor is it to come up with ways to cure its diseases (like AIDS) that spring up in various 3rd world shitholes that would helpt to reduce the pop of these areas as they should.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here you go, false hysteria fans. ^^^^^^. Is this the kind of nut you want to be associated with?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> By advocating that the FIrst World NOT research Third World diseases, in order to "reduce" the population of those areas, he is advocating passive genocide.
Click to expand...

*Multiculturalism Violates the Law of Evolution and Deserves Punishment*

We have no duty to allow incompetent mooching savages to continue to exist.  Hidden behind that  fake humanitarianism is a Death Wish by misfits within the civilized world and a desire to drag the rest of us into their suicidal pit.


----------



## Unkotare

The Sage of Main Street said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rhodescholar said:
> 
> 
> 
> The world is badly overpopulated, and if I could press a button that would bring the pop down to 500 MM, eliminating all of china, russia, africa, the mideast (except Israel), and south america, I'd hit that button with a hammer.
> 
> I have given this a lot of thought over the years, and the maximum amount of people the world could sustain if everyone was producing the same amount of pollutants and using the same amount of resources like water as an american, would be about 500 MM.
> 
> The world is headed towards a disaster seen in the movies Elysium/Soylent Green, etc; overcrowded, polluted, starving masses, etc.  The africans and the rest of the 3rd world needs to start using birth control.
> 
> It is not the responsibility of the 1st world to be the 3rd world's safety valve for its overpopulation, nor is it to come up with ways to cure its diseases (like AIDS) that spring up in various 3rd world shitholes that would helpt to reduce the pop of these areas as they should.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here you go, false hysteria fans. ^^^^^^. Is this the kind of nut you want to be associated with?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> By advocating that the FIrst World NOT research Third World diseases, in order to "reduce" the population of those areas, he is advocating passive genocide.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Multiculturalism Violates the Law of Evolution and Deserves Punishment*
> 
> We have no duty to allow incompetent mooching savages to continue to exist.  Hidden behind that  fake humanitarianism is a Death Wish by misfits within the civilized world and a desire to drag the rest of us into their suicidal pit.
Click to expand...







Some people just can't seem to post anything but ignorant, cowardly nonsense.


----------



## rhodescholar

Correll said:


> By advocating that the FIrst World NOT research Third World diseases, in order to "reduce" the population of those areas, he is advocating passive genocide.



Oh shut up.  Where is it the US/West's responsibility to fix the problems of the 3rd world?

Do you see people in NJ demanding that africans and asians come over to fix their bridges and roads?  Or solve any other problems?  

It's called not getting involved, how a low IAQ dolt can call that "genocide" is ludicrous nonsense.


----------



## Correll

there4eyeM said:


> Always rewarding to see the right people upset.




I'm not upset, and my point, which we all noticed you did not address, stands.


----------



## sealybobo

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?



Yes.

Many countries, including the U.S., contribute plastic pollution, and it all adds up. For example, in 2010 alone (the year's worth of data that Jambeck's _Science_ study was based on), a total of 8 million metric tons of plastic entered the world's oceans.

We're Drowning In Plastic Trash. Jenna Jambeck Wants To Save Us


----------



## sealybobo

2aguy said:


> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No...some areas are overpopulated...like Japan.....but the world is not overpopulated.  And the birth rates for western democracies are going down, not up....as countries become wealthier, their people stop producing large families..so if you want lower population levels, embrace freedom, capitalism and the rule of law.....they will lead to wealth and prosperity for all, and lower birth rates.....
Click to expand...


I love it how we have problems and you don't see the problem with the problems we have.  How dumb are you?

First you don't see the problem with Florida's stand your ground law and now I see you don't even understand that we have too many humans on this planet consuming too much of our natural resources.  Humans are horrible.  Not all humans are as equally bad but you seem to be one of the worst.


----------



## Unkotare

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?




The problem shortly to be facing us is exactly the opposite.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The problem shortly to be facing us is exactly the opposite.
Click to expand...

Just because our corporations need more bodies doesn't mean the planet needs more.  You might want growth but mother nature wants you to keep it in your pants.

See wave of garbage off the Dominican Republic - CNN Video


----------



## MarathonMike

Overpopulation is a big problem because we don't have an even distribution of people over Earth's surface area. We have enormous concentrations of people in relatively small areas of the Earth. Those areas are by far the biggest polluters. Look at China with it's billion plus population mostly concentrated in disgusting smog choked cities. They also along with India are turning the ocean into a floating garbage heap.


----------



## sealybobo

Maybe we just have too many asians.


----------



## 2aguy

sealybobo said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No...some areas are overpopulated...like Japan.....but the world is not overpopulated.  And the birth rates for western democracies are going down, not up....as countries become wealthier, their people stop producing large families..so if you want lower population levels, embrace freedom, capitalism and the rule of law.....they will lead to wealth and prosperity for all, and lower birth rates.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I love it how we have problems and you don't see the problem with the problems we have.  How dumb are you?
> 
> First you don't see the problem with Florida's stand your ground law and now I see you don't even understand that we have too many humans on this planet consuming too much of our natural resources.  Humans are horrible.  Not all humans are as equally bad but you seem to be one of the worst.
Click to expand...



We don't have overpopulation...in fact, the countries in Europe aren't having enough kids to replace their population levels.  As countries get richer, the people have fewer and fewer kids......


----------



## sealybobo

2aguy said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No...some areas are overpopulated...like Japan.....but the world is not overpopulated.  And the birth rates for western democracies are going down, not up....as countries become wealthier, their people stop producing large families..so if you want lower population levels, embrace freedom, capitalism and the rule of law.....they will lead to wealth and prosperity for all, and lower birth rates.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I love it how we have problems and you don't see the problem with the problems we have.  How dumb are you?
> 
> First you don't see the problem with Florida's stand your ground law and now I see you don't even understand that we have too many humans on this planet consuming too much of our natural resources.  Humans are horrible.  Not all humans are as equally bad but you seem to be one of the worst.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> We don't have overpopulation...in fact, the countries in Europe aren't having enough kids to replace their population levels.  As countries get richer, the people have fewer and fewer kids......
Click to expand...

That’s not a problem except for big business who always wants growth damn the planet


----------



## sealybobo

2aguy said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No...some areas are overpopulated...like Japan.....but the world is not overpopulated.  And the birth rates for western democracies are going down, not up....as countries become wealthier, their people stop producing large families..so if you want lower population levels, embrace freedom, capitalism and the rule of law.....they will lead to wealth and prosperity for all, and lower birth rates.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I love it how we have problems and you don't see the problem with the problems we have.  How dumb are you?
> 
> First you don't see the problem with Florida's stand your ground law and now I see you don't even understand that we have too many humans on this planet consuming too much of our natural resources.  Humans are horrible.  Not all humans are as equally bad but you seem to be one of the worst.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> We don't have overpopulation...in fact, the countries in Europe aren't having enough kids to replace their population levels.  As countries get richer, the people have fewer and fewer kids......
Click to expand...

This is what’s wrong with republicans. You’re worried about business not the planet


----------



## Unkotare

The Population Problem


----------



## Unkotare

MarathonMike said:


> .... Look at China with it's billion plus population mostly concentrated in disgusting smog choked cities. ....




Yeah, look at China which is facing a dramatic and precipitous population crash.


----------



## Unkotare

MarathonMike said:


> .... Look at China with it's billion plus population mostly concentrated in disgusting smog choked cities. ....




Yeah, look at China which is facing a dramatic and precipitous population crash.


China’s air quality improved in 2017, environment ministry says


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> The Population Problem


The six natural resources most drained by our 7 billion people

*1. Water*
 The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations is predicting that by 2025, 1.8 billion people will be living in countries or regions with absolute water scarcity.

*2. Oil*
The fear of reaching peak oil continues to haunt the oil industry. The BP Statistical Review of World Energy in June measured total global oil at 188.8 million tonnes, from proved oil resources at the end of 2010. This is only enough to oil for the next 46.2 years, should global production remain at the current rate.

*3. Natural gas*
A similar picture to oil exists for natural gas, with enough gas in proven reserves to meet 58.6 years of global production at the end of 2010.

*4. Phosphorus*
Without this element, plants cannot grow. Essential for fertiliser, phosphate rock is only found in a handful of countries, including the US, China and Morocco. With the need to feed 7 billion people, scientists from the Global Phosphorus Research Initiative predict we could run out of phosphorus in 50 to 100 years unless new reserves of the element are found.

*5. Coal*
This has the largest reserves left of all the fossil fuels, but as China and other developing countries continue to increase their appetite for coal, demand could finally outstrip supply. As it is, we have enough coal to meet 188 years of global production.

*6. Rare earth elements*
Scandium and terbium are just two of the 17 rare earth minerals that are used in everything from the powerful magnets in wind turbines to the electronic circuits in smartphones. The elements are not as rare as their name suggests but currently 97% of the world's supply comes from China and they can restrict supplies at will. Exact reserves are not known.

If all you care about is the next 188 years then we are good.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> MarathonMike said:
> 
> 
> 
> .... Look at China with it's billion plus population mostly concentrated in disgusting smog choked cities. ....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, look at China which is facing a dramatic and precipitous population crash.
> 
> 
> China’s air quality improved in 2017, environment ministry says
Click to expand...


As for the finite amount of natural resources on Earth, there are four things we must accept, and fast:

1) We cannot continue to think we have an _unlimited_ amount of natural resources.

2) We will not be able to find a technological fix that will allow us to consume _unlimited_ resources.

3)  The term “renewable” resource does not imply that the resource is unlimited.

4) When we use a natural resource, we may turn it into something useless through entropy (for example, if we burn wood for heat, it turns to ashes, which are useless to us). The natural resources are diminishing while our population is exponentially increasing. Based on current trends, we cannot assure future generations an adequate supply of clean air, safe water, or a healthy food supply.


----------



## sealybobo

Some of the most recent data comes from a NASA study that was released in 2014. Sadly, it suggests that the world is heading toward an _“irreversible collapse”_ as a result of unsustainable resource exploitation and “increasingly unequal wealth distribution.” When will the switch flip? Well, they assert that it’ll happen within a few decades.

A Timeline of Death: How Long Until We Exhaust All Our Resources?


----------



## RetiredGySgt

Fastest way to get new resources is to mine the asteroid belt. But what did Obama do? He gutted NASA.


----------



## g5000

MarathonMike said:


> Overpopulation is a big problem because we don't have an even distribution of people over Earth's surface area. We have enormous concentrations of people in relatively small areas of the Earth. Those areas are by far the biggest polluters. Look at China with it's billion plus population mostly concentrated in disgusting smog choked cities. They also along with India are turning the ocean into a floating garbage heap.


Disgusting smog choked cities are part of development. We used to have disgusting smog choked cities.


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> .....
> 2) We will not be able to find a technological fix .....




Despite the fact that we always have...


----------



## Unkotare

The brainless parrots who can't let go of a false crisis from the 70s miss the  significant factors of technological change that will lead to a different use of resources and use of different resources by what will eventually be a shrinking global population. The idiotic hypocrites just want to be afraid.


----------



## sealybobo

RetiredGySgt said:


> Fastest way to get new resources is to mine the asteroid belt. But what did Obama do? He gutted NASA.


He got us out of the Great Recession


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> .....
> 2) We will not be able to find a technological fix .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Despite the fact that we always have...
Click to expand...


Just because we always have doesn't mean we always will be able to come up with a technilogical fix.  

And see here?  This is a republican who says don't lower birth rates, we will engineer a solution to this.  You know who has engineered a solution to this?  India and China.

This is where the Donald Trump of India lives



Because there's no room.  Lets keep doubling the population and become india you fucktard.


----------



## sealybobo

RetiredGySgt said:


> Fastest way to get new resources is to mine the asteroid belt. But what did Obama do? He gutted NASA.


Most people believe that as soon as oil runs out the car companies will quickly switch over to battery.


----------



## sealybobo

RetiredGySgt said:


> Fastest way to get new resources is to mine the asteroid belt. But what did Obama do? He gutted NASA.



researchers have detected signs of a large, stable body of liquid water locked away beneath a mile of ice near Mars' south pole. The observations were recorded by the Mars Advanced Radar for Subsurface and Ionosphere Sounding instrument—Marsis for short. "Marsis was born to make this kind of discovery, and now it has," says Roberto Orosei, a radioastronomer at the National Institute for Astrophysics, who led the investigation. His team's findings, which appear in this week's issue of Science, raise tantalizing questions about the planet's geology—and its potential for harboring life.


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> .....
> 2) We will not be able to find a technological fix .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Despite the fact that we always have...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Just because we always have doesn't mean we always will be able to come up with a technilogical [sic] fix.
> 
> ......
Click to expand...





But this same kind of democrat dumbass is just sure that Communism will work despite the fact that it never has. The fundamentally fucked up failure of what passes for leftist 'thinking.'


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> ...... You know who has engineered a solution to this?  India and China........




No they haven't.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> .....
> 2) We will not be able to find a technological fix .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Despite the fact that we always have...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Just because we always have doesn't mean we always will be able to come up with a technilogical [sic] fix.
> 
> ......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But this same kind of democrat dumbass is just sure that Communism will work despite the fact that it never has. The fundamentally fucked up failure of what passes for leftist 'thinking.'
Click to expand...

I'm no communist.  Is that what you think?  No wonder you're such an asshole.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...... You know who has engineered a solution to this?  India and China........
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No they haven't.
Click to expand...


Of course they have.  You don't like the solution?  Neither do I.  They should have had less kids.  That would have been a proper solution.  Less people = less smog and more land for the animals.

Gosh there are so many examples of how we are overpopulated.  How about this one:
African lion populations dwindling as humans take over | CBC News

The lions that roam Africa's savannahs have lost as much as 75 per cent of their habitat in the last 50 years as humans overtake their land and the lion population dwindles, according to a new study.

Did you know this you stupid idiot?

One of our closest relatives is going extinct and humans are entirely to blame

It would perhaps not be surprising if they were to die out. Of more than 82,000 species assessed by the IUCN, nearly 30 per cent are facing that fate – almost entirely because of the actions of humans.


Geologists are currently considering reclassifying the Earth’s present geological epoch as the Anthropocene – a name that reflects the extent of our impact on the planet – partly because of what some scientists are already calling the sixth mass extinction of life on Earth. 

Now you can tell the scientists they are wrong because you are an intelligent 7th grade gym teacher.  You fucking idiot.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...... You know who has engineered a solution to this?  India and China........
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No they haven't.
Click to expand...

There are so many of us that we are threatening to make Zebra's go extinct.

List now includes 82,954 species of which 23,928 – 28.8 per cent – are threatened with extinction. Other species added to those in trouble include the plains zebra, which has moved from the “least concern” category to “near threatened” after a 24 per cent decrease in its population in 14 years from 660,000 to about 500,000, largely because of hunting.

Three species of African antelope – the bay duiker, white-bellied duiker and yellow-backed duiker – were also moved from least concern to near threatened. 

Mountain gorillas have been critically endangered for 20 years with only about 300 mature individuals left

You don't see the problem with only having 300 gorillas left and you don't see the problem with having 7.3 billion humans on this planet?  How dumb are you?


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...... You know who has engineered a solution to this?  India and China........
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No they haven't.
Click to expand...


Habitat loss poses the greatest threat to species. The world's forests, swamps, plains, lakes, and other habitats continue to disappear as they are harvested for human consumption and cleared to make way for agriculture, housing, roads, pipelines and the other hallmarks of industrial development. Without a strong plan to create terrestrial and marine protected areas important ecological habitats will continue to be lost.

*Habitat loss is probably the greatest threat to the variety of life on this planet today.*

It is identified as a main threat to 85% of all species described in the IUCN's Red List (those species officially classified as "Threatened" and "Endangered").

Increasing food production is a major agent for the conversion of natural habitat into agricultural land.

*Why is it happening?*

Forest loss and degradation is mostly caused by the expansion of agricultural land, intensive harvesting of timber, wood for fuel and other forest products, as well as overgrazing.

*High land conversion rates*

The net loss in global forest area during the 1990s was about 94 million ha (equivalent to 2.4% of total forests). It is estimated that in the 1990s, almost 70% of deforested areas were converted to agricultural land.

Around half of the world's original forests have disappeared, and they are still being removed at a rate 10x higher than any possible level of regrowth. As tropical forests contain at least half the Earth's species, the clearance of some 17 million hectares each year is a dramatic loss.

Do I really need to explain this to you unkotare?

Human impact on terrestrial and marine natural resources results in marine and coastal degradation. Population growth, urbanization, industrialization and tourism are all factors.

In 1994, it was estimated that 37% of the global population lived within 60 km of the coast. Poverty, consumption and land-use patterns contribute to the degradation of marine habitats and to the destruction of the species that rely on them to survive.

Impact of habitat loss on species


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> .....
> 2) We will not be able to find a technological fix .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Despite the fact that we always have...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Just because we always have doesn't mean we always will be able to come up with a technilogical [sic] fix.
> 
> ......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But this same kind of democrat dumbass is just sure that Communism will work despite the fact that it never has. The fundamentally fucked up failure of what passes for leftist 'thinking.'
Click to expand...


Palm oil plantations in the tropical regions of Africa, Latin America, and Asia have led the large scale destruction of important habitat  for many species. The largest growth of palm oil plantations has been in Malaysia and Indonesia where large tracts of rainforest are cleared to grow palm oil crops. Orangutans, tigers, elephants, rhinos, and many other species are increasingly isolated and their sources of food and shelter are in decline. Human-wildlife conflict also increases because without sufficient natural habitat these species come into contact with humans and are often killed or captured.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...... You know who has engineered a solution to this?  India and China........
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No they haven't.
Click to expand...


Yes they have.  Do you want to see what the Chinese came up with?  It's brilliant!


----------



## pismoe

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?


--------------------------------   in reply , i only concern myself with the USA and maybe Canada because we share a border with them .  Concerning the USA , i don't like the USA population growth simply because the USA is growing .   Can the USA support 500 million , sure it can but why would any current American want that ??     As history , i was born in 1949 and USA Pop was about 150 million mostly Whites and Blacks [i don't remember 1950 Census]  .   In 1970 which i do remember USA Population was about 210 million and i do remember that time and i mostly saw Whites and Blacks .   And in 2010 which i remember USA pop was about 310 million and thats not counting the millions , some say 11 million illegal aliens running around in the USA [i say 20 million illegal aliens at least] .  ----------------------   over population , i don't think that thats a problem although i'd like to see population reduced to 200 million .   Too me the problem with USA Population is the diversity of the imported third worlder coming into and in the USA    SanPatricio .      [just answering the opening question]


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> .....
> 2) We will not be able to find a technological fix .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Despite the fact that we always have...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Just because we always have doesn't mean we always will be able to come up with a technilogical [sic] fix.
> 
> ......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But this same kind of democrat dumbass is just sure that Communism will work despite the fact that it never has. The fundamentally fucked up failure of what passes for leftist 'thinking.'
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm no communist.  Is that what you think?  No wonder you're such an asshole.
Click to expand...





Your masters at the other end of the leash are, or dream of being.


----------



## sealybobo

pismoe said:


> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> --------------------------------   in reply , i only concern myself with the USA and maybe Canada because we share a border with them .  Concerning the USA , i don't like the USA population growth simply because the USA is growing .   Can the USA support 500 million , sure it can but why would any current American want that ??     As history , i was born in 1949 and USA Pop was about 150 million mostly Whites and Blacks [i don't remember 1950 Census]  .   In 1970 which i do remember USA Population was about 210 million and i do remember that time and i mostly saw Whites and Blacks .   And in 2010 which i remember USA pop was about 310 million and thats not counting the millions , some say 11 million illegal aliens running around in the USA [i say 20 million illegal aliens at least] .  ----------------------   over population , i don't think that thats a problem although i'd like to see population reduced to 200 million .   Too me the problem with USA Population is the diversity of the imported third worlder coming into and in the USA    SanPatricio .      [just answering the opening question]
Click to expand...


I'm also concerned with asia, europe and everywhere else because they too are consuming too many natural resources.

Have you seen One Strange Rock hosted by Will Smith?

Will Smith to Host Nat Geo's 'One Strange Rock'

They teach you in this documentary that the entire planet is connected.  What they do in the rest of the world affects the entire planet.  That includes the USA.  So I'd like to see every country cut their population in half.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> .....
> 2) We will not be able to find a technological fix .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Despite the fact that we always have...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Just because we always have doesn't mean we always will be able to come up with a technilogical [sic] fix.
> 
> ......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But this same kind of democrat dumbass is just sure that Communism will work despite the fact that it never has. The fundamentally fucked up failure of what passes for leftist 'thinking.'
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm no communist.  Is that what you think?  No wonder you're such an asshole.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your masters at the other end of the leash are, or dream of being.
Click to expand...

Is that why you, a union public school teacher is a Republican?  They've convinced you that Democrats are communists?  Boy are you fucking stupid.  

Have you started a thread on this subject?  I'd love for you to explain how my "masters" are communists.

I thought Democrats were in bed with the rich?  I thought it was them who widened the gap between the rich and poor.  THat's at least the stupid claim Republicans make.  Now you are suggesting that we want to take the rich people's money and spread it around so that a doctor makes as much as a lowly public school teacher?

Who is saying that?  No one.  Maybe you need to re educate yourself.  Maybe as a wrestler you were dropped on your head too many times.


----------



## RetiredGySgt

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Despite the fact that we always have...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just because we always have doesn't mean we always will be able to come up with a technilogical [sic] fix.
> 
> ......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But this same kind of democrat dumbass is just sure that Communism will work despite the fact that it never has. The fundamentally fucked up failure of what passes for leftist 'thinking.'
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm no communist.  Is that what you think?  No wonder you're such an asshole.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your masters at the other end of the leash are, or dream of being.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Is that why you, a union public school teacher is a Republican?  They've convinced you that Democrats are communists?  Boy are you fucking stupid.
> 
> Have you started a thread on this subject?  I'd love for you to explain how my "masters" are communists.
> 
> I thought Democrats were in bed with the rich?  I thought it was them who widened the gap between the rich and poor.  THat's at least the stupid claim Republicans make.  Now you are suggesting that we want to take the rich people's money and spread it around so that a doctor makes as much as a lowly public school teacher?
> 
> Who is saying that?  No one.  Maybe you need to re educate yourself.  Maybe as a wrestler you were dropped on your head too many times.
Click to expand...

The leaders of any supposed communist nation are all the rich.


----------



## koshergrl

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Population Problem
> 
> 
> 
> The six natural resources most drained by our 7 billion people
> 
> *1. Water*
> The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations is predicting that by 2025, 1.8 billion people will be living in countries or regions with absolute water scarcity.
> 
> *2. Oil*
> The fear of reaching peak oil continues to haunt the oil industry. The BP Statistical Review of World Energy in June measured total global oil at 188.8 million tonnes, from proved oil resources at the end of 2010. This is only enough to oil for the next 46.2 years, should global production remain at the current rate.
> 
> *3. Natural gas*
> A similar picture to oil exists for natural gas, with enough gas in proven reserves to meet 58.6 years of global production at the end of 2010.
> 
> *4. Phosphorus*
> Without this element, plants cannot grow. Essential for fertiliser, phosphate rock is only found in a handful of countries, including the US, China and Morocco. With the need to feed 7 billion people, scientists from the Global Phosphorus Research Initiative predict we could run out of phosphorus in 50 to 100 years unless new reserves of the element are found.
> 
> *5. Coal*
> This has the largest reserves left of all the fossil fuels, but as China and other developing countries continue to increase their appetite for coal, demand could finally outstrip supply. As it is, we have enough coal to meet 188 years of global production.
> 
> *6. Rare earth elements*
> Scandium and terbium are just two of the 17 rare earth minerals that are used in everything from the powerful magnets in wind turbines to the electronic circuits in smartphones. The elements are not as rare as their name suggests but currently 97% of the world's supply comes from China and they can restrict supplies at will. Exact reserves are not known.
> 
> If all you care about is the next 188 years then we are good.
Click to expand...


The only water scarcity that exists is CAUSED BY GOVERNMENT CONTROL OF WATER.

Likewise all the rest. There is no problem on that list that communism doesn't make 100x worse.

Do we have to look at the pollution map again? The one that shows communist countries under bright solid red "pollution" clouds? And corresponding red clouds in the US ONLY in spots controlled by the government????


----------



## sealybobo

RetiredGySgt said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just because we always have doesn't mean we always will be able to come up with a technilogical [sic] fix.
> 
> ......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But this same kind of democrat dumbass is just sure that Communism will work despite the fact that it never has. The fundamentally fucked up failure of what passes for leftist 'thinking.'
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm no communist.  Is that what you think?  No wonder you're such an asshole.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your masters at the other end of the leash are, or dream of being.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Is that why you, a union public school teacher is a Republican?  They've convinced you that Democrats are communists?  Boy are you fucking stupid.
> 
> Have you started a thread on this subject?  I'd love for you to explain how my "masters" are communists.
> 
> I thought Democrats were in bed with the rich?  I thought it was them who widened the gap between the rich and poor.  THat's at least the stupid claim Republicans make.  Now you are suggesting that we want to take the rich people's money and spread it around so that a doctor makes as much as a lowly public school teacher?
> 
> Who is saying that?  No one.  Maybe you need to re educate yourself.  Maybe as a wrestler you were dropped on your head too many times.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The leaders of any supposed communist nation are all the rich.
Click to expand...

Well trying to shrink the income inequality in this country or trying to shrink the gap between rich and poor isn't communism but that's what rich Republicans will tell you.

Gap between rich and poor continues to widen, latest Fed data show

What are Republicans doing about it?  In 2016 they blamed Obama for it but now what are they doing to fix this problem?  Or, now that Republicans are in charge, like the debt, this is no longer a problem.  It was only a problem when Democrats were in charge.  Blame Obama.  But then don't give him credit for anything.  Just blame.


----------



## sealybobo

koshergrl said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Population Problem
> 
> 
> 
> The six natural resources most drained by our 7 billion people
> 
> *1. Water*
> The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations is predicting that by 2025, 1.8 billion people will be living in countries or regions with absolute water scarcity.
> 
> *2. Oil*
> The fear of reaching peak oil continues to haunt the oil industry. The BP Statistical Review of World Energy in June measured total global oil at 188.8 million tonnes, from proved oil resources at the end of 2010. This is only enough to oil for the next 46.2 years, should global production remain at the current rate.
> 
> *3. Natural gas*
> A similar picture to oil exists for natural gas, with enough gas in proven reserves to meet 58.6 years of global production at the end of 2010.
> 
> *4. Phosphorus*
> Without this element, plants cannot grow. Essential for fertiliser, phosphate rock is only found in a handful of countries, including the US, China and Morocco. With the need to feed 7 billion people, scientists from the Global Phosphorus Research Initiative predict we could run out of phosphorus in 50 to 100 years unless new reserves of the element are found.
> 
> *5. Coal*
> This has the largest reserves left of all the fossil fuels, but as China and other developing countries continue to increase their appetite for coal, demand could finally outstrip supply. As it is, we have enough coal to meet 188 years of global production.
> 
> *6. Rare earth elements*
> Scandium and terbium are just two of the 17 rare earth minerals that are used in everything from the powerful magnets in wind turbines to the electronic circuits in smartphones. The elements are not as rare as their name suggests but currently 97% of the world's supply comes from China and they can restrict supplies at will. Exact reserves are not known.
> 
> If all you care about is the next 188 years then we are good.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The only water scarcity that exists is CAUSED BY GOVERNMENT CONTROL OF WATER.
> 
> Likewise all the rest. There is no problem on that list that communism doesn't make 100x worse.
> 
> Do we have to look at the pollution map again? The one that shows communist countries under bright solid red "pollution" clouds? And corresponding red clouds in the US ONLY in spots controlled by the government????
Click to expand...

Why are the RWNJ's here talking about communism?  Fact is we are overpopulated even here where Capitalism is your god.


----------



## Redfish

The earth is already overpopulated.   modern medicine is mostly responsible (or gets the credit).  

there are limits on how many humans this planet can feed,  Africa and parts of asia are already unable to feed all the people who live there, 

the real question is how do we stop or control it.


----------



## pismoe

sealybobo said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> --------------------------------   in reply , i only concern myself with the USA and maybe Canada because we share a border with them .  Concerning the USA , i don't like the USA population growth simply because the USA is growing .   Can the USA support 500 million , sure it can but why would any current American want that ??     As history , i was born in 1949 and USA Pop was about 150 million mostly Whites and Blacks [i don't remember 1950 Census]  .   In 1970 which i do remember USA Population was about 210 million and i do remember that time and i mostly saw Whites and Blacks .   And in 2010 which i remember USA pop was about 310 million and thats not counting the millions , some say 11 million illegal aliens running around in the USA [i say 20 million illegal aliens at least] .  ----------------------   over population , i don't think that thats a problem although i'd like to see population reduced to 200 million .   Too me the problem with USA Population is the diversity of the imported third worlder coming into and in the USA    SanPatricio .      [just answering the opening question]
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm also concerned with asia, europe and everywhere else because they too are consuming too many natural resources.
> 
> Have you seen One Strange Rock hosted by Will Smith?
> 
> Will Smith to Host Nat Geo's 'One Strange Rock'
> 
> They teach you in this documentary that the entire planet is connected.  What they do in the rest of the world affects the entire planet.  That includes the USA.  So I'd like to see every country cut their population in half.
Click to expand...

-----------------------------  hey Sealy , the guy you mention is an azzhole and a liberal in my opinion .  Seems to me that many of a certain age group think that he is MORE than an azzhole but to me , he is simply an AZZHOLE of the proper age , politics and lefty culture to do propaganda for younger people .  ---------------   and finally , my only concern is the USA .    Let them starve in 'sud africa' and 'birber land' in the shadow of the Atlas Mountains and its ok with me  Sealy .


----------



## Darkwind




----------



## Polishprince

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?




Only if we don't get the wall up.  Gallup's world wide survey shows there are 150 million people or so that  want to come here, and the number is growing as people can see the excellence of Trump's America and what a great country we're becoming.


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> ....
> There are so many of us that we are threatening to make Zebra's go extinct......





Really? Because there are so many of us? Or maybe because of what some of us are doing?


*Alligators, Whooping Cranes, Bald Eagles, Peregrine Falcons, Wolves, Grizzly Bears, And California Condors were all endangered a generation or two ago (when there were fewer people, stupid) and now in the US are not. *

How could this be if it is merely a matter of how many human beings are alive, stupid? Do you think there are more or fewer people working on behalf of endangered species today as compared with a generation ago, stupid?


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...... You know who has engineered a solution to this?  India and China........
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No they haven't.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes they have.  Do you want to see what the Chinese came up with?  It's brilliant!
Click to expand...



Meaning what, stupid?


----------



## koshergrl

Redfish said:


> The earth is already overpopulated.   modern medicine is mostly responsible (or gets the credit).
> 
> there are limits on how many humans this planet can feed,  Africa and parts of asia are already unable to feed all the people who live there,
> 
> the real question is how do we stop or control it.



Africa and Asia are not *unable to feed the people who live there* because there are too many people. 
They are unable to feed the people who live there because there are powerful people in the world who think there are too many people, and would like to lighten the earth's load by eliminating whole populations of people. So they WITHHOLD FOOD FROM THEM or prevent them from accessing the resources they need to get food. 

The fact that people get raped and murdered if they dare to move around, delivering food and supplies around the countryside, and therefore people in the countryside starve because they, likewise are raped and killed if they move out of their hovels, is NOT an argument that there are too many people in the world, you nazi piece of shit.


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> ...... Fact is we are overpopulated ......




No, we are not.


----------



## Unkotare

Redfish said:


> The earth is already overpopulated. .......




NO, it is not.


----------



## playtime

yep & overturning roe v wade is gonna turn the next population explosion up to 11.


----------



## pismoe

playtime said:


> yep & overturning roe v wade is gonna turn the next population explosion up to 11.


---------------------------------------------------------   naw , just have American kids and let the third worlder stew in their juices  in the third world  Playtime .


----------



## Mac1958

The primary issue appears to be an over-saturation of people who watch "Keeping up with the Kardashians".


----------



## playtime

pismoe said:


> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> yep & overturning roe v wade is gonna turn the next population explosion up to 11.
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------   naw , just have American kids and let the third worlder stew in their juices  in the third world  Playtime .
Click to expand...


american women still need the choice.  & some real cheap birth control can go a long way in those countries....  less that will want to come here, right?  think about it.

that there is some good conservatism....


----------



## OODA_Loop

Nature always self-corrects.


----------



## pismoe

not my concern and like i said , let the third worlders stew in their own juices Playtime .


----------



## Redfish

playtime said:


> yep & overturning roe v wade is gonna turn the next population explosion up to 11.




who is going to overturn it?  funny how you take the position that its ok to murder millions of minority children in the name of controlling population.  Are you a racist?


----------



## playtime

Redfish said:


> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> yep & overturning roe v wade is gonna turn the next population explosion up to 11.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> who is going to overturn it?  funny how you take the position that its ok to murder millions of minority children in the name of controlling population.  Are you a racist?
Click to expand...


hopefully no one- even if it goes back to the states....   funny how you are trying to flip the conversation to anything but how any women, no matter their color gets to control her own uterus & decides whether she wants to contribute to the population or not.


----------



## BasicHumanUnit

Redfish said:


> The earth is already overpopulated.   modern medicine is mostly responsible (or gets the credit).
> 
> there are limits on how many humans this planet can feed,  Africa and parts of asia are already unable to feed all the people who live there,
> 
> the real question is how do we stop or control it.



We (humanity) need not worry......
Mother nature WILL thin the heard.  It's happened throughout history.  Modern medicine has delayed the process, but that just means that when she comes charging back, it's gonna be a wipe out.   A new virus will evolve, anti-biotics will become useless  or something.   Guaranteed.  Billions will go at once.  it's part of nature.

China's working on mutated pathogens that only affect humans without certain Asian genes.
No proof at this time.....but they're innovative and scientifically evolving rapidly.   Plus, they don't have government restrictions.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....
> There are so many of us that we are threatening to make Zebra's go extinct......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really? Because there are so many of us? Or maybe because of what some of us are doing?
> 
> 
> *Alligators, Whooping Cranes, Bald Eagles, Peregrine Falcons, Wolves, Grizzly Bears, And California Condors were all endangered a generation or two ago (when there were fewer people, stupid) and now in the US are not. *
> 
> How could this be if it is merely a matter of how many human beings are alive, stupid? Do you think there are more or fewer people working on behalf of endangered species today as compared with a generation ago, stupid?
Click to expand...

Its not nearly a matter of. No one said that. That’s your dumb ass assumption

Some animals will adapt to the human virus like coyote might survive us.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...... You know who has engineered a solution to this?  India and China........
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No they haven't.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes they have.  Do you want to see what the Chinese came up with?  It's brilliant!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Meaning what, stupid?
Click to expand...

That’s their solution rather than population control. Less people means less coal needed to burn.

You’ll engineer us into extinction


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> Redfish said:
> 
> 
> 
> The earth is already overpopulated. .......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NO, it is not.
Click to expand...

Yes it is. We have 188 years at the rate we are going. 

I love the low birth rates supply side economics produces


----------



## sealybobo

pismoe said:


> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> yep & overturning roe v wade is gonna turn the next population explosion up to 11.
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------   naw , just have American kids and let the third worlder stew in their juices  in the third world  Playtime .
Click to expand...

You poor republicans may not believe me but the rich you worship and serve agree with me. They know eventually we’re going to need a massive purge of the poor. The rich will survive the depression but many of us will not.

Anyways, they know when they’re done selling oil and when water gets scarce they’ll be safe in their gated communities


----------



## Likkmee

I think the illumiati is correct as is written in stone ( Georgia guide-stones) Knock it back to 200 million rich people with a couple very well paid employees each and call it a day


----------



## BuckToothMoron

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?



It’s an interesting topic. I think it depends where on the earth you are and how you define overpopulated. The world has shrunk in a manner of speaking since we can and do provide goods and service from one part of the earth to another. Therefore some areas which would have been considered over populated 100 years ago can now support many more people. Briefly, can the earth be over populated? Perhaps, but technology makes the carrying capacity much larger than it is today.

I would think that natural disasters and epidemics would cull the population making over population a long way off.


----------



## pismoe

sealybobo said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> yep & overturning roe v wade is gonna turn the next population explosion up to 11.
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------   naw , just have American kids and let the third worlder stew in their juices  in the third world  Playtime .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You poor republicans may not believe me but the rich you worship and serve agree with me. They know eventually we’re going to need a massive purge of the poor. The rich will survive the depression but many of us will not.
> 
> Anyways, they know when they’re done selling oil and when water gets scarce they’ll be safe in their gated communities
Click to expand...

--------------------------------   RUSH was telling a story similar to your thoughts today .   Seems that some hugely rich tech big wigs hired a VERY smart guy to tell them where to go to avoid the coming catastrophe that the unwashed rabble would enjoy .  Anyway , pretty interesting as they discussed Alaska or New Zealand  Sealy .   If they go to New Zealand they better stay away from the Mongrel Mob   Sealy .


----------



## LeftofLeft

When liberals are worried about overpopulation, watch out for Margaret Sanger and Obamacare death panels.


----------



## whitehall

Overpopulated by what, sharks or Downs Syndrome kids?  You can't force people to conform to religious views but you can enact laws that respect the sanctity of animal and human life. We do it every day.


----------



## LuckyDuck

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?


The earth is finite in size and therefore, finite in its resources.  It has no way of replenishing what it has and with large demands on its resources, at some point there will be an end to it and then we're screwed.  We keep cutting down forests to make room for mining, assorted businesses, homes and parking lots, buying up family farms to create our suburban areas, we overfish to meet the demands for more seafood and go blissfully about our lives in an "all will be well, it'll all be here, there's no end to what's available" attitude.  
So, yes, we are overpopulated, but if elements of society claim that we should refrain from spitting out more kids, business complain that it'll ruin the economy.  All that would happen if there were less humans would be businesses shrinking to meet the demands of smaller towns, of course, that would mean less money in the corporate heads pockets, which they would and do scream against.


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...... You know who has engineered a solution to this?  India and China........
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No they haven't.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes they have.  Do you want to see what the Chinese came up with?  It's brilliant!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Meaning what, stupid?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That’s their solution rather than population control. Less people means less coal needed to burn.
> 
> ......
Click to expand...



What the hell are you talking about, fool?


----------



## Unkotare

BasicHumanUnit said:


> .....  Guaranteed.  Billions will go at once.  it's part of nature.
> 
> ......






No it's not.


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....
> There are so many of us that we are threatening to make Zebra's go extinct......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really? Because there are so many of us? Or maybe because of what some of us are doing?
> 
> 
> *Alligators, Whooping Cranes, Bald Eagles, Peregrine Falcons, Wolves, Grizzly Bears, And California Condors were all endangered a generation or two ago (when there were fewer people, stupid) and now in the US are not. *
> 
> How could this be if it is merely a matter of how many human beings are alive, stupid? Do you think there are more or fewer people working on behalf of endangered species today as compared with a generation ago, stupid?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ... No one said that. ........
Click to expand...



Other than you, stupid.


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Redfish said:
> 
> 
> 
> The earth is already overpopulated. .......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NO, it is not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes it is. We have 188 years at the rate we are going......
Click to expand...



This has been explained to you many times, but you are just too stupid to learn. "The rate we are going" and the way we are going and the means by which we go will change as we adapt and innovate as we always have. Stupid farm animals like you will just go along for the ride as long as we don't cull the herd of the weakest.


----------



## Unkotare

LuckyDuck said:


> ......
> So, yes, we are overpopulated, but if elements of society claim that we should refrain from spitting out more kids........




NO, we are NOT overpopulated, and women give birth to babies, they do not "spit them out." What a fucking scumbag thing to say about human life.


----------



## sealybobo

pismoe said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> yep & overturning roe v wade is gonna turn the next population explosion up to 11.
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------   naw , just have American kids and let the third worlder stew in their juices  in the third world  Playtime .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You poor republicans may not believe me but the rich you worship and serve agree with me. They know eventually we’re going to need a massive purge of the poor. The rich will survive the depression but many of us will not.
> 
> Anyways, they know when they’re done selling oil and when water gets scarce they’ll be safe in their gated communities
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> --------------------------------   RUSH was telling a story similar to your thoughts today .   Seems that some hugely rich tech big wigs hired a VERY smart guy to tell them where to go to avoid the coming catastrophe that the unwashed rabble would enjoy .  Anyway , pretty interesting as they discussed Alaska or New Zealand  Sealy .   If they go to New Zealand they better stay away from the Mongrel Mob   Sealy .
Click to expand...

We have 65 acres out in bfe up north Michigan. Lots of wild game and a little river separates us and our neighbors behind us. My brothers property. I’ll be on the right side of the gated communities will you?


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> LuckyDuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> ......
> So, yes, we are overpopulated, but if elements of society claim that we should refrain from spitting out more kids........
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NO, we are NOT overpopulated, and women give birth to babies, they do not "spit them out." What a fucking scumbag thing to say about human life.
Click to expand...

Fuck all the sperm that doesn’t penetrate the egg. Fuck the trillions of them.


----------



## sealybobo

BuckToothMoron said:


> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It’s an interesting topic. I think it depends where on the earth you are and how you define overpopulated. The world has shrunk in a manner of speaking since we can and do provide goods and service from one part of the earth to another. Therefore some areas which would have been considered over populated 100 years ago can now support many more people. Briefly, can the earth be over populated? Perhaps, but technology makes the carrying capacity much larger than it is today.
> 
> I would think that natural disasters and epidemics would cull the population making over population a long way off.
Click to expand...

There are diseases that have been buried in the permanent frost for millions of years. Global warming is releasing new viruses all the time. Or just wait. Worse to come


----------



## MisterBeale

It's simple really, most folks live in huge cities, they believe the Earth is over populated.

Folks that live outside the mega cities know better.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....
> There are so many of us that we are threatening to make Zebra's go extinct......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really? Because there are so many of us? Or maybe because of what some of us are doing?
> 
> 
> *Alligators, Whooping Cranes, Bald Eagles, Peregrine Falcons, Wolves, Grizzly Bears, And California Condors were all endangered a generation or two ago (when there were fewer people, stupid) and now in the US are not. *
> 
> How could this be if it is merely a matter of how many human beings are alive, stupid? Do you think there are more or fewer people working on behalf of endangered species today as compared with a generation ago, stupid?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ... No one said that. ........
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Other than you, stupid.
Click to expand...

No I did not say that.

The fact that we have saved some species from extinction is not proof we are not overpopulated. The fact that we caused those species to almost go extinct proves we are overpopulated but you’re too stupid to understand this.


----------



## pismoe

sealybobo said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> yep & overturning roe v wade is gonna turn the next population explosion up to 11.
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------   naw , just have American kids and let the third worlder stew in their juices  in the third world  Playtime .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You poor republicans may not believe me but the rich you worship and serve agree with me. They know eventually we’re going to need a massive purge of the poor. The rich will survive the depression but many of us will not.
> 
> Anyways, they know when they’re done selling oil and when water gets scarce they’ll be safe in their gated communities
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> --------------------------------   RUSH was telling a story similar to your thoughts today .   Seems that some hugely rich tech big wigs hired a VERY smart guy to tell them where to go to avoid the coming catastrophe that the unwashed rabble would enjoy .  Anyway , pretty interesting as they discussed Alaska or New Zealand  Sealy .   If they go to New Zealand they better stay away from the Mongrel Mob   Sealy .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We have 65 acres out in bfe up north Michigan. Lots of wild game and a little river separates us and our neighbors behind us. My brothers property. I’ll be on the right side of the gated communities will you?
Click to expand...

-------------------------------------  U.P. or what ??


----------



## pismoe

one of my observations of the large diverse population in the USA is that they vote and USA  Government caters to them .  And the imported population aren't Western or American and never will be .   Heck , they won't even speak English .   Plus , large population means more rules and regulations and then more 'government men' are needed to enforce the rules and regulations .  Its a bad situation , call someone a 'beaner' and you might be arrested for a hate crime the way things are going [chuckle] .    Its funny . course , as i always say , i am an old guy so the problems of a huge diverse population will fall on the younger generations , imo .


----------



## LuckyDuck

Unkotare said:


> LuckyDuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> ......
> So, yes, we are overpopulated, but if elements of society claim that we should refrain from spitting out more kids........
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NO, we are NOT overpopulated, and women give birth to babies, they do not "spit them out." What a fucking scumbag thing to say about human life.
Click to expand...

Like I give a crap about your opinion, or ever have.


----------



## Unkotare

LuckyDuck said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LuckyDuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> ......
> So, yes, we are overpopulated, but if elements of society claim that we should refrain from spitting out more kids........
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NO, we are NOT overpopulated, and women give birth to babies, they do not "spit them out." What a fucking scumbag thing to say about human life.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Like I give a crap about your opinion, or ever have.
Click to expand...



You sure do.


----------



## Unkotare

pismoe said:


> ..... And the imported population aren't Western or American and never will be .   Heck , they won't even speak English .   ...... .




Those are lies, of course. Stop indulging in your nihilistic whistling past the graveyard, old fool.


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....
> There are so many of us that we are threatening to make Zebra's go extinct......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really? Because there are so many of us? Or maybe because of what some of us are doing?
> 
> 
> *Alligators, Whooping Cranes, Bald Eagles, Peregrine Falcons, Wolves, Grizzly Bears, And California Condors were all endangered a generation or two ago (when there were fewer people, stupid) and now in the US are not. *
> 
> How could this be if it is merely a matter of how many human beings are alive, stupid? Do you think there are more or fewer people working on behalf of endangered species today as compared with a generation ago, stupid?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ... No one said that. ........
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Other than you, stupid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No I did not say that.......
Click to expand...



It's exactly what you said, stupid.


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> ......The fact that we caused those species to almost go extinct proves we are overpopulated .......




No it doesn't, you illogical buffoon.


----------



## Rigby5

It is obvious that unless we come up with some new energy source like fusion, we are dead meat.
The only thing that stopped the mass starvation Malthus predicted, was fossil fuel.
When that runs out, we die because we won't have artificial fertilizers or means of transporting food long distances.
We are also running out of clean water.


----------



## there4eyeM

The earth is presently overpopulated vis-a-vis human use of resources. If things were done intelligently, the current population could be supported in a pleasant enough condition. The problem is a significant number who want too much. 
At any rate, a smaller population would be better. How to get there appears to be the insurmountable question. Keeping it there is another. People just don't appear to think enough about making offspring.


----------



## Unkotare

Unkotare said:


> The Population Problem


.


----------



## pismoe

we are overpopulated in the USA when just 30 - 50 years ago the USA was a nice , most powerful , best living conditions , most prosperous and best fed nation in the world .   Around 70 years ago the USA rebuilt Germany and all of Europe and Japan and many other foreign areas of the world and all by itself .     And thats  all pretty much gone in the USA as that USA has been replaced by DIVERSITY .  [i only care about the USA and maybe Canada but Canada is also currently messing itself up ] -----------  just a comment !!


----------



## Unkotare

pismoe said:


> we are overpopulated in the USA when just 30 - 50 years ago the USA was a nice , most powerful , best living conditions , most prosperous and best fed nation in the world .   ......




We are still the greatest nation in the world, and it is absurd to suggest my vast and beautiful country is anywhere near "overpopulated." Some people just can't be satisfied if they aren't bitching about something. Some people smelling the other side become spiteful about it and think giving the world the finger on their way down is somehow empowering. How sad to miss the last point.


----------



## sealybobo

pismoe said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> playtime said:
> 
> 
> 
> yep & overturning roe v wade is gonna turn the next population explosion up to 11.
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------   naw , just have American kids and let the third worlder stew in their juices  in the third world  Playtime .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You poor republicans may not believe me but the rich you worship and serve agree with me. They know eventually we’re going to need a massive purge of the poor. The rich will survive the depression but many of us will not.
> 
> Anyways, they know when they’re done selling oil and when water gets scarce they’ll be safe in their gated communities
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> --------------------------------   RUSH was telling a story similar to your thoughts today .   Seems that some hugely rich tech big wigs hired a VERY smart guy to tell them where to go to avoid the coming catastrophe that the unwashed rabble would enjoy .  Anyway , pretty interesting as they discussed Alaska or New Zealand  Sealy .   If they go to New Zealand they better stay away from the Mongrel Mob   Sealy .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We have 65 acres out in bfe up north Michigan. Lots of wild game and a little river separates us and our neighbors behind us. My brothers property. I’ll be on the right side of the gated communities will you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> -------------------------------------  U.P. or what ??
Click to expand...


No.  Near Boyne Mountain/Gaylord/East Jordan.  When we say up north MI we never mean the UP.  That we call the UP.  Unless you live up north then you call the UP up north.  LOL.

It's about 4 hours away from Metro Detroit.  About an hour away once you get off on the Gaylord exit.  Very remote.  I love it!


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> ......The fact that we caused those species to almost go extinct proves we are overpopulated .......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No it doesn't, you illogical buffoon.
Click to expand...

See here stupid.  You see a story about how an animal almost went extinct because of us and you say, "see, we fixed the problem, we aren't overpopulated"  

But the fact that they almost went extinct and many others have gone extinct because of us proves we are overpopulated.  Remember the Matrix?

I'd like to share a revelation that I've had during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species, and I realized that you're not actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment; but you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply, and multiply, until every natural resource is consumed and the only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer on this planet, you are a plague


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> 
> we are overpopulated in the USA when just 30 - 50 years ago the USA was a nice , most powerful , best living conditions , most prosperous and best fed nation in the world .   ......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We are still the greatest nation in the world, and it is absurd to suggest my vast and beautiful country is anywhere near "overpopulated." Some people just can't be satisfied if they aren't bitching about something. Some people smelling the other side become spiteful about it and think giving the world the finger on their way down is somehow empowering. How sad to miss the last point.
Click to expand...


We are no longer the greatest.  We are just one of the greatest.  That's your nationalistic pride talking.  Everyone thinks their country is the greatest country.  Well lets look at the facts

"We're seventh in literacy, 27th in math, 22nd in science, 49th in life expectancy, 178th in infant mortality, third in median household income, No. 4 in labor force, and No. 4 in exports. ... So when you ask what makes us the greatest country in the world, I don't know what the f*** you're talking about."

Who Has the World's No. 1 Economy? Not the U.S.

So while a stupid broke public school teacher in America is screaming we're number one, China is passing us.


----------



## pismoe

sounds nice , ---------    I am a - yooper - though i prefer to be known as a Swamper or plain old Redneck / hillbilly.     And concerning  Deeeeeetroit . i hear that it is being rebuilt .    What do you think about 'detroit' if you have any info or thoughts   Sealy ??


----------



## Kondor3

Yes.

The US is, indeed, overpopulated.

Time to slow immigration down to a trickle.

-------------

We are no longer a Nation of Immigrants.

We are now a Nation of the _*Descendants*_ of Immigrants.

Big difference.

In the heyday of immigration to the US ( 1840s - 1940s ), our population ranged in size from 17M (1840) to 132M (1940).

We had plenty of unclaimed land, and work and opportunities for anyone who wanted to make the effort.

Times and circumstances have changed.

Today we are nation of 330,000,000... that's one third of a _*billion*_ people.

Today, the land is all divvied-up and we cannot feed and clothe and educate and employ all of our own, most years.

We have all the talent and human capital we're going to need for a very long time.

We no longer have any need to facilitate large-scale immigration.

All good things come to an end, and that is the case with large-scale immigration to the US.

Fun-time's over, kiddies.


----------



## pismoe

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> 
> we are overpopulated in the USA when just 30 - 50 years ago the USA was a nice , most powerful , best living conditions , most prosperous and best fed nation in the world .   ......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We are still the greatest nation in the world, and it is absurd to suggest my vast and beautiful country is anywhere near "overpopulated." Some people just can't be satisfied if they aren't bitching about something. Some people smelling the other side become spiteful about it and think giving the world the finger on their way down is somehow empowering. How sad to miss the last point.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We are no longer the greatest.  We are just one of the greatest.  That's your nationalistic pride talking.  Everyone thinks their country is the greatest country.  Well lets look at the facts
> 
> "We're seventh in literacy, 27th in math, 22nd in science, 49th in life expectancy, 178th in infant mortality, third in median household income, No. 4 in labor force, and No. 4 in exports. ... So when you ask what makes us the greatest country in the world, I don't know what the f*** you're talking about."
> 
> Who Has the World's No. 1 Economy? Not the U.S.
> 
> So while a stupid broke public school teacher in America is screaming we're number one, China is passing us.
Click to expand...

-------------------------------  MY point is proven with your comment that we are No Longer the GREATEST although i don't agree with that judgement and opinion .  But i guess that the USA used to be the Greatest eh so things must have recently changed ??     And  i don't know , i look around and i see fat people all over the place mostly living comfortably in heated home , apartment or falling down hovels .   Still they are well fed , have some sort of shelter , wear clothes , travel to and fro independently or on public transport so they have some money at least and most importantly , we can still kick and destroy 'china' azz .  As far as the stats that you put up or mention  . Well this is NEW and recent stats in American History .   Maybe true , who knows other than that hip hopping 'will smith' Historian [chuckle] on History channel .    --------------------   My judgement is that IF the USA isn't the Greatest anymore that its the fault of USA Government and diverse USA Society and their purposeful work to degrade the USA through immigration and other means .  And my Personal Curse on younger residents of the USA is that they are getting what they deserve   Sealy .


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> ......The fact that we caused those species to almost go extinct proves we are overpopulated .......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No it doesn't, you illogical buffoon.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> See here stupid.  You see a story about how an animal almost went extinct because of us and you say, "see, we fixed the problem, we aren't overpopulated"
> 
> But the fact that they almost went extinct and many others have gone extinct because of us proves we are overpopulated.  .....
Click to expand...







 Once again logic easily and smoothly evades you. Holy shit, how can you be this stupid and exist?


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> 
> we are overpopulated in the USA when just 30 - 50 years ago the USA was a nice , most powerful , best living conditions , most prosperous and best fed nation in the world .   ......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We are still the greatest nation in the world, and it is absurd to suggest my vast and beautiful country is anywhere near "overpopulated." Some people just can't be satisfied if they aren't bitching about something. Some people smelling the other side become spiteful about it and think giving the world the finger on their way down is somehow empowering. How sad to miss the last point.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We are no longer the greatest.  We are just one of the greatest.  That's your nationalistic pride talking.  Everyone thinks their country is the greatest country.  Well lets look at the facts
> 
> "We're seventh in literacy, 27th in math, 22nd in science, 49th in life expectancy, 178th in infant mortality, third in median household income, No. 4 in labor force, and No. 4 in exports. ... So when you ask what makes us the greatest country in the world, I don't know what the f*** you're talking about."
> 
> Who Has the World's No. 1 Economy? Not the U.S.
> 
> So while a stupid broke public school teacher in America is screaming we're number one, China is passing us.
Click to expand...





 The United States of America is still the greatest nation on the face of the earth. In fact, it is the greatest nation this planet has ever seen. Comparing other countries apples to our oranges is misleading to everyone except those as brain-dead as yourself. Eagerly cherry picking information to try and support your claim against the United States reveals more than enough about you. China has not surpassed us, as you can ask just about any Chinese person about.  To give you some idea, take a look at how many people in China Are striving and eagerly competing to send their children or themselves to live and be educated in the United States of America. Of course, you are always free to go live somewhere else. My great nation would only be all the greater for your absence.


----------



## sealybobo

pismoe said:


> sounds nice , ---------    I am a - yooper - though i prefer to be known as a Swamper or plain old Redneck / hillbilly.     And concerning  Deeeeeetroit . i hear that it is being rebuilt .    What do you think about 'detroit' if you have any info or thoughts   Sealy ??





pismoe said:


> sounds nice , ---------    I am a - yooper - though i prefer to be known as a Swamper or plain old Redneck / hillbilly.     And concerning  Deeeeeetroit . i hear that it is being rebuilt .    What do you think about 'detroit' if you have any info or thoughts   Sealy ??



Detroit has been fixed up so much you wouldn't believe it.  We took my dad through it and he couldn't believe it.  White people are starting to move back.  People are starting to invest.  They are starting to raise rent to run out the rats.  Dan Gilbert and 3 other rich guys own everything.  

That's not to say Detroit doesn't still have high crime and poverty.  Detroit is a HUGE place.  Downtown has been fixed up but the 70% that isn't downtown is still bad.  But no one white would ever go to those areas unless you got off on the wrong exit or something.


----------



## pismoe

yeah , thanks Sealy .   I've been hearing that Detroit is being rebuilt , also heard that land left vacant or with falling down houses is being bought up and urban farms are being  developed on that land   Sealy .


----------



## Rigby5

Since the industrial revolution, we have depended entirely on fossil fuels.
That is not just for transportation, manufacturing, heating, and cooling, but also for the creation of fertilizers and almost all farm production.
If and when fossil fuels run out, humans will be starving until the population significantly decreases.
That is unless we somehow discover some miracle energy source like fusion.
But that is very unlikely, and things like wind, solar, and geothermal are way too tiny in comparison.


----------



## Papageorgio

sealybobo said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But this same kind of democrat dumbass is just sure that Communism will work despite the fact that it never has. The fundamentally fucked up failure of what passes for leftist 'thinking.'
> 
> 
> 
> I'm no communist.  Is that what you think?  No wonder you're such an asshole.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your masters at the other end of the leash are, or dream of being.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Is that why you, a union public school teacher is a Republican?  They've convinced you that Democrats are communists?  Boy are you fucking stupid.
> 
> Have you started a thread on this subject?  I'd love for you to explain how my "masters" are communists.
> 
> I thought Democrats were in bed with the rich?  I thought it was them who widened the gap between the rich and poor.  THat's at least the stupid claim Republicans make.  Now you are suggesting that we want to take the rich people's money and spread it around so that a doctor makes as much as a lowly public school teacher?
> 
> Who is saying that?  No one.  Maybe you need to re educate yourself.  Maybe as a wrestler you were dropped on your head too many times.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The leaders of any supposed communist nation are all the rich.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well trying to shrink the income inequality in this country or trying to shrink the gap between rich and poor isn't communism but that's what rich Republicans will tell you.
> 
> Gap between rich and poor continues to widen, latest Fed data show
> 
> What are Republicans doing about it?  In 2016 they blamed Obama for it but now what are they doing to fix this problem?  Or, now that Republicans are in charge, like the debt, this is no longer a problem.  It was only a problem when Democrats were in charge.  Blame Obama.  But then don't give him credit for anything.  Just blame.
Click to expand...


The Democrats blame Republicans and the Republicans blame the Democrats and spending and deficits only matter to the party not in charge. I see no difference in the two parties.


----------



## bripat9643

g5000 said:


> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> I think resource distribution is the problem, not over-population.
> 
> There is plenty of food to go around for everyone.  It just doesn't get to everywhere it is needed, for various reasons.
> 
> So, no.  We do not have an over-population problem at this time.
> 
> The first real crush we will feel, as far as population goes, will be sources of fresh water.   We are going to need to find a way to economically desalinate ocean water in the near future, I think.
Click to expand...

There may be sufficient food, but humans are destroying the habitats of other animals.  The population of this planet needs to be reduced to about 2 billion, and no higher.


----------



## bripat9643

Rigby5 said:


> Since the industrial revolution, we have depended entirely on fossil fuels.
> That is not just for transportation, manufacturing, heating, and cooling, but also for the creation of fertilizers and almost all farm production.
> If and when fossil fuels run out, humans will be starving until the population significantly decreases.
> That is unless we somehow discover some miracle energy source like fusion.
> But that is very unlikely, and things like wind, solar, and geothermal are way too tiny in comparison.


I don't believe it's unlikely that we'll develop fusion.  Progress has been getting more rapid every year.


----------



## sealybobo

Papageorgio said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm no communist.  Is that what you think?  No wonder you're such an asshole.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your masters at the other end of the leash are, or dream of being.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Is that why you, a union public school teacher is a Republican?  They've convinced you that Democrats are communists?  Boy are you fucking stupid.
> 
> Have you started a thread on this subject?  I'd love for you to explain how my "masters" are communists.
> 
> I thought Democrats were in bed with the rich?  I thought it was them who widened the gap between the rich and poor.  THat's at least the stupid claim Republicans make.  Now you are suggesting that we want to take the rich people's money and spread it around so that a doctor makes as much as a lowly public school teacher?
> 
> Who is saying that?  No one.  Maybe you need to re educate yourself.  Maybe as a wrestler you were dropped on your head too many times.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The leaders of any supposed communist nation are all the rich.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well trying to shrink the income inequality in this country or trying to shrink the gap between rich and poor isn't communism but that's what rich Republicans will tell you.
> 
> Gap between rich and poor continues to widen, latest Fed data show
> 
> What are Republicans doing about it?  In 2016 they blamed Obama for it but now what are they doing to fix this problem?  Or, now that Republicans are in charge, like the debt, this is no longer a problem.  It was only a problem when Democrats were in charge.  Blame Obama.  But then don't give him credit for anything.  Just blame.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Democrats blame Republicans and the Republicans blame the Democrats and spending and deficits only matter to the party not in charge. I see no difference in the two parties.
Click to expand...

That's what's wrong with the middle class.  You right leaning middle class people see no difference.  I do.


----------



## Unkotare

bripat9643 said:


> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> I think resource distribution is the problem, not over-population.
> 
> There is plenty of food to go around for everyone.  It just doesn't get to everywhere it is needed, for various reasons.
> 
> So, no.  We do not have an over-population problem at this time.
> 
> The first real crush we will feel, as far as population goes, will be sources of fresh water.   We are going to need to find a way to economically desalinate ocean water in the near future, I think.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There may be sufficient food, but humans are destroying the habitats of other animals.  The population of this planet needs to be reduced to about 2 billion, and no higher.
Click to expand...





Yet here you still are...


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> I think resource distribution is the problem, not over-population.
> 
> There is plenty of food to go around for everyone.  It just doesn't get to everywhere it is needed, for various reasons.
> 
> So, no.  We do not have an over-population problem at this time.
> 
> The first real crush we will feel, as far as population goes, will be sources of fresh water.   We are going to need to find a way to economically desalinate ocean water in the near future, I think.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There may be sufficient food, but humans are destroying the habitats of other animals.  The population of this planet needs to be reduced to about 2 billion, and no higher.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yet here you still are...
Click to expand...

No one is suggesting that we kill anyone but if you can't afford to pay for a child on your own, don't have one.  What are you suggesting?  What should all the future women in poverty do?  Should they continue having babies and collecting foodstamps and welfare or should a poor person who can't afford a child refrain from having one?

We have 15 million too many kids in America right now.  Need proof?

About *15 million children* in the United States – 21% of all children – live in families with incomes below the federal poverty threshold, a measurement that has been shown to underestimate the needs of families. Research shows that, on average, families need an income of about twice that level to cover basic expenses.


----------



## bripat9643

Unkotare said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> I think resource distribution is the problem, not over-population.
> 
> There is plenty of food to go around for everyone.  It just doesn't get to everywhere it is needed, for various reasons.
> 
> So, no.  We do not have an over-population problem at this time.
> 
> The first real crush we will feel, as far as population goes, will be sources of fresh water.   We are going to need to find a way to economically desalinate ocean water in the near future, I think.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There may be sufficient food, but humans are destroying the habitats of other animals.  The population of this planet needs to be reduced to about 2 billion, and no higher.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yet here you still are...
Click to expand...


I'm not asking anyone to commit suicide, shit for brains.


----------



## Unkotare

bripat9643 said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> I think resource distribution is the problem, not over-population.
> 
> There is plenty of food to go around for everyone.  It just doesn't get to everywhere it is needed, for various reasons.
> 
> So, no.  We do not have an over-population problem at this time.
> 
> The first real crush we will feel, as far as population goes, will be sources of fresh water.   We are going to need to find a way to economically desalinate ocean water in the near future, I think.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There may be sufficient food, but humans are destroying the habitats of other animals.  The population of this planet needs to be reduced to about 2 billion, and no higher.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yet here you still are...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not asking anyone to commit suicide, shit for brains.
Click to expand...


Not willing to put your money where your mouth is.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> I think resource distribution is the problem, not over-population.
> 
> There is plenty of food to go around for everyone.  It just doesn't get to everywhere it is needed, for various reasons.
> 
> So, no.  We do not have an over-population problem at this time.
> 
> The first real crush we will feel, as far as population goes, will be sources of fresh water.   We are going to need to find a way to economically desalinate ocean water in the near future, I think.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There may be sufficient food, but humans are destroying the habitats of other animals.  The population of this planet needs to be reduced to about 2 billion, and no higher.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yet here you still are...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not asking anyone to commit suicide, shit for brains.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not willing to put your money where your mouth is.
Click to expand...

For a supposed educator you sure add very little to every conversation I ever see you in.

*Human overpopulation* occurs when the ecological footprint of a human population in a specific geographical location exceeds the carrying capacity of the place occupied by that group. Overpopulation can further be viewed, in a long term perspective, as existing if a population cannot be maintained given the rapid depletion of non-renewable resources or given the degradation of the capacity of the environment to give support to the population. 

The term _human overpopulation_ refers to the relationship between the entire human population and its environment: the Earth,[4] or to smaller geographical areas such as countries. Overpopulation can result from an increase in births, a decline in mortality rates, an increase in immigration, or an unsustainable biome and depletion of resources. It is possible for very sparsely populated areas to be overpopulated if the area has a meagre or non-existent capability to sustain life (e.g. a desert). Advocates of population moderation cite issues like quality of life, carrying capacity, and risk of starvation as a basis to argue for population decline. Scientists suggest that the human impact on the environment as a result of overpopulation, profligate consumption and proliferation of technology has pushed the planet into a new geological epoch known as the Anthropocene.


----------



## sealybobo

Inadequate fresh water[110] for drinking as well as sewage treatment and effluent discharge. Some countries, like Saudi Arabia, use energy-expensive desalination to solve the problem of water shortages.[111][112]
Depletion of natural resources, especially fossil fuels.[113]World energy consumption & predictions, 1970–2025.
Increased levels of air pollution, water pollution, soil contamination and noise pollution.
Changes in atmospheric composition and consequent global warming.
Loss of arable land and increase in desertification.[117] Deforestation and desertification can be reversed by adopting property rights, and this policy is successful even while the human population continues to grow.
Mass species extinctions and contracting biodiversity from reduced habitat in tropical forests due to slash-and-burn techniques that sometimes are practiced by shifting cultivators, especially in countries with rapidly expanding rural populations; present extinction rates may be as high as 140,000 species lost per year.As of February 2011, the IUCN Red List lists a total of 801 animal species having gone extinct during recorded human history,[125] although the vast majority of extinctions are thought to be undocumented. Biodiversity would continue to grow at an exponential rate if not for human influence.
Sound familiar?


----------



## sealybobo

bripat9643 said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> I think resource distribution is the problem, not over-population.
> 
> There is plenty of food to go around for everyone.  It just doesn't get to everywhere it is needed, for various reasons.
> 
> So, no.  We do not have an over-population problem at this time.
> 
> The first real crush we will feel, as far as population goes, will be sources of fresh water.   We are going to need to find a way to economically desalinate ocean water in the near future, I think.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There may be sufficient food, but humans are destroying the habitats of other animals.  The population of this planet needs to be reduced to about 2 billion, and no higher.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yet here you still are...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not asking anyone to commit suicide, shit for brains.
Click to expand...


We are so overpopulated we are even running out of sand

The World Is Running Out of Sand

That's sad.


----------



## Norman

As of this moment we have way too many idiots:







To a democrat of course, this is not yet enough. We need to import even more!


----------



## Unkotare

THE AGING, CHILDLESS FUTURE | Culminant Health


"The world will not have sufficient working-age people to support the elderly."


"forecasts include a spike in the number of people 80 and over."


"*In 2016, the fertility rate in the United States was the lowest it has ever been"


*


----------



## Rigby5

Papageorgio said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm no communist.  Is that what you think?  No wonder you're such an asshole.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your masters at the other end of the leash are, or dream of being.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Is that why you, a union public school teacher is a Republican?  They've convinced you that Democrats are communists?  Boy are you fucking stupid.
> 
> Have you started a thread on this subject?  I'd love for you to explain how my "masters" are communists.
> 
> I thought Democrats were in bed with the rich?  I thought it was them who widened the gap between the rich and poor.  THat's at least the stupid claim Republicans make.  Now you are suggesting that we want to take the rich people's money and spread it around so that a doctor makes as much as a lowly public school teacher?
> 
> Who is saying that?  No one.  Maybe you need to re educate yourself.  Maybe as a wrestler you were dropped on your head too many times.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The leaders of any supposed communist nation are all the rich.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well trying to shrink the income inequality in this country or trying to shrink the gap between rich and poor isn't communism but that's what rich Republicans will tell you.
> 
> Gap between rich and poor continues to widen, latest Fed data show
> 
> What are Republicans doing about it?  In 2016 they blamed Obama for it but now what are they doing to fix this problem?  Or, now that Republicans are in charge, like the debt, this is no longer a problem.  It was only a problem when Democrats were in charge.  Blame Obama.  But then don't give him credit for anything.  Just blame.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Democrats blame Republicans and the Republicans blame the Democrats and spending and deficits only matter to the party not in charge. I see no difference in the two parties.
Click to expand...



Yes, both parties actually have nearly identical policies when it comes to important things like war, over spending, lying, the war on drugs, overly expensive health care, high tuition, lack of affordable housing, etc.


----------



## Rigby5

bripat9643 said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Since the industrial revolution, we have depended entirely on fossil fuels.
> That is not just for transportation, manufacturing, heating, and cooling, but also for the creation of fertilizers and almost all farm production.
> If and when fossil fuels run out, humans will be starving until the population significantly decreases.
> That is unless we somehow discover some miracle energy source like fusion.
> But that is very unlikely, and things like wind, solar, and geothermal are way too tiny in comparison.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't believe it's unlikely that we'll develop fusion.  Progress has been getting more rapid every year.
Click to expand...



I am very, very skeptical.
They have been claiming big breakthroughs and right around the corner for over 50 years now with fusion.
I think the reason it will never happen is that if fusion ever because easy, like the "Mr. Fusion" added to the DeLorean on the one of the "Back to the Future" movies, then everyone would have a potential city destroying weapon.

Anyway, the point is we are relying totally on fossil fuels that concentrate millions of years of sunlight energy in very small space, and is rapidly running out.


----------



## Papageorgio

sealybobo said:


> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your masters at the other end of the leash are, or dream of being.
> 
> 
> 
> Is that why you, a union public school teacher is a Republican?  They've convinced you that Democrats are communists?  Boy are you fucking stupid.
> 
> Have you started a thread on this subject?  I'd love for you to explain how my "masters" are communists.
> 
> I thought Democrats were in bed with the rich?  I thought it was them who widened the gap between the rich and poor.  THat's at least the stupid claim Republicans make.  Now you are suggesting that we want to take the rich people's money and spread it around so that a doctor makes as much as a lowly public school teacher?
> 
> Who is saying that?  No one.  Maybe you need to re educate yourself.  Maybe as a wrestler you were dropped on your head too many times.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The leaders of any supposed communist nation are all the rich.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well trying to shrink the income inequality in this country or trying to shrink the gap between rich and poor isn't communism but that's what rich Republicans will tell you.
> 
> Gap between rich and poor continues to widen, latest Fed data show
> 
> What are Republicans doing about it?  In 2016 they blamed Obama for it but now what are they doing to fix this problem?  Or, now that Republicans are in charge, like the debt, this is no longer a problem.  It was only a problem when Democrats were in charge.  Blame Obama.  But then don't give him credit for anything.  Just blame.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Democrats blame Republicans and the Republicans blame the Democrats and spending and deficits only matter to the party not in charge. I see no difference in the two parties.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's what's wrong with the middle class.  You right leaning middle class people see no difference.  I do.
Click to expand...


So far, you have failed in showing the difference. The older I get the less difference I see, years ago there was a difference today both parties are the rich making laws for the rich, they throw a bonde to the middle class and poor every now and then, they feign disgust at the way things are and then continue to make the rules for the rich. Sorry you are blind.


----------



## Papageorgio

sealybobo said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> I think resource distribution is the problem, not over-population.
> 
> There is plenty of food to go around for everyone.  It just doesn't get to everywhere it is needed, for various reasons.
> 
> So, no.  We do not have an over-population problem at this time.
> 
> The first real crush we will feel, as far as population goes, will be sources of fresh water.   We are going to need to find a way to economically desalinate ocean water in the near future, I think.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There may be sufficient food, but humans are destroying the habitats of other animals.  The population of this planet needs to be reduced to about 2 billion, and no higher.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yet here you still are...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not asking anyone to commit suicide, shit for brains.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We are so overpopulated we are even running out of sand
> 
> The World Is Running Out of Sand
> 
> That's sad.
Click to expand...


The problem isn’t over population it is man’s inability to manage resources.


----------



## edward37

Papageorgio said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think resource distribution is the problem, not over-population.
> 
> There is plenty of food to go around for everyone.  It just doesn't get to everywhere it is needed, for various reasons.
> 
> So, no.  We do not have an over-population problem at this time.
> 
> The first real crush we will feel, as far as population goes, will be sources of fresh water.   We are going to need to find a way to economically desalinate ocean water in the near future, I think.
> 
> 
> 
> There may be sufficient food, but humans are destroying the habitats of other animals.  The population of this planet needs to be reduced to about 2 billion, and no higher.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yet here you still are...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not asking anyone to commit suicide, shit for brains.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We are so overpopulated we are even running out of sand
> 
> The World Is Running Out of Sand
> 
> That's sad.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The problem isn’t over population it is man’s inability to manage resources.
Click to expand...

So you believe all the protections taken off our air and water ,shouldn't have?


----------



## Unkotare

Papageorgio said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think resource distribution is the problem, not over-population.
> 
> There is plenty of food to go around for everyone.  It just doesn't get to everywhere it is needed, for various reasons.
> 
> So, no.  We do not have an over-population problem at this time.
> 
> The first real crush we will feel, as far as population goes, will be sources of fresh water.   We are going to need to find a way to economically desalinate ocean water in the near future, I think.
> 
> 
> 
> There may be sufficient food, but humans are destroying the habitats of other animals.  The population of this planet needs to be reduced to about 2 billion, and no higher.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yet here you still are...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not asking anyone to commit suicide, shit for brains.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We are so overpopulated we are even running out of sand
> 
> The World Is Running Out of Sand
> 
> That's sad.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The problem isn’t over population it is man’s inability to manage resources.
Click to expand...




That has ALWAYS been the real issue, but idiots like Bobobrainless can only process simple ideas, no matter how inaccurate.


----------



## Rigby5

Papageorgio said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think resource distribution is the problem, not over-population.
> 
> There is plenty of food to go around for everyone.  It just doesn't get to everywhere it is needed, for various reasons.
> 
> So, no.  We do not have an over-population problem at this time.
> 
> The first real crush we will feel, as far as population goes, will be sources of fresh water.   We are going to need to find a way to economically desalinate ocean water in the near future, I think.
> 
> 
> 
> There may be sufficient food, but humans are destroying the habitats of other animals.  The population of this planet needs to be reduced to about 2 billion, and no higher.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yet here you still are...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not asking anyone to commit suicide, shit for brains.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We are so overpopulated we are even running out of sand
> 
> The World Is Running Out of Sand
> 
> That's sad.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The problem isn’t over population it is man’s inability to manage resources.
Click to expand...


While we certainly can and should manage resource better, they are still finite and decreasing, while population increases.


----------



## Rigby5

Unkotare said:


> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> There may be sufficient food, but humans are destroying the habitats of other animals.  The population of this planet needs to be reduced to about 2 billion, and no higher.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yet here you still are...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not asking anyone to commit suicide, shit for brains.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We are so overpopulated we are even running out of sand
> 
> The World Is Running Out of Sand
> 
> That's sad.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The problem isn’t over population it is man’s inability to manage resources.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That has ALWAYS been the real issue, but idiots like Bobobrainless can only process simple ideas, no matter how inaccurate.
Click to expand...



The boomer bulge is only temporary.
Once we die off, the population won't have an excess of elderly any more.
And while larger populations do stimulate the economy, increase wealth, and are capable of doing more, like space projects, etc., there is also a limit.  There is a finite amount of fossil fuel, plants can only capture so much sunlight, we can only capture a small % of clean rain water, plankton and trees only produce a fixed amount of oxygen, only a fixed amount of carbon is scrubbed from the air by plants, etc.
We can argue about whether or not we have passed the optimal population, but clearly there has to be a limit.


----------



## bripat9643

Rigby5 said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Since the industrial revolution, we have depended entirely on fossil fuels.
> That is not just for transportation, manufacturing, heating, and cooling, but also for the creation of fertilizers and almost all farm production.
> If and when fossil fuels run out, humans will be starving until the population significantly decreases.
> That is unless we somehow discover some miracle energy source like fusion.
> But that is very unlikely, and things like wind, solar, and geothermal are way too tiny in comparison.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't believe it's unlikely that we'll develop fusion.  Progress has been getting more rapid every year.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I am very, very skeptical.
> They have been claiming big breakthroughs and right around the corner for over 50 years now with fusion.
> I think the reason it will never happen is that if fusion ever because easy, like the "Mr. Fusion" added to the DeLorean on the one of the "Back to the Future" movies, then everyone would have a potential city destroying weapon.
> 
> Anyway, the point is we are relying totally on fossil fuels that concentrate millions of years of sunlight energy in very small space, and is rapidly running out.
Click to expand...

Fusion cannot be made into a bomb.  You obviously understand nothing about the process.


----------



## Rigby5

bripat9643 said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Since the industrial revolution, we have depended entirely on fossil fuels.
> That is not just for transportation, manufacturing, heating, and cooling, but also for the creation of fertilizers and almost all farm production.
> If and when fossil fuels run out, humans will be starving until the population significantly decreases.
> That is unless we somehow discover some miracle energy source like fusion.
> But that is very unlikely, and things like wind, solar, and geothermal are way too tiny in comparison.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't believe it's unlikely that we'll develop fusion.  Progress has been getting more rapid every year.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I am very, very skeptical.
> They have been claiming big breakthroughs and right around the corner for over 50 years now with fusion.
> I think the reason it will never happen is that if fusion ever because easy, like the "Mr. Fusion" added to the DeLorean on the one of the "Back to the Future" movies, then everyone would have a potential city destroying weapon.
> 
> Anyway, the point is we are relying totally on fossil fuels that concentrate millions of years of sunlight energy in very small space, and is rapidly running out.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Fusion cannot be made into a bomb.  You obviously understand nothing about the process.
Click to expand...



Fusion can ALWAYS be made into a bomb!
What you forget is that the size of current fusion reactors is so that they can withstand continual operation, and produce significant continual results.  The reality is that once the process is ever perfected, micro miniaturization for a weapon, would be trivial.
Just because it is easy to shut down fusion experiments by cutting off the deuterium and tritium fuel, that does not mean it is not just as easy to let it race.  Unlike fission, there no critical mass required.  If it is self sustaining, all you need is the tiniest start and enough deuterium and tritium.  Magnetic containment is just to allow it to continue while fuel starved.  Without fuel starvation, you don't need magnetic containment.  So much excess heat would be generated so quickly that it does not need to be or even could be contained.

For example, what if they discovered a way of initiating fusion with just a couple of lasers?  The technology could be so cheap and easy, Uganda even could become a thermonuclear power over night.  Not a good idea.


----------



## bripat9643

Rigby5 said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Since the industrial revolution, we have depended entirely on fossil fuels.
> That is not just for transportation, manufacturing, heating, and cooling, but also for the creation of fertilizers and almost all farm production.
> If and when fossil fuels run out, humans will be starving until the population significantly decreases.
> That is unless we somehow discover some miracle energy source like fusion.
> But that is very unlikely, and things like wind, solar, and geothermal are way too tiny in comparison.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't believe it's unlikely that we'll develop fusion.  Progress has been getting more rapid every year.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I am very, very skeptical.
> They have been claiming big breakthroughs and right around the corner for over 50 years now with fusion.
> I think the reason it will never happen is that if fusion ever because easy, like the "Mr. Fusion" added to the DeLorean on the one of the "Back to the Future" movies, then everyone would have a potential city destroying weapon.
> 
> Anyway, the point is we are relying totally on fossil fuels that concentrate millions of years of sunlight energy in very small space, and is rapidly running out.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Fusion cannot be made into a bomb.  You obviously understand nothing about the process.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Fusion can ALWAYS be made into a bomb!
> What you forget is that the size of current fusion reactors is so that they can withstand continual operation, and produce significant continual results.  The reality is that once the process is ever perfected, micro miniaturization for a weapon, would be trivial.
> Just because it is easy to shut down fusion experiments by cutting off the deuterium and tritium fuel, that does not mean it is not just as easy to let it race.  Unlike fission, there no critical mass required.  If it is self sustaining, all you need is the tiniest start and enough deuterium and tritium.  Magnetic containment is just to allow it to continue while fuel starved.  Without fuel starvation, you don't need magnetic containment.  So much excess heat would be generated so quickly that it does not need to be or even could be contained.
> 
> For example, what if they discovered a way of initiating fusion with just a couple of lasers?  The technology could be so cheap and easy, Uganda even could become a thermonuclear power over night.  Not a good idea.
Click to expand...

You only proved that you don't know jack shit about fusion.  Just about everything you posted is wrong.  The size of the reactors is not so they can withstand continual operation.  None of the experimental reactors have ever sustained a fusion reaction for more than a few seconds.  "Let it race" means nothing in the case of fusion.  As I previously noted, they can't get the reaction to sustain for more than a few seconds.  Fusion is not self sustaining.  It takes massive amounts of electricity to make it happen.  

I could go on and on, but everyone reading this will know that you are an ignoramus.


----------



## sealybobo

Rigby5 said:


> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your masters at the other end of the leash are, or dream of being.
> 
> 
> 
> Is that why you, a union public school teacher is a Republican?  They've convinced you that Democrats are communists?  Boy are you fucking stupid.
> 
> Have you started a thread on this subject?  I'd love for you to explain how my "masters" are communists.
> 
> I thought Democrats were in bed with the rich?  I thought it was them who widened the gap between the rich and poor.  THat's at least the stupid claim Republicans make.  Now you are suggesting that we want to take the rich people's money and spread it around so that a doctor makes as much as a lowly public school teacher?
> 
> Who is saying that?  No one.  Maybe you need to re educate yourself.  Maybe as a wrestler you were dropped on your head too many times.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The leaders of any supposed communist nation are all the rich.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well trying to shrink the income inequality in this country or trying to shrink the gap between rich and poor isn't communism but that's what rich Republicans will tell you.
> 
> Gap between rich and poor continues to widen, latest Fed data show
> 
> What are Republicans doing about it?  In 2016 they blamed Obama for it but now what are they doing to fix this problem?  Or, now that Republicans are in charge, like the debt, this is no longer a problem.  It was only a problem when Democrats were in charge.  Blame Obama.  But then don't give him credit for anything.  Just blame.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Democrats blame Republicans and the Republicans blame the Democrats and spending and deficits only matter to the party not in charge. I see no difference in the two parties.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, both parties actually have nearly identical policies when it comes to important things like war, over spending, lying, the war on drugs, overly expensive health care, high tuition, lack of affordable housing, etc.
Click to expand...

No, we didn't invade Iraq the Republicans did.  They tried to get us to but we wouldn't bite.  And Trump will drop a bomb on a country if it bombs it's citizens with chemical weapons.  Boy if that wasn't a fake ass made up story designed to make Trump look better I don't know what is.

Overspending?  What do Democrats overspend on? Infrastructure, social security, schools so that you can afford to go to them?

Obama and Hillary lied 1/10th the amount Trump has yet you guys think this is apples to apples.

War on drugs?  
*How Obama quietly reshaped America’s war on drugs*
*Obama’s drug war legacy is underappreciated. But it now hangs in the balance — thanks to Trump.*

*How Obama quietly reshaped America’s war on drugs*

*We want single payer.  If you could have gotten 5 Republicans to go along we'd have it.*

*We are the party that wants to lower college tuition.  Are you kidding with this one???*

*Lack of affordable housing?  I didn't know this was even a problem other than for poor people.  Are you poor?  Then you certainly shouldn't be voting Republican.*

*If you don't see the difference that's probably why they will never solve these problems.  Why should they when they can just keep you in a constant state of confusion?*


----------



## sealybobo

Papageorgio said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think resource distribution is the problem, not over-population.
> 
> There is plenty of food to go around for everyone.  It just doesn't get to everywhere it is needed, for various reasons.
> 
> So, no.  We do not have an over-population problem at this time.
> 
> The first real crush we will feel, as far as population goes, will be sources of fresh water.   We are going to need to find a way to economically desalinate ocean water in the near future, I think.
> 
> 
> 
> There may be sufficient food, but humans are destroying the habitats of other animals.  The population of this planet needs to be reduced to about 2 billion, and no higher.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yet here you still are...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not asking anyone to commit suicide, shit for brains.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We are so overpopulated we are even running out of sand
> 
> The World Is Running Out of Sand
> 
> That's sad.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The problem isn’t over population it is man’s inability to manage resources.
Click to expand...

See here's another person saying that we aren't overpopulated, we just haven't engineered a solution to the fact that we are overpopulated.  


If we had 1 million people on this planet we wouldn't need to worry about man's ability or inability to manage resources.  

Sure we could go to 100% renewable energy and make room for another 100 million people.  But then eventually we will run out of things like water and sand.  Ok so then you will learn to turn salt water into drinking water and then we can pack on another 100 million pounds worth of people.  

Or we could stop having so many kids and this planet can stay beautiful longer.


----------



## Papageorgio

sealybobo said:


> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> There may be sufficient food, but humans are destroying the habitats of other animals.  The population of this planet needs to be reduced to about 2 billion, and no higher.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yet here you still are...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not asking anyone to commit suicide, shit for brains.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We are so overpopulated we are even running out of sand
> 
> The World Is Running Out of Sand
> 
> That's sad.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The problem isn’t over population it is man’s inability to manage resources.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> See here's another person saying that we aren't overpopulated, we just haven't engineered a solution to the fact that we are overpopulated.
> 
> 
> If we had 1 million people on this planet we wouldn't need to worry about man's ability or inability to manage resources.
> 
> Sure we could go to 100% renewable energy and make room for another 100 million people.  But then eventually we will run out of things like water and sand.  Ok so then you will learn to turn salt water into drinking water and then we can pack on another 100 million pounds worth of people.
> 
> Or we could stop having so many kids and this planet can stay beautiful longer.
Click to expand...


Here is a another person claiming I said something I didn’t. I didn’t say we were or weren’t over populated, I criticized man’s greed of not managing resources. And if you had only a million people you would still worry about resources and mismanagement. If all that are complaining about over population committed suicide, we wouldn’t have this problem. Maybe you need to reconsider gun control, the more violence the less population.


----------



## sealybobo

bripat9643 said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Since the industrial revolution, we have depended entirely on fossil fuels.
> That is not just for transportation, manufacturing, heating, and cooling, but also for the creation of fertilizers and almost all farm production.
> If and when fossil fuels run out, humans will be starving until the population significantly decreases.
> That is unless we somehow discover some miracle energy source like fusion.
> But that is very unlikely, and things like wind, solar, and geothermal are way too tiny in comparison.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't believe it's unlikely that we'll develop fusion.  Progress has been getting more rapid every year.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I am very, very skeptical.
> They have been claiming big breakthroughs and right around the corner for over 50 years now with fusion.
> I think the reason it will never happen is that if fusion ever because easy, like the "Mr. Fusion" added to the DeLorean on the one of the "Back to the Future" movies, then everyone would have a potential city destroying weapon.
> 
> Anyway, the point is we are relying totally on fossil fuels that concentrate millions of years of sunlight energy in very small space, and is rapidly running out.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Fusion cannot be made into a bomb.  You obviously understand nothing about the process.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Fusion can ALWAYS be made into a bomb!
> What you forget is that the size of current fusion reactors is so that they can withstand continual operation, and produce significant continual results.  The reality is that once the process is ever perfected, micro miniaturization for a weapon, would be trivial.
> Just because it is easy to shut down fusion experiments by cutting off the deuterium and tritium fuel, that does not mean it is not just as easy to let it race.  Unlike fission, there no critical mass required.  If it is self sustaining, all you need is the tiniest start and enough deuterium and tritium.  Magnetic containment is just to allow it to continue while fuel starved.  Without fuel starvation, you don't need magnetic containment.  So much excess heat would be generated so quickly that it does not need to be or even could be contained.
> 
> For example, what if they discovered a way of initiating fusion with just a couple of lasers?  The technology could be so cheap and easy, Uganda even could become a thermonuclear power over night.  Not a good idea.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You only proved that you don't know jack shit about fusion.  Just about everything you posted is wrong.  The size of the reactors is not so they can withstand continual operation.  None of the experimental reactors have ever sustained a fusion reaction for more than a few seconds.  "Let it race" means nothing in the case of fusion.  As I previously noted, they can't get the reaction to sustain for more than a few seconds.  Fusion is not self sustaining.  It takes massive amounts of electricity to make it happen.
> 
> I could go on and on, but everyone reading this will know that you are an ignoramus.
Click to expand...


Well he seems nice, polite, intelligent and informed.  You however have the MO of being a know it all on every subject and yet on every subject you seem to be wrong.  Right wing Wrong.


----------



## sealybobo

Papageorgio said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yet here you still are...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not asking anyone to commit suicide, shit for brains.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We are so overpopulated we are even running out of sand
> 
> The World Is Running Out of Sand
> 
> That's sad.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The problem isn’t over population it is man’s inability to manage resources.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> See here's another person saying that we aren't overpopulated, we just haven't engineered a solution to the fact that we are overpopulated.
> 
> 
> If we had 1 million people on this planet we wouldn't need to worry about man's ability or inability to manage resources.
> 
> Sure we could go to 100% renewable energy and make room for another 100 million people.  But then eventually we will run out of things like water and sand.  Ok so then you will learn to turn salt water into drinking water and then we can pack on another 100 million pounds worth of people.
> 
> Or we could stop having so many kids and this planet can stay beautiful longer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here is a another person claiming I said something I didn’t. I didn’t say we were or weren’t over populated, I criticized man’s greed of not managing resources. And if you had only a million people you would still worry about resources and mismanagement. If all that are complaining about over population committed suicide, we wouldn’t have this problem. Maybe you need to reconsider gun control, the more violence the less population.
Click to expand...


Yea but I don't want innocent people who are already living hurt.  I just want all the poor people who can't afford to have kids without foodstamps or welfare to stop having kids.  That's it.  Is that wrong?  We all want that don't we?  I don't know why I'm the bad guy for saying we should have 13.2 million less people running around America right now.  

There were 13,253,000 children living in poverty in 2016


----------



## Papageorgio

sealybobo said:


> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not asking anyone to commit suicide, shit for brains.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We are so overpopulated we are even running out of sand
> 
> The World Is Running Out of Sand
> 
> That's sad.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The problem isn’t over population it is man’s inability to manage resources.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> See here's another person saying that we aren't overpopulated, we just haven't engineered a solution to the fact that we are overpopulated.
> 
> 
> If we had 1 million people on this planet we wouldn't need to worry about man's ability or inability to manage resources.
> 
> Sure we could go to 100% renewable energy and make room for another 100 million people.  But then eventually we will run out of things like water and sand.  Ok so then you will learn to turn salt water into drinking water and then we can pack on another 100 million pounds worth of people.
> 
> Or we could stop having so many kids and this planet can stay beautiful longer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here is a another person claiming I said something I didn’t. I didn’t say we were or weren’t over populated, I criticized man’s greed of not managing resources. And if you had only a million people you would still worry about resources and mismanagement. If all that are complaining about over population committed suicide, we wouldn’t have this problem. Maybe you need to reconsider gun control, the more violence the less population.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yea but I don't want innocent people who are already living hurt.  I just want all the poor people who can't afford to have kids without foodstamps or welfare to stop having kids.  That's it.  Is that wrong?  We all want that don't we?  I don't know why I'm the bad guy for saying we should have 13.2 million less people running around America right now.
> 
> There were 13,253,000 children living in poverty in 2016
Click to expand...


I never said you are a bad guy. Just get sterlized.


----------



## sealybobo

Papageorgio said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> We are so overpopulated we are even running out of sand
> 
> The World Is Running Out of Sand
> 
> That's sad.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The problem isn’t over population it is man’s inability to manage resources.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> See here's another person saying that we aren't overpopulated, we just haven't engineered a solution to the fact that we are overpopulated.
> 
> 
> If we had 1 million people on this planet we wouldn't need to worry about man's ability or inability to manage resources.
> 
> Sure we could go to 100% renewable energy and make room for another 100 million people.  But then eventually we will run out of things like water and sand.  Ok so then you will learn to turn salt water into drinking water and then we can pack on another 100 million pounds worth of people.
> 
> Or we could stop having so many kids and this planet can stay beautiful longer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here is a another person claiming I said something I didn’t. I didn’t say we were or weren’t over populated, I criticized man’s greed of not managing resources. And if you had only a million people you would still worry about resources and mismanagement. If all that are complaining about over population committed suicide, we wouldn’t have this problem. Maybe you need to reconsider gun control, the more violence the less population.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yea but I don't want innocent people who are already living hurt.  I just want all the poor people who can't afford to have kids without foodstamps or welfare to stop having kids.  That's it.  Is that wrong?  We all want that don't we?  I don't know why I'm the bad guy for saying we should have 13.2 million less people running around America right now.
> 
> There were 13,253,000 children living in poverty in 2016
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I never said you are a bad guy. Just get sterlized.
Click to expand...


I'm not having any kids.  I'm 47 dating a 25 year old Belarus woman.  I'm doing my part by not having kids.  My brother had 2 sons who will carry on the Sealybobo name.  LOL


----------



## 2aguy

sealybobo said:


> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> The problem isn’t over population it is man’s inability to manage resources.
> 
> 
> 
> See here's another person saying that we aren't overpopulated, we just haven't engineered a solution to the fact that we are overpopulated.
> 
> 
> If we had 1 million people on this planet we wouldn't need to worry about man's ability or inability to manage resources.
> 
> Sure we could go to 100% renewable energy and make room for another 100 million people.  But then eventually we will run out of things like water and sand.  Ok so then you will learn to turn salt water into drinking water and then we can pack on another 100 million pounds worth of people.
> 
> Or we could stop having so many kids and this planet can stay beautiful longer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here is a another person claiming I said something I didn’t. I didn’t say we were or weren’t over populated, I criticized man’s greed of not managing resources. And if you had only a million people you would still worry about resources and mismanagement. If all that are complaining about over population committed suicide, we wouldn’t have this problem. Maybe you need to reconsider gun control, the more violence the less population.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yea but I don't want innocent people who are already living hurt.  I just want all the poor people who can't afford to have kids without foodstamps or welfare to stop having kids.  That's it.  Is that wrong?  We all want that don't we?  I don't know why I'm the bad guy for saying we should have 13.2 million less people running around America right now.
> 
> There were 13,253,000 children living in poverty in 2016
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I never said you are a bad guy. Just get sterlized.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not having any kids.  I'm 47 dating a 25 year old Belarus woman.  I'm doing my part by not having kids.  My brother had 2 sons who will carry on the Sealybobo name.  LOL
Click to expand...



Don't drink from any unsealed containers if you marry her.........especially after she gets her green card.


----------



## Papageorgio

sealybobo said:


> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> The problem isn’t over population it is man’s inability to manage resources.
> 
> 
> 
> See here's another person saying that we aren't overpopulated, we just haven't engineered a solution to the fact that we are overpopulated.
> 
> 
> If we had 1 million people on this planet we wouldn't need to worry about man's ability or inability to manage resources.
> 
> Sure we could go to 100% renewable energy and make room for another 100 million people.  But then eventually we will run out of things like water and sand.  Ok so then you will learn to turn salt water into drinking water and then we can pack on another 100 million pounds worth of people.
> 
> Or we could stop having so many kids and this planet can stay beautiful longer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here is a another person claiming I said something I didn’t. I didn’t say we were or weren’t over populated, I criticized man’s greed of not managing resources. And if you had only a million people you would still worry about resources and mismanagement. If all that are complaining about over population committed suicide, we wouldn’t have this problem. Maybe you need to reconsider gun control, the more violence the less population.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yea but I don't want innocent people who are already living hurt.  I just want all the poor people who can't afford to have kids without foodstamps or welfare to stop having kids.  That's it.  Is that wrong?  We all want that don't we?  I don't know why I'm the bad guy for saying we should have 13.2 million less people running around America right now.
> 
> There were 13,253,000 children living in poverty in 2016
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I never said you are a bad guy. Just get sterlized.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not having any kids.  I'm 47 dating a 25 year old Belarus woman.  I'm doing my part by not having kids.  My brother had 2 sons who will carry on the Sealybobo name.  LOL
Click to expand...


Then you and your friend should get sterized that way you can claim to contribute to saving the world.


----------



## sealybobo

2aguy said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> See here's another person saying that we aren't overpopulated, we just haven't engineered a solution to the fact that we are overpopulated.
> 
> 
> If we had 1 million people on this planet we wouldn't need to worry about man's ability or inability to manage resources.
> 
> Sure we could go to 100% renewable energy and make room for another 100 million people.  But then eventually we will run out of things like water and sand.  Ok so then you will learn to turn salt water into drinking water and then we can pack on another 100 million pounds worth of people.
> 
> Or we could stop having so many kids and this planet can stay beautiful longer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a another person claiming I said something I didn’t. I didn’t say we were or weren’t over populated, I criticized man’s greed of not managing resources. And if you had only a million people you would still worry about resources and mismanagement. If all that are complaining about over population committed suicide, we wouldn’t have this problem. Maybe you need to reconsider gun control, the more violence the less population.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yea but I don't want innocent people who are already living hurt.  I just want all the poor people who can't afford to have kids without foodstamps or welfare to stop having kids.  That's it.  Is that wrong?  We all want that don't we?  I don't know why I'm the bad guy for saying we should have 13.2 million less people running around America right now.
> 
> There were 13,253,000 children living in poverty in 2016
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I never said you are a bad guy. Just get sterlized.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not having any kids.  I'm 47 dating a 25 year old Belarus woman.  I'm doing my part by not having kids.  My brother had 2 sons who will carry on the Sealybobo name.  LOL
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Don't drink from any unsealed containers if you marry her.........especially after she gets her green card.
Click to expand...


I wouldn't marry her.  My nephews are going to get everything I leave behind.  I would never give her all my wealth.  Her mom married the guy she's with only to come to America.  She told me her mom only had sex with him twice and she can't stand him.  Poor idiot.  Oh and she's already got her green card.  Not only that the sap who married her mom adopted her so she will get his fortune when him and her mom died.  His family is pissed.  

I was friends with her for months before we started dating.  Yes I help her out with $ but I'll tell you  this.  She's cheaper than any other girlfriend I've ever had.  I don't need to take her out to dinner all the time or on vacations.  She cleans my place once a week and I pay her for it.  Sure I pay her more than I would pay a real cleaning woman but a real cleaning woman wouldn't blow and fuck me.   

But it's funny she is shady just like all women from Eastern Europe.  So black people need to realize we don't only stereotype them.  We do it to every nationality.  I would trust a black American woman more than I would a white woman from Belarus.  Is that racist?  LOL.


----------



## sealybobo

Papageorgio said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> See here's another person saying that we aren't overpopulated, we just haven't engineered a solution to the fact that we are overpopulated.
> 
> 
> If we had 1 million people on this planet we wouldn't need to worry about man's ability or inability to manage resources.
> 
> Sure we could go to 100% renewable energy and make room for another 100 million people.  But then eventually we will run out of things like water and sand.  Ok so then you will learn to turn salt water into drinking water and then we can pack on another 100 million pounds worth of people.
> 
> Or we could stop having so many kids and this planet can stay beautiful longer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a another person claiming I said something I didn’t. I didn’t say we were or weren’t over populated, I criticized man’s greed of not managing resources. And if you had only a million people you would still worry about resources and mismanagement. If all that are complaining about over population committed suicide, we wouldn’t have this problem. Maybe you need to reconsider gun control, the more violence the less population.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yea but I don't want innocent people who are already living hurt.  I just want all the poor people who can't afford to have kids without foodstamps or welfare to stop having kids.  That's it.  Is that wrong?  We all want that don't we?  I don't know why I'm the bad guy for saying we should have 13.2 million less people running around America right now.
> 
> There were 13,253,000 children living in poverty in 2016
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I never said you are a bad guy. Just get sterlized.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not having any kids.  I'm 47 dating a 25 year old Belarus woman.  I'm doing my part by not having kids.  My brother had 2 sons who will carry on the Sealybobo name.  LOL
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Then you and your friend should get sterized that way you can claim to contribute to saving the world.
Click to expand...

I don't need to get sterilized.  I already claim to be contributing to saving the world.


----------



## sealybobo

Papageorgio said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> See here's another person saying that we aren't overpopulated, we just haven't engineered a solution to the fact that we are overpopulated.
> 
> 
> If we had 1 million people on this planet we wouldn't need to worry about man's ability or inability to manage resources.
> 
> Sure we could go to 100% renewable energy and make room for another 100 million people.  But then eventually we will run out of things like water and sand.  Ok so then you will learn to turn salt water into drinking water and then we can pack on another 100 million pounds worth of people.
> 
> Or we could stop having so many kids and this planet can stay beautiful longer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a another person claiming I said something I didn’t. I didn’t say we were or weren’t over populated, I criticized man’s greed of not managing resources. And if you had only a million people you would still worry about resources and mismanagement. If all that are complaining about over population committed suicide, we wouldn’t have this problem. Maybe you need to reconsider gun control, the more violence the less population.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yea but I don't want innocent people who are already living hurt.  I just want all the poor people who can't afford to have kids without foodstamps or welfare to stop having kids.  That's it.  Is that wrong?  We all want that don't we?  I don't know why I'm the bad guy for saying we should have 13.2 million less people running around America right now.
> 
> There were 13,253,000 children living in poverty in 2016
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I never said you are a bad guy. Just get sterlized.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not having any kids.  I'm 47 dating a 25 year old Belarus woman.  I'm doing my part by not having kids.  My brother had 2 sons who will carry on the Sealybobo name.  LOL
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Then you and your friend should get sterized that way you can claim to contribute to saving the world.
Click to expand...


This is what Bushanomics and Trumpanomics creates.  This is why I say I'm a Republican now.  I love it!

U.S. Births Dip To 30-Year Low; Fertility Rate Sinks Further Below Replacement Level


----------



## sealybobo

Papageorgio said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> See here's another person saying that we aren't overpopulated, we just haven't engineered a solution to the fact that we are overpopulated.
> 
> 
> If we had 1 million people on this planet we wouldn't need to worry about man's ability or inability to manage resources.
> 
> Sure we could go to 100% renewable energy and make room for another 100 million people.  But then eventually we will run out of things like water and sand.  Ok so then you will learn to turn salt water into drinking water and then we can pack on another 100 million pounds worth of people.
> 
> Or we could stop having so many kids and this planet can stay beautiful longer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a another person claiming I said something I didn’t. I didn’t say we were or weren’t over populated, I criticized man’s greed of not managing resources. And if you had only a million people you would still worry about resources and mismanagement. If all that are complaining about over population committed suicide, we wouldn’t have this problem. Maybe you need to reconsider gun control, the more violence the less population.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yea but I don't want innocent people who are already living hurt.  I just want all the poor people who can't afford to have kids without foodstamps or welfare to stop having kids.  That's it.  Is that wrong?  We all want that don't we?  I don't know why I'm the bad guy for saying we should have 13.2 million less people running around America right now.
> 
> There were 13,253,000 children living in poverty in 2016
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I never said you are a bad guy. Just get sterlized.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not having any kids.  I'm 47 dating a 25 year old Belarus woman.  I'm doing my part by not having kids.  My brother had 2 sons who will carry on the Sealybobo name.  LOL
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Then you and your friend should get sterized that way you can claim to contribute to saving the world.
Click to expand...


The birthrate fell for nearly every group of women of reproductive age in the U.S. in 2017, reflecting a sharp drop that saw the fewest newborns since 1987, according to a new report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

There were 3,853,472 births in the U.S. in 2017 — "down 2 percent from 2016 and the lowest number in 30 years," the CDC said.

The general fertility rate sank to a record low of 60.2 births per 1,000 women between the ages of 15 and 44 — a 3 percent drop from 2016, the CDC said in its tally of provisional data for the year.

Republicans say consumer confidence is up but a high birthrate would be a better indicator that people aren't worried about money.

Unless you think there is another reason people are having less kids?  I think it's because:
low wages
high student loans
high cost of living
high cost of college
no job security anymore


----------



## sealybobo

Something I said was deleted.  I would love to know what I said.  All they gave for a reason was Gross and not on topic.  LOL


----------



## Papageorgio

Sealy, you are all over the board. I don’t care about your personal life, you talk the talk and don’t walk the walk.


----------



## sealybobo

Papageorgio said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> See here's another person saying that we aren't overpopulated, we just haven't engineered a solution to the fact that we are overpopulated.
> 
> 
> If we had 1 million people on this planet we wouldn't need to worry about man's ability or inability to manage resources.
> 
> Sure we could go to 100% renewable energy and make room for another 100 million people.  But then eventually we will run out of things like water and sand.  Ok so then you will learn to turn salt water into drinking water and then we can pack on another 100 million pounds worth of people.
> 
> Or we could stop having so many kids and this planet can stay beautiful longer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a another person claiming I said something I didn’t. I didn’t say we were or weren’t over populated, I criticized man’s greed of not managing resources. And if you had only a million people you would still worry about resources and mismanagement. If all that are complaining about over population committed suicide, we wouldn’t have this problem. Maybe you need to reconsider gun control, the more violence the less population.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yea but I don't want innocent people who are already living hurt.  I just want all the poor people who can't afford to have kids without foodstamps or welfare to stop having kids.  That's it.  Is that wrong?  We all want that don't we?  I don't know why I'm the bad guy for saying we should have 13.2 million less people running around America right now.
> 
> There were 13,253,000 children living in poverty in 2016
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I never said you are a bad guy. Just get sterlized.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not having any kids.  I'm 47 dating a 25 year old Belarus woman.  I'm doing my part by not having kids.  My brother had 2 sons who will carry on the Sealybobo name.  LOL
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Then you and your friend should get sterized that way you can claim to contribute to saving the world.
Click to expand...


This should be all the information I need to prove my point

But sand isn’t just sand, it turns out. In the industrial world, it’s “aggregate,” a category that includes gravel, crushed stone, and various recycled materials. Natural aggregate is the world’s second most heavily exploited natural resource, after water, and for many uses the right kind is scarce or inaccessible. In 2014, the United Nations Environment Programme published a report titled “Sand, Rarer Than One Thinks,” which concluded that the mining of sand and gravel “greatly exceeds natural renewal rates” and that “the amount being mined is increasing exponentially, mainly as a result of rapid economic growth in Asia.”

The World Is Running Out of Sand

China’s swift development had consumed more sand in the previous four years than the United States used in the past century. In India, commercially useful sand is now so scarce that markets for it are dominated by “sand mafias”—criminal enterprises that sell material taken illegally from rivers and other sources, sometimes killing to safeguard their deposits. In the United States, the fastest-growing uses include the fortification of shorelines eroded by rising sea levels and more and more powerful ocean storms—efforts that, like many attempts to address environmental challenges, create environmental challenges of their own.

So unkotare thinks we can engineer our way out of our problems.  Looks to me like our solutions create their own environmental challenges.  

 Sand on ocean beaches usually includes a high proportion of shell pieces and, increasingly, bits of decomposing plastic trash;


----------



## sealybobo

Papageorgio said:


> Sealy, you are all over the board. I don’t care about your personal life, you talk the talk and don’t walk the walk.



How do I not walk the walk?

Aggregate is the main constituent of concrete (eighty per cent) and asphalt (ninety-four per cent), and it’s also the primary base material that concrete and asphalt are placed on during the building of roads, buildings, parking lots, runways, and many other structures. A report published in 2004 by the American Geological Institute said that a typical American house requires more than a hundred tons of sand, gravel, and crushed stone for the foundation, basement, garage, and driveway, and more than two hundred tons if you include its share of the street that runs in front of it. A mile-long section of a single lane of an American interstate highway requires thirty-eight thousand tons. The most dramatic global increase in aggregate consumption is occurring in parts of the world where people who build roads are trying to keep pace with people who buy cars. Chinese officials have said that by 2030 they hope to have completed a hundred and sixty-five thousand miles of roads

Windowpanes, wineglasses, and cell-phone screens are made from melted sand. Sand is used for filtration in water-treatment facilities, septic systems, and swimming pools. Oil and gas drillers inject large quantities of hard, round sand into fracked rock formations in order to hold the cracks open, like shoving a foot in the door. Railroad locomotives drop angular sand onto the rails in front of their wheels as they brake, to improve traction. Australia and India are major exporters of garnet sand, which is crushed to make an abrasive material used in sandblasting and by water-jet cutters. Foundries use sand to form the molds for iron bolts, manhole covers, engine blocks, and other cast-metal objects. I once visited a foundry in Arizona whose products included parts for airplanes, cruise missiles, and artificial hip joints, and I watched a worker pouring molten stainless steel into a mold that had been made by repeatedly dipping a wax pattern into a ceramic slurry and then into sand. The work area was so hot that I nervously checked my arm, because I thought my shirt was on fire. Factories that produce plate glass—by pouring thin layers of molten silica onto baths of molten tin—can be hotter.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> There may be sufficient food, but humans are destroying the habitats of other animals.  The population of this planet needs to be reduced to about 2 billion, and no higher.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yet here you still are...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not asking anyone to commit suicide, shit for brains.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We are so overpopulated we are even running out of sand
> 
> The World Is Running Out of Sand
> 
> That's sad.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The problem isn’t over population it is man’s inability to manage resources.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That has ALWAYS been the real issue, but idiots like Bobobrainless can only process simple ideas, no matter how inaccurate.
Click to expand...


Good luck trying to manage the resources.

In some applications, natural aggregate can be replaced by or supplemented with recycled materials, but the possibilities are limited. And efforts to reduce consumption are complicated by the fact that many environmentally desirable products and activities depend as heavily on aggregate as environmentally undesirable ones do: solar panels are made from silica and silicon; wind turbines are manufactured with foundry sand; autonomous electric vehicles need roads and highways, too.

Unfortunately for Dubai’s builders and real-estate developers, desert sand is also unsuitable for construction and, indeed, for almost any human use. The grains don’t have enough fractured faces for concrete and asphalt, and they’re too small and round for water-filtration systems. The high-compression concrete used in Dubai’s Burj Khalifa, the world’s tallest structure, was made with sand imported from Australia. 

The World consists of three hundred small islands arranged in clusters that (vaguely) suggest a Mercator projection of Earth. Creating so much artificial land required enormous shipments of quarried stone, from across the Emirates, as well as hundreds of millions of tons of sand, which foreign contractors dredged from the floor of the Gulf and heaped into piles. According to a U.N. report, the dredging “exhausted all of the marine sand resources in Dubai,” and also did extensive environmental damage. Seafloor dredging creates the undersea equivalent of choking sandstorms, killing organisms, destroying coral reefs and other habitats, and altering patterns of water circulation. In 2011, a British scientist who had studied the Dubai projects told _Nature_, “All the ecological trajectories are downhill.”


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> There may be sufficient food, but humans are destroying the habitats of other animals.  The population of this planet needs to be reduced to about 2 billion, and no higher.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yet here you still are...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not asking anyone to commit suicide, shit for brains.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We are so overpopulated we are even running out of sand
> 
> The World Is Running Out of Sand
> 
> That's sad.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The problem isn’t over population it is man’s inability to manage resources.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ....
> 
> Or we could stop having so many kids and this planet can stay beautiful longer.
Click to expand...



Every baby born makes this world more beautiful.


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> There may be sufficient food, but humans are destroying the habitats of other animals.  The population of this planet needs to be reduced to about 2 billion, and no higher.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yet here you still are...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not asking anyone to commit suicide, shit for brains.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We are so overpopulated we are even running out of sand
> 
> The World Is Running Out of Sand
> 
> That's sad.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The problem isn’t over population it is man’s inability to manage resources.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ....
> 
> 
> If we had 1 million people on this planet we wouldn't need to worry about man's ability or inability to manage resources.
Click to expand...



Wrong, idiot. Put two people in a room with one pizza and you’ll run into problems managing resources. You’re just too damn stupid to grasp the concepts.


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is that why you, a union public school teacher is a Republican?  They've convinced you that Democrats are communists?  Boy are you fucking stupid.
> 
> Have you started a thread on this subject?  I'd love for you to explain how my "masters" are communists.
> 
> I thought Democrats were in bed with the rich?  I thought it was them who widened the gap between the rich and poor.  THat's at least the stupid claim Republicans make.  Now you are suggesting that we want to take the rich people's money and spread it around so that a doctor makes as much as a lowly public school teacher?
> 
> Who is saying that?  No one.  Maybe you need to re educate yourself.  Maybe as a wrestler you were dropped on your head too many times.
> 
> 
> 
> The leaders of any supposed communist nation are all the rich.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well trying to shrink the income inequality in this country or trying to shrink the gap between rich and poor isn't communism but that's what rich Republicans will tell you.
> 
> Gap between rich and poor continues to widen, latest Fed data show
> 
> What are Republicans doing about it?  In 2016 they blamed Obama for it but now what are they doing to fix this problem?  Or, now that Republicans are in charge, like the debt, this is no longer a problem.  It was only a problem when Democrats were in charge.  Blame Obama.  But then don't give him credit for anything.  Just blame.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Democrats blame Republicans and the Republicans blame the Democrats and spending and deficits only matter to the party not in charge. I see no difference in the two parties.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, both parties actually have nearly identical policies when it comes to important things like war, over spending, lying, the war on drugs, overly expensive health care, high tuition, lack of affordable housing, etc.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, we didn't invade Iraq the Republicans did.  ....*?*
Click to expand...




Factually wrong.


----------



## Unkotare

Papageorgio said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> We are so overpopulated we are even running out of sand
> 
> The World Is Running Out of Sand
> 
> That's sad.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The problem isn’t over population it is man’s inability to manage resources.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> See here's another person saying that we aren't overpopulated, we just haven't engineered a solution to the fact that we are overpopulated.
> 
> 
> If we had 1 million people on this planet we wouldn't need to worry about man's ability or inability to manage resources.
> 
> Sure we could go to 100% renewable energy and make room for another 100 million people.  But then eventually we will run out of things like water and sand.  Ok so then you will learn to turn salt water into drinking water and then we can pack on another 100 million pounds worth of people.
> 
> Or we could stop having so many kids and this planet can stay beautiful longer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here is a another person claiming I said something I didn’t. I didn’t say we were or weren’t over populated, I criticized man’s greed of not managing resources. And if you had only a million people you would still worry about resources and mismanagement. If all that are complaining about over population committed suicide, we wouldn’t have this problem. Maybe you need to reconsider gun control, the more violence the less population.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yea but I don't want innocent people who are already living hurt.  I just want all the poor people who can't afford to have kids without foodstamps or welfare to stop having kids.  That's it.  Is that wrong?  We all want that don't we?  I don't know why I'm the bad guy for saying we should have 13.2 million less people running around America right now.
> 
> There were 13,253,000 children living in poverty in 2016
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I never said you are a bad guy. Just get sterlized.
Click to expand...




No need. His personality and proclivities achieve the same results.


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> The problem isn’t over population it is man’s inability to manage resources.
> 
> 
> 
> See here's another person saying that we aren't overpopulated, we just haven't engineered a solution to the fact that we are overpopulated.
> 
> 
> If we had 1 million people on this planet we wouldn't need to worry about man's ability or inability to manage resources.
> 
> Sure we could go to 100% renewable energy and make room for another 100 million people.  But then eventually we will run out of things like water and sand.  Ok so then you will learn to turn salt water into drinking water and then we can pack on another 100 million pounds worth of people.
> 
> Or we could stop having so many kids and this planet can stay beautiful longer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here is a another person claiming I said something I didn’t. I didn’t say we were or weren’t over populated, I criticized man’s greed of not managing resources. And if you had only a million people you would still worry about resources and mismanagement. If all that are complaining about over population committed suicide, we wouldn’t have this problem. Maybe you need to reconsider gun control, the more violence the less population.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yea but I don't want innocent people who are already living hurt.  I just want all the poor people who can't afford to have kids without foodstamps or welfare to stop having kids.  That's it.  Is that wrong?  We all want that don't we?  I don't know why I'm the bad guy for saying we should have 13.2 million less people running around America right now.
> 
> There were 13,253,000 children living in poverty in 2016
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I never said you are a bad guy. Just get sterlized.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not having any kids.  ....LOL
Click to expand...




Of course, closet case. Meanwhile, heterosexual couples will continue to have children. Just at a lower rate in developed countries. Economics is putting the lie to the false crisis.


----------



## Likkmee

I can honestly bleat here are far too many white English speaking whites and Brit riff raff loitering across the planet with far more money than brains. We assholes are everywhere ! 360 or so million(US if IsnTreal-semi current concensus) and lets assume 1/3 are NOT world travelers( because they're kids). Down to 120.Half of those are mental cases or broke ass trailer trash on multiple drugs and no idea where the other parental unit is.Down to 40 million or so ? Mas o menos. Lets not get technical.
Why is it that you enter any airport on earth and there a lines of loudmouth English( or Brit---all together different) standing in every line you get near elaborating their fatass superiority complex to everyone who doesn't have the balls to knock them the fuck out ?
Yeah. Overpopulation-oxygen thievery is a REAL issue.I think three IQ questionnaires at age 9 should be mandated and those who cant pass 2 of the three should be immediately spayed and or neutered( unless they're " neutral/unsure") Just shoot those in the head


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> See here's another person saying that we aren't overpopulated, we just haven't engineered a solution to the fact that we are overpopulated.
> 
> 
> If we had 1 million people on this planet we wouldn't need to worry about man's ability or inability to manage resources.
> 
> Sure we could go to 100% renewable energy and make room for another 100 million people.  But then eventually we will run out of things like water and sand.  Ok so then you will learn to turn salt water into drinking water and then we can pack on another 100 million pounds worth of people.
> 
> Or we could stop having so many kids and this planet can stay beautiful longer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a another person claiming I said something I didn’t. I didn’t say we were or weren’t over populated, I criticized man’s greed of not managing resources. And if you had only a million people you would still worry about resources and mismanagement. If all that are complaining about over population committed suicide, we wouldn’t have this problem. Maybe you need to reconsider gun control, the more violence the less population.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yea but I don't want innocent people who are already living hurt.  I just want all the poor people who can't afford to have kids without foodstamps or welfare to stop having kids.  That's it.  Is that wrong?  We all want that don't we?  I don't know why I'm the bad guy for saying we should have 13.2 million less people running around America right now.
> 
> There were 13,253,000 children living in poverty in 2016
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I never said you are a bad guy. Just get sterlized.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not having any kids.  ....LOL
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course, closet case. Meanwhile, heterosexual couples will continue to have children. Just at a lower rate in developed countries. Economics is putting the lie to the false crisis.
Click to expand...

That’s what I said. Republican policy is if you have a kid pay for them. And they won’t be cheap. And the masses who think they are middle class but are in debt and have no savings will probably have fewer kids. 

Republican policies are solving this problem I agree


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> The problem isn’t over population it is man’s inability to manage resources.
> 
> 
> 
> See here's another person saying that we aren't overpopulated, we just haven't engineered a solution to the fact that we are overpopulated.
> 
> 
> If we had 1 million people on this planet we wouldn't need to worry about man's ability or inability to manage resources.
> 
> Sure we could go to 100% renewable energy and make room for another 100 million people.  But then eventually we will run out of things like water and sand.  Ok so then you will learn to turn salt water into drinking water and then we can pack on another 100 million pounds worth of people.
> 
> Or we could stop having so many kids and this planet can stay beautiful longer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here is a another person claiming I said something I didn’t. I didn’t say we were or weren’t over populated, I criticized man’s greed of not managing resources. And if you had only a million people you would still worry about resources and mismanagement. If all that are complaining about over population committed suicide, we wouldn’t have this problem. Maybe you need to reconsider gun control, the more violence the less population.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yea but I don't want innocent people who are already living hurt.  I just want all the poor people who can't afford to have kids without foodstamps or welfare to stop having kids.  That's it.  Is that wrong?  We all want that don't we?  I don't know why I'm the bad guy for saying we should have 13.2 million less people running around America right now.
> 
> There were 13,253,000 children living in poverty in 2016
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I never said you are a bad guy. Just get sterlized.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No need. His personality and proclivities achieve the same results.
Click to expand...

I’m helping the planet and Mother Nature. We have too many humans now just ask all the other animals who’ve gone extinct because of us.

Unkotare thinks every baby is so precious they are worth the bio diversity we once had???  I think also those extinct species were more precious

And what about the future? We should never run out of natural resources


----------



## boedicca

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?




No. Developed nations are more at risk of declining native born populations as the birth rate is below the replacement rate.


----------



## sealybobo

boedicca said:


> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No. Developed nations are more at risk of declining native born populations as the birth rate is below the replacement rate.
Click to expand...

Who cares what nationality Americans will be in 200 years? One time Greeks and Italians were blonde hair and blue eyed. Are Greeks and Italians today not proud of who they are?

I see your ancestors worrying about the white race. Let it go. Assimilate. We tell the blacks and foreigners and even the native Americans to assimilate well we have to realize our white kids are in a melting pot.

I get mad at foreigners who come here and want their kids to only date their kind. Well why did you bring them here?  But don’t get mad when you see foreigners sticking together because you do the same thing. You want your daughters to marry aryans


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No. Developed nations are more at risk of declining native born populations as the birth rate is below the replacement rate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ...
> 
> I get mad at foreigners who come here and want their kids to only date their kind...
Click to expand...



You get mad because no one will date you.


----------



## Rigby5

bripat9643 said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Since the industrial revolution, we have depended entirely on fossil fuels.
> That is not just for transportation, manufacturing, heating, and cooling, but also for the creation of fertilizers and almost all farm production.
> If and when fossil fuels run out, humans will be starving until the population significantly decreases.
> That is unless we somehow discover some miracle energy source like fusion.
> But that is very unlikely, and things like wind, solar, and geothermal are way too tiny in comparison.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't believe it's unlikely that we'll develop fusion.  Progress has been getting more rapid every year.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I am very, very skeptical.
> They have been claiming big breakthroughs and right around the corner for over 50 years now with fusion.
> I think the reason it will never happen is that if fusion ever because easy, like the "Mr. Fusion" added to the DeLorean on the one of the "Back to the Future" movies, then everyone would have a potential city destroying weapon.
> 
> Anyway, the point is we are relying totally on fossil fuels that concentrate millions of years of sunlight energy in very small space, and is rapidly running out.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Fusion cannot be made into a bomb.  You obviously understand nothing about the process.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Fusion can ALWAYS be made into a bomb!
> What you forget is that the size of current fusion reactors is so that they can withstand continual operation, and produce significant continual results.  The reality is that once the process is ever perfected, micro miniaturization for a weapon, would be trivial.
> Just because it is easy to shut down fusion experiments by cutting off the deuterium and tritium fuel, that does not mean it is not just as easy to let it race.  Unlike fission, there no critical mass required.  If it is self sustaining, all you need is the tiniest start and enough deuterium and tritium.  Magnetic containment is just to allow it to continue while fuel starved.  Without fuel starvation, you don't need magnetic containment.  So much excess heat would be generated so quickly that it does not need to be or even could be contained.
> 
> For example, what if they discovered a way of initiating fusion with just a couple of lasers?  The technology could be so cheap and easy, Uganda even could become a thermonuclear power over night.  Not a good idea.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You only proved that you don't know jack shit about fusion.  Just about everything you posted is wrong.  The size of the reactors is not so they can withstand continual operation.  None of the experimental reactors have ever sustained a fusion reaction for more than a few seconds.  "Let it race" means nothing in the case of fusion.  As I previously noted, they can't get the reaction to sustain for more than a few seconds.  Fusion is not self sustaining.  It takes massive amounts of electricity to make it happen.
> 
> I could go on and on, but everyone reading this will know that you are an ignoramus.
Click to expand...



You need to study some physics, and listen when someone with a physics degree tries to explain it to you.
If what you claimed was true, that fusion can not get into a race chain reaction, then a hydrogen bomb would not be possible.
But it clearly is.
Fusion will initiate a chain reaction that accelerates until fuel runs out.
It is not at all difficult to start a thermonuclear chain reaction.
Fusion clearly IS self sustaining.

What you are getting confused by is that fusion normally wants to accelerate.
What makes fusion reactors fail and shut down, is that we don't want to let them accelerate, because that would destroy the facility. 
So they try to limit the fuel supply to the very minimal.
And that does not work.
The reaction gets poisoned by mechanisms unknown.

If you want a different perspective to help clear out some of your obvious misconceptions, look up Philo T. Farnsworth, and his early fusion device, the Farnsworth Fusor.

Fusor - Wikipedia

The Fusor works, and does implement fusion.  But it constantly shuts down due to unknown mechanisms.  So all they can use it for is sterilization of MREs and other perishable food storage.
But imagine if someone ever figured out why it shuts down, and eliminates that?
There is nothing more terrifying than that prospect.


----------



## Rigby5

sealybobo said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is that why you, a union public school teacher is a Republican?  They've convinced you that Democrats are communists?  Boy are you fucking stupid.
> 
> Have you started a thread on this subject?  I'd love for you to explain how my "masters" are communists.
> 
> I thought Democrats were in bed with the rich?  I thought it was them who widened the gap between the rich and poor.  THat's at least the stupid claim Republicans make.  Now you are suggesting that we want to take the rich people's money and spread it around so that a doctor makes as much as a lowly public school teacher?
> 
> Who is saying that?  No one.  Maybe you need to re educate yourself.  Maybe as a wrestler you were dropped on your head too many times.
> 
> 
> 
> The leaders of any supposed communist nation are all the rich.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well trying to shrink the income inequality in this country or trying to shrink the gap between rich and poor isn't communism but that's what rich Republicans will tell you.
> 
> Gap between rich and poor continues to widen, latest Fed data show
> 
> What are Republicans doing about it?  In 2016 they blamed Obama for it but now what are they doing to fix this problem?  Or, now that Republicans are in charge, like the debt, this is no longer a problem.  It was only a problem when Democrats were in charge.  Blame Obama.  But then don't give him credit for anything.  Just blame.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Democrats blame Republicans and the Republicans blame the Democrats and spending and deficits only matter to the party not in charge. I see no difference in the two parties.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, both parties actually have nearly identical policies when it comes to important things like war, over spending, lying, the war on drugs, overly expensive health care, high tuition, lack of affordable housing, etc.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, we didn't invade Iraq the Republicans did.  They tried to get us to but we wouldn't bite.  And Trump will drop a bomb on a country if it bombs it's citizens with chemical weapons.  Boy if that wasn't a fake ass made up story designed to make Trump look better I don't know what is.
> 
> Overspending?  What do Democrats overspend on? Infrastructure, social security, schools so that you can afford to go to them?
> 
> Obama and Hillary lied 1/10th the amount Trump has yet you guys think this is apples to apples.
> 
> War on drugs?
> *How Obama quietly reshaped America’s war on drugs*
> *Obama’s drug war legacy is underappreciated. But it now hangs in the balance — thanks to Trump.*
> 
> *How Obama quietly reshaped America’s war on drugs*
> 
> *We want single payer.  If you could have gotten 5 Republicans to go along we'd have it.*
> 
> *We are the party that wants to lower college tuition.  Are you kidding with this one???*
> 
> *Lack of affordable housing?  I didn't know this was even a problem other than for poor people.  Are you poor?  Then you certainly shouldn't be voting Republican.*
> 
> *If you don't see the difference that's probably why they will never solve these problems.  Why should they when they can just keep you in a constant state of confusion?*
Click to expand...


You will find that it was Hillary and Kerry that caused the Republicans to get the votes needed to invade Iraq.
The dems were just as bad on that.

With the war on drugs, whether Obama did better or not, it was the Clintons who put the minor drug offenders in federal prisons with the 1994 Federal Crime Bill.

Don't know about single payer, except that it was in there originally, and no one seemed to fight for it.

We have the lowest level of owner occupied housing in history, and in the civilized world.
Slightly under 50%.  Most counties have more like 90% owner occupied.
It is mostly unfair tax laws that favor landlords, that make housing unaffordable.

I am  not confused at all.
The dems no longer support working class, unions, jobs, housing, food, medical care, etc.
Instead they support war overseas like in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Egypt, Syrian, Iran, etc., and war at home with gun confiscation.


----------



## sealybobo

Rigby5 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> The leaders of any supposed communist nation are all the rich.
> 
> 
> 
> Well trying to shrink the income inequality in this country or trying to shrink the gap between rich and poor isn't communism but that's what rich Republicans will tell you.
> 
> Gap between rich and poor continues to widen, latest Fed data show
> 
> What are Republicans doing about it?  In 2016 they blamed Obama for it but now what are they doing to fix this problem?  Or, now that Republicans are in charge, like the debt, this is no longer a problem.  It was only a problem when Democrats were in charge.  Blame Obama.  But then don't give him credit for anything.  Just blame.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Democrats blame Republicans and the Republicans blame the Democrats and spending and deficits only matter to the party not in charge. I see no difference in the two parties.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, both parties actually have nearly identical policies when it comes to important things like war, over spending, lying, the war on drugs, overly expensive health care, high tuition, lack of affordable housing, etc.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, we didn't invade Iraq the Republicans did.  They tried to get us to but we wouldn't bite.  And Trump will drop a bomb on a country if it bombs it's citizens with chemical weapons.  Boy if that wasn't a fake ass made up story designed to make Trump look better I don't know what is.
> 
> Overspending?  What do Democrats overspend on? Infrastructure, social security, schools so that you can afford to go to them?
> 
> Obama and Hillary lied 1/10th the amount Trump has yet you guys think this is apples to apples.
> 
> War on drugs?
> *How Obama quietly reshaped America’s war on drugs*
> *Obama’s drug war legacy is underappreciated. But it now hangs in the balance — thanks to Trump.*
> 
> *How Obama quietly reshaped America’s war on drugs*
> 
> *We want single payer.  If you could have gotten 5 Republicans to go along we'd have it.*
> 
> *We are the party that wants to lower college tuition.  Are you kidding with this one???*
> 
> *Lack of affordable housing?  I didn't know this was even a problem other than for poor people.  Are you poor?  Then you certainly shouldn't be voting Republican.*
> 
> *If you don't see the difference that's probably why they will never solve these problems.  Why should they when they can just keep you in a constant state of confusion?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You will find that it was Hillary and Kerry that caused the Republicans to get the votes needed to invade Iraq.
> The dems were just as bad on that.
> 
> With the war on drugs, whether Obama did better or not, it was the Clintons who put the minor drug offenders in federal prisons with the 1994 Federal Crime Bill.
> 
> Don't know about single payer, except that it was in there originally, and no one seemed to fight for it.
> 
> We have the lowest level of owner occupied housing in history, and in the civilized world.
> Slightly under 50%.  Most counties have more like 90% owner occupied.
> It is mostly unfair tax laws that favor landlords, that make housing unaffordable.
> 
> I am  not confused at all.
> The dems no longer support working class, unions, jobs, housing, food, medical care, etc.
> Instead they support war overseas like in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Egypt, Syrian, Iran, etc., and war at home with gun confiscation.
Click to expand...

You fail to acknowledge they were lied to too


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No. Developed nations are more at risk of declining native born populations as the birth rate is below the replacement rate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ...
> 
> I get mad at foreigners who come here and want their kids to only date their kind...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You get mad because no one will date you.
Click to expand...

I had a date last night and we’re going boating Sunday loser no one really loves. You’re a paycheck.


----------



## Papageorgio

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> See here's another person saying that we aren't overpopulated, we just haven't engineered a solution to the fact that we are overpopulated.
> 
> 
> If we had 1 million people on this planet we wouldn't need to worry about man's ability or inability to manage resources.
> 
> Sure we could go to 100% renewable energy and make room for another 100 million people.  But then eventually we will run out of things like water and sand.  Ok so then you will learn to turn salt water into drinking water and then we can pack on another 100 million pounds worth of people.
> 
> Or we could stop having so many kids and this planet can stay beautiful longer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a another person claiming I said something I didn’t. I didn’t say we were or weren’t over populated, I criticized man’s greed of not managing resources. And if you had only a million people you would still worry about resources and mismanagement. If all that are complaining about over population committed suicide, we wouldn’t have this problem. Maybe you need to reconsider gun control, the more violence the less population.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yea but I don't want innocent people who are already living hurt.  I just want all the poor people who can't afford to have kids without foodstamps or welfare to stop having kids.  That's it.  Is that wrong?  We all want that don't we?  I don't know why I'm the bad guy for saying we should have 13.2 million less people running around America right now.
> 
> There were 13,253,000 children living in poverty in 2016
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I never said you are a bad guy. Just get sterlized.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No need. His personality and proclivities achieve the same results.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I’m helping the planet and Mother Nature. We have too many humans now just ask all the other animals who’ve gone extinct because of us.
> 
> Unkotare thinks every baby is so precious they are worth the bio diversity we once had???  I think also those extinct species were more precious
> 
> And what about the future? We should never run out of natural resources
Click to expand...


If every human is ruining the earth as you claimed, then you aren’t helping, you are hurting the planet.


----------



## Papageorgio

sealybobo said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well trying to shrink the income inequality in this country or trying to shrink the gap between rich and poor isn't communism but that's what rich Republicans will tell you.
> 
> Gap between rich and poor continues to widen, latest Fed data show
> 
> What are Republicans doing about it?  In 2016 they blamed Obama for it but now what are they doing to fix this problem?  Or, now that Republicans are in charge, like the debt, this is no longer a problem.  It was only a problem when Democrats were in charge.  Blame Obama.  But then don't give him credit for anything.  Just blame.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Democrats blame Republicans and the Republicans blame the Democrats and spending and deficits only matter to the party not in charge. I see no difference in the two parties.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, both parties actually have nearly identical policies when it comes to important things like war, over spending, lying, the war on drugs, overly expensive health care, high tuition, lack of affordable housing, etc.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, we didn't invade Iraq the Republicans did.  They tried to get us to but we wouldn't bite.  And Trump will drop a bomb on a country if it bombs it's citizens with chemical weapons.  Boy if that wasn't a fake ass made up story designed to make Trump look better I don't know what is.
> 
> Overspending?  What do Democrats overspend on? Infrastructure, social security, schools so that you can afford to go to them?
> 
> Obama and Hillary lied 1/10th the amount Trump has yet you guys think this is apples to apples.
> 
> War on drugs?
> *How Obama quietly reshaped America’s war on drugs*
> *Obama’s drug war legacy is underappreciated. But it now hangs in the balance — thanks to Trump.*
> 
> *How Obama quietly reshaped America’s war on drugs*
> 
> *We want single payer.  If you could have gotten 5 Republicans to go along we'd have it.*
> 
> *We are the party that wants to lower college tuition.  Are you kidding with this one???*
> 
> *Lack of affordable housing?  I didn't know this was even a problem other than for poor people.  Are you poor?  Then you certainly shouldn't be voting Republican.*
> 
> *If you don't see the difference that's probably why they will never solve these problems.  Why should they when they can just keep you in a constant state of confusion?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You will find that it was Hillary and Kerry that caused the Republicans to get the votes needed to invade Iraq.
> The dems were just as bad on that.
> 
> With the war on drugs, whether Obama did better or not, it was the Clintons who put the minor drug offenders in federal prisons with the 1994 Federal Crime Bill.
> 
> Don't know about single payer, except that it was in there originally, and no one seemed to fight for it.
> 
> We have the lowest level of owner occupied housing in history, and in the civilized world.
> Slightly under 50%.  Most counties have more like 90% owner occupied.
> It is mostly unfair tax laws that favor landlords, that make housing unaffordable.
> 
> I am  not confused at all.
> The dems no longer support working class, unions, jobs, housing, food, medical care, etc.
> Instead they support war overseas like in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Egypt, Syrian, Iran, etc., and war at home with gun confiscation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You fail to acknowledge they were lied to too
Click to expand...


Kerry, Bill and Hillary Clinton and Gore had first hand knowledge, so no they weren’t lied to, you are the one lying.


----------



## bripat9643

Rigby5 said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't believe it's unlikely that we'll develop fusion.  Progress has been getting more rapid every year.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am very, very skeptical.
> They have been claiming big breakthroughs and right around the corner for over 50 years now with fusion.
> I think the reason it will never happen is that if fusion ever because easy, like the "Mr. Fusion" added to the DeLorean on the one of the "Back to the Future" movies, then everyone would have a potential city destroying weapon.
> 
> Anyway, the point is we are relying totally on fossil fuels that concentrate millions of years of sunlight energy in very small space, and is rapidly running out.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Fusion cannot be made into a bomb.  You obviously understand nothing about the process.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Fusion can ALWAYS be made into a bomb!
> What you forget is that the size of current fusion reactors is so that they can withstand continual operation, and produce significant continual results.  The reality is that once the process is ever perfected, micro miniaturization for a weapon, would be trivial.
> Just because it is easy to shut down fusion experiments by cutting off the deuterium and tritium fuel, that does not mean it is not just as easy to let it race.  Unlike fission, there no critical mass required.  If it is self sustaining, all you need is the tiniest start and enough deuterium and tritium.  Magnetic containment is just to allow it to continue while fuel starved.  Without fuel starvation, you don't need magnetic containment.  So much excess heat would be generated so quickly that it does not need to be or even could be contained.
> 
> For example, what if they discovered a way of initiating fusion with just a couple of lasers?  The technology could be so cheap and easy, Uganda even could become a thermonuclear power over night.  Not a good idea.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You only proved that you don't know jack shit about fusion.  Just about everything you posted is wrong.  The size of the reactors is not so they can withstand continual operation.  None of the experimental reactors have ever sustained a fusion reaction for more than a few seconds.  "Let it race" means nothing in the case of fusion.  As I previously noted, they can't get the reaction to sustain for more than a few seconds.  Fusion is not self sustaining.  It takes massive amounts of electricity to make it happen.
> 
> I could go on and on, but everyone reading this will know that you are an ignoramus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You need to study some physics, and listen when someone with a physics degree tries to explain it to you.
> If what you claimed was true, that fusion can not get into a race chain reaction, then a hydrogen bomb would not be possible.
> But it clearly is.
> Fusion will initiate a chain reaction that accelerates until fuel runs out.
> It is not at all difficult to start a thermonuclear chain reaction.
> Fusion clearly IS self sustaining.
Click to expand...



Are you trying to tell me you have a degree in physics?   Really?





Thermonuclear bombs work because of "nuclear" part, dumbass.  You need a nuclear explosion to trigger the fusion reaction, and nothing short of that. There is also nothing called a "race chain reaction."  There are chain reactions.  That's it.



Rigby5 said:


> What you are getting confused by is that fusion normally wants to accelerate.
> What makes fusion reactors fail and shut down, is that we don't want to let them accelerate, because that would destroy the facility.
> So they try to limit the fuel supply to the very minimal.
> And that does not work.
> The reaction gets poisoned by mechanisms unknown.
> 
> If you want a different perspective to help clear out some of your obvious misconceptions, look up Philo T. Farnsworth, and his early fusion device, the Farnsworth Fusor.
> 
> Fusor - Wikipedia
> 
> The Fusor works, and does implement fusion.  But it constantly shuts down due to unknown mechanisms.  So all they can use it for is sterilization of MREs and other perishable food storage.
> But imagine if someone ever figured out why it shuts down, and eliminates that?
> There is nothing more terrifying than that prospect.



If the fusor can keep a fusion reaction going, then where's the evidence for this so-called "fusion chain reaction" you keep claiming exists?


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well trying to shrink the income inequality in this country or trying to shrink the gap between rich and poor isn't communism but that's what rich Republicans will tell you.
> 
> Gap between rich and poor continues to widen, latest Fed data show
> 
> What are Republicans doing about it?  In 2016 they blamed Obama for it but now what are they doing to fix this problem?  Or, now that Republicans are in charge, like the debt, this is no longer a problem.  It was only a problem when Democrats were in charge.  Blame Obama.  But then don't give him credit for anything.  Just blame.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Democrats blame Republicans and the Republicans blame the Democrats and spending and deficits only matter to the party not in charge. I see no difference in the two parties.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, both parties actually have nearly identical policies when it comes to important things like war, over spending, lying, the war on drugs, overly expensive health care, high tuition, lack of affordable housing, etc.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, we didn't invade Iraq the Republicans did.  They tried to get us to but we wouldn't bite.  And Trump will drop a bomb on a country if it bombs it's citizens with chemical weapons.  Boy if that wasn't a fake ass made up story designed to make Trump look better I don't know what is.
> 
> Overspending?  What do Democrats overspend on? Infrastructure, social security, schools so that you can afford to go to them?
> 
> Obama and Hillary lied 1/10th the amount Trump has yet you guys think this is apples to apples.
> 
> War on drugs?
> *How Obama quietly reshaped America’s war on drugs*
> *Obama’s drug war legacy is underappreciated. But it now hangs in the balance — thanks to Trump.*
> 
> *How Obama quietly reshaped America’s war on drugs*
> 
> *We want single payer.  If you could have gotten 5 Republicans to go along we'd have it.*
> 
> *We are the party that wants to lower college tuition.  Are you kidding with this one???*
> 
> *Lack of affordable housing?  I didn't know this was even a problem other than for poor people.  Are you poor?  Then you certainly shouldn't be voting Republican.*
> 
> *If you don't see the difference that's probably why they will never solve these problems.  Why should they when they can just keep you in a constant state of confusion?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You will find that it was Hillary and Kerry that caused the Republicans to get the votes needed to invade Iraq.
> The dems were just as bad on that.
> 
> With the war on drugs, whether Obama did better or not, it was the Clintons who put the minor drug offenders in federal prisons with the 1994 Federal Crime Bill.
> 
> Don't know about single payer, except that it was in there originally, and no one seemed to fight for it.
> 
> We have the lowest level of owner occupied housing in history, and in the civilized world.
> Slightly under 50%.  Most counties have more like 90% owner occupied.
> It is mostly unfair tax laws that favor landlords, that make housing unaffordable.
> 
> I am  not confused at all.
> The dems no longer support working class, unions, jobs, housing, food, medical care, etc.
> Instead they support war overseas like in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Egypt, Syrian, Iran, etc., and war at home with gun confiscation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You fail to acknowledge they were lied to too
Click to expand...




  democrats


----------



## there4eyeM

The two party dictatorship is no joke.


----------



## boedicca

sealybobo said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No. Developed nations are more at risk of declining native born populations as the birth rate is below the replacement rate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Who cares what nationality Americans will be in 200 years? One time Greeks and Italians were blonde hair and blue eyed. Are Greeks and Italians today not proud of who they are?
> 
> I see your ancestors worrying about the white race. Let it go. Assimilate. We tell the blacks and foreigners and even the native Americans to assimilate well we have to realize our white kids are in a melting pot.
> 
> I get mad at foreigners who come here and want their kids to only date their kind. Well why did you bring them here?  But don’t get mad when you see foreigners sticking together because you do the same thing. You want your daughters to marry aryans
Click to expand...



Oh blah blah blah nonsense nonsense nonsense.

Here's a clue bub:  culture matters.   There is a fine line between immigration and invasion.  When immigrants do not learn the language and do not accept the basic values of our culture, what makes the U.S. the most successful country in modern history will be destroyed.  This is not a race issue; it is one of preserving our culture.

And you know nothing about my ancestors, so frell off.


----------



## boedicca

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No. Developed nations are more at risk of declining native born populations as the birth rate is below the replacement rate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ...
> 
> I get mad at foreigners who come here and want their kids to only date their kind...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You get mad because no one will date you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I had a date last night and we’re going boating Sunday loser no one really loves. You’re a paycheck.
Click to expand...



Nobody wants your date except losers, bub - but she will be quite useful as a floatation device if your boat capsizes.


----------



## sealybobo

boedicca said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No. Developed nations are more at risk of declining native born populations as the birth rate is below the replacement rate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Who cares what nationality Americans will be in 200 years? One time Greeks and Italians were blonde hair and blue eyed. Are Greeks and Italians today not proud of who they are?
> 
> I see your ancestors worrying about the white race. Let it go. Assimilate. We tell the blacks and foreigners and even the native Americans to assimilate well we have to realize our white kids are in a melting pot.
> 
> I get mad at foreigners who come here and want their kids to only date their kind. Well why did you bring them here?  But don’t get mad when you see foreigners sticking together because you do the same thing. You want your daughters to marry aryans
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Oh blah blah blah nonsense nonsense nonsense.
> 
> Here's a clue bub:  culture matters.   There is a fine line between immigration and invasion.  When immigrants do not learn the language and do not accept the basic values of our culture, what makes the U.S. the most successful country in modern history will be destroyed.  This is not a race issue; it is one of preserving our culture.
> 
> And you know nothing about my ancestors, so frell off.
Click to expand...

Nonsense. The parents, maybe even the kids will hold on to the culture but the grandkids will be 100% Americans no matter how they look.


----------



## sealybobo

there4eyeM said:


> The two party dictatorship is no joke.


The 3 party systems even worse


----------



## sealybobo

boedicca said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No. Developed nations are more at risk of declining native born populations as the birth rate is below the replacement rate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ...
> 
> I get mad at foreigners who come here and want their kids to only date their kind...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You get mad because no one will date you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I had a date last night and we’re going boating Sunday loser no one really loves. You’re a paycheck.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Nobody wants your date except losers, bub - but she will be quite useful as a floatation device if your boat capsizes.
> 
> View attachment 207363
Click to expand...

I wish I could post pics. Her body is a 8 and her face a 7. Me being 47 to me she’s a 9 body and 8 face. She’s still perfect. No age flaws yet. I remember when I first met her. I would have never dreamed that hot young girl would blow and fuck me. No way.


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> No. Developed nations are more at risk of declining native born populations as the birth rate is below the replacement rate.
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> I get mad at foreigners who come here and want their kids to only date their kind...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You get mad because no one will date you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I had a date last night and we’re going boating Sunday loser no one really loves. You’re a paycheck.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Nobody wants your date except losers, bub - but she will be quite useful as a floatation device if your boat capsizes.
> 
> View attachment 207363
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I wish I could post pics. Her body is a 8 and her face a 7. Me being 47 to me she’s a 9 body and 8 face. She’s still perfect. No age flaws yet. I remember when I first met her. I would have never dreamed that hot young girl would blow and fuck me. No way.
Click to expand...




Comments like this are how we know for sure you are either a 13-year-old virgin or a sad old closeted queen.


----------



## bripat9643

sealybobo said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No. Developed nations are more at risk of declining native born populations as the birth rate is below the replacement rate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Who cares what nationality Americans will be in 200 years? One time Greeks and Italians were blonde hair and blue eyed. Are Greeks and Italians today not proud of who they are?
> 
> I see your ancestors worrying about the white race. Let it go. Assimilate. We tell the blacks and foreigners and even the native Americans to assimilate well we have to realize our white kids are in a melting pot.
> 
> I get mad at foreigners who come here and want their kids to only date their kind. Well why did you bring them here?  But don’t get mad when you see foreigners sticking together because you do the same thing. You want your daughters to marry aryans
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Oh blah blah blah nonsense nonsense nonsense.
> 
> Here's a clue bub:  culture matters.   There is a fine line between immigration and invasion.  When immigrants do not learn the language and do not accept the basic values of our culture, what makes the U.S. the most successful country in modern history will be destroyed.  This is not a race issue; it is one of preserving our culture.
> 
> And you know nothing about my ancestors, so frell off.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nonsense. The parents, maybe even the kids will hold on to the culture but the grandkids will be 100% Americans no matter how they look.
Click to expand...

Not if the live in a neighborhood where all the signs are in Spanish, the schools teach in Spanish and everyone speaks Spanish.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> I get mad at foreigners who come here and want their kids to only date their kind...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You get mad because no one will date you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I had a date last night and we’re going boating Sunday loser no one really loves. You’re a paycheck.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Nobody wants your date except losers, bub - but she will be quite useful as a floatation device if your boat capsizes.
> 
> View attachment 207363
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I wish I could post pics. Her body is a 8 and her face a 7. Me being 47 to me she’s a 9 body and 8 face. She’s still perfect. No age flaws yet. I remember when I first met her. I would have never dreamed that hot young girl would blow and fuck me. No way.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Comments like this are how we know for sure you are either a 13-year-old virgin or a sad old closeted queen.
Click to expand...

Just being honest. I’ve never told a lie. Wait. That’s a lie


----------



## boedicca

sealybobo said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No. Developed nations are more at risk of declining native born populations as the birth rate is below the replacement rate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Who cares what nationality Americans will be in 200 years? One time Greeks and Italians were blonde hair and blue eyed. Are Greeks and Italians today not proud of who they are?
> 
> I see your ancestors worrying about the white race. Let it go. Assimilate. We tell the blacks and foreigners and even the native Americans to assimilate well we have to realize our white kids are in a melting pot.
> 
> I get mad at foreigners who come here and want their kids to only date their kind. Well why did you bring them here?  But don’t get mad when you see foreigners sticking together because you do the same thing. You want your daughters to marry aryans
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Oh blah blah blah nonsense nonsense nonsense.
> 
> Here's a clue bub:  culture matters.   There is a fine line between immigration and invasion.  When immigrants do not learn the language and do not accept the basic values of our culture, what makes the U.S. the most successful country in modern history will be destroyed.  This is not a race issue; it is one of preserving our culture.
> 
> And you know nothing about my ancestors, so frell off.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nonsense. The parents, maybe even the kids will hold on to the culture but the grandkids will be 100% Americans no matter how they look.
Click to expand...



You're not very bright, bub.


----------



## Lysistrata

This question was raised 50 years ago. The "conservatives" voted for overpopulation and against ZPG.


----------



## Unkotare

bripat9643 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No. Developed nations are more at risk of declining native born populations as the birth rate is below the replacement rate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Who cares what nationality Americans will be in 200 years? One time Greeks and Italians were blonde hair and blue eyed. Are Greeks and Italians today not proud of who they are?
> 
> I see your ancestors worrying about the white race. Let it go. Assimilate. We tell the blacks and foreigners and even the native Americans to assimilate well we have to realize our white kids are in a melting pot.
> 
> I get mad at foreigners who come here and want their kids to only date their kind. Well why did you bring them here?  But don’t get mad when you see foreigners sticking together because you do the same thing. You want your daughters to marry aryans
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Oh blah blah blah nonsense nonsense nonsense.
> 
> Here's a clue bub:  culture matters.   There is a fine line between immigration and invasion.  When immigrants do not learn the language and do not accept the basic values of our culture, what makes the U.S. the most successful country in modern history will be destroyed.  This is not a race issue; it is one of preserving our culture.
> 
> And you know nothing about my ancestors, so frell off.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nonsense. The parents, maybe even the kids will hold on to the culture but the grandkids will be 100% Americans no matter how they look.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not if the live in a neighborhood where all the signs are in Spanish, the schools teach in Spanish and everyone speaks Spanish.
Click to expand...



Yes, they will. And they will move out of that neighborhood.


----------



## Unkotare

Lysistrata said:


> This question was raised 50 years ago. The "conservatives" voted for overpopulation and against ZPG.




There is no overpopulation.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> 
> This question was raised 50 years ago. The "conservatives" voted for overpopulation and against ZPG.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is no overpopulation.
Click to expand...

Yes there is. If poured mountains of evidence on your dumb ass and you see no problem with the fact we are overpopulated.

And I’m glad this may be reversing. Low birth rates to replace all the baby boomers who are dying. This is great for our species.


----------



## sealybobo

What’s good for business isn’t always good for us humans or the planet


----------



## Lysistrata

The "conservatives" have wanted over-population for 50 years now. They are still at it. Just look at the policies they support. Us normal people want what the planet can sustain. To the "conservatives," it's just baby after baby after baby and then nothing about how the the world sustains these babies' lives;


----------



## Unkotare

Unkotare said:


> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> 
> This question was raised 50 years ago. The "conservatives" voted for overpopulation and against ZPG.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is no overpopulation.
Click to expand...

.


----------



## Lysistrata

The earths population is growing beyond sustainability. But the "conservatives" want it to grow beyond.


----------



## Unkotare

Lysistrata said:


> The earths population is growing beyond sustainability...




No it’s not.


----------



## xyz

Unkotare said:


> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> 
> The earths population is growing beyond sustainability...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No it’s not.
Click to expand...

Depends on how humanity is going to continue to manage pollutants. 

Unsurvivable heatwaves could strike heart of China by end of century


----------



## Unkotare

xyz said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> 
> The earths population is growing beyond sustainability...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No it’s not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Depends on how humanity is going to continue to manage pollutants.
> 
> Unsurvivable heatwaves could strike heart of China by end of century
Click to expand...




Imperfectly, but we’ll carry on.


----------



## Lysistrata

xyz said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> 
> The earths population is growing beyond sustainability...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No it’s not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Depends on how humanity is going to continue to manage pollutants.
> 
> Unsurvivable heatwaves could strike heart of China by end of century
Click to expand...


It is so disturbing that humankind is not making progress on several fronts. Even more disturbing that millions of people are spreading the story that problems like this do not actually exist. Heat waves, wildfires, hurricanes, plastics being found in the stomachs of dead aquatic creatures, plastics coming out of the ocean. It's time to get real on these and so many other issues. We adults forget that we are leaving this planet to the grand-kids.


----------



## Unkotare

It’s disturbing that so many suckers are still swallowing a false crisis from decades ago.


----------



## Maggdy

JQPublic1 said:


> Some scholarly calculations indicate the state of Texas could hold the entire human population of the earth. And, it wouldn't be standing room only!




Texas is a beautiful and giant area. I really like this.


----------



## oreo

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?



I think we're already overpopulated.  Someone day we'll have to do what China did.  ONE kid ONLY.


----------



## Rigby5

g5000 said:


> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> I think resource distribution is the problem, not over-population.
> 
> There is plenty of food to go around for everyone.  It just doesn't get to everywhere it is needed, for various reasons.
> 
> So, no.  We do not have an over-population problem at this time.
> 
> The first real crush we will feel, as far as population goes, will be sources of fresh water.   We are going to need to find a way to economically desalinate ocean water in the near future, I think.
Click to expand...



No, there is not plenty of food at all.
Food is essentially being grown artificially with fertilizers made out of fossil fuel.  That won't last more than another 100 years, and then there will be huge starvation, wars over remaining fossil fuels, etc.
Malthus was right, and only delayed by the massive waste of fossil fuel for fertilizer and shipping.  
Instead of Europe starving when it should have, Europe used colonialism and imperialism to steal food from all over the world.
But that will not last either.


----------



## Rigby5

peach174 said:


> Nature will always balance itself out with epidemics, be it animals or humans.
> We are not over populated.



That is not true.
Nature does not always balance out.
Nature simply is what ever happens, and more often than not, species go extinct, which does not at all seem balanced to me.
Almost all species that ever existed have gone extinct.
Clearly the human race is desperately trying to go extinct, and likely will succeed as well.


----------



## there4eyeM

As with many species that evolved one attribute at the expense of survival, humans have excessive brain development. That is to say, we are smart enough to get ourselves into enormous trouble and not smart enough to avoid it.


----------



## Windparadox

`
Given the historic human condition for self-destruction, I'm not worried about overpopulation.


----------



## Snouter

Non-White savages are procreating because of White generosity (stupidity).


----------



## bripat9643

oreo said:


> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think we're already overpopulated.  Someone day we'll have to do what China did.  ONE kid ONLY.
Click to expand...

But you defend open borders.  How do you square those two positions?


----------



## bripat9643

Rigby5 said:


> peach174 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nature will always balance itself out with epidemics, be it animals or humans.
> We are not over populated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is not true.
> Nature does not always balance out.
> Nature simply is what ever happens, and more often than not, species go extinct, which does not at all seem balanced to me.
> Almost all species that ever existed have gone extinct.
> Clearly the human race is desperately trying to go extinct, and likely will succeed as well.
Click to expand...

When bacteria started producing oxygen, they almost killed off all life on the planet.


----------



## evenflow1969

LaDexter said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> We will NEVER use all the fresh water on this planet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So sayeth an idiot with no clue or basis to comment initially...
Click to expand...

He is an idiot no doubt.


----------



## Skull Pilot

g5000 said:


> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> I think resource distribution is the problem, not over-population.
> 
> There is plenty of food to go around for everyone.  It just doesn't get to everywhere it is needed, for various reasons.
> 
> So, no.  We do not have an over-population problem at this time.
> 
> The first real crush we will feel, as far as population goes, will be sources of fresh water.   We are going to need to find a way to economically desalinate ocean water in the near future, I think.
Click to expand...

if we need some sort of global food and water distribution then we are overpopulated.


----------



## there4eyeM

The population is so great that even a modest increase risks massive disaster and suffering. Humans can be so incredibly intelligent that it makes us wonder why so few are.


----------



## theHawk

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?



World population will probably top out at 11-13 billion, then will flatten out and even regress.


----------



## Unkotare

oreo said:


> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think we're already overpopulated.  Someone day we'll have to do what China did.  ONE kid ONLY.
Click to expand...



China had to repeal that stupid law, and now they are looking for ways to undo it. Dumbass.


----------



## Unkotare

evenflow1969 said:


> LaDexter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> We will NEVER use all the fresh water on this planet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So sayeth an idiot with no clue or basis to comment initially...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He is an idiot no doubt.
Click to expand...





Let me know when I’m wrong.


----------



## evenflow1969

Unkotare said:


> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LaDexter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> We will NEVER use all the fresh water on this planet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So sayeth an idiot with no clue or basis to comment initially...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He is an idiot no doubt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let me know when I’m wrong.
Click to expand...

All day every day.


----------



## Unkotare

evenflow1969 said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LaDexter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> We will NEVER use all the fresh water on this planet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So sayeth an idiot with no clue or basis to comment initially...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He is an idiot no doubt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let me know when I’m wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> All day every day.
Click to expand...




Is there fresh water on this planet?


----------



## Redfish

Lysistrata said:


> xyz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> 
> The earths population is growing beyond sustainability...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No it’s not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Depends on how humanity is going to continue to manage pollutants.
> 
> Unsurvivable heatwaves could strike heart of China by end of century
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is so disturbing that humankind is not making progress on several fronts. Even more disturbing that millions of people are spreading the story that problems like this do not actually exist. Heat waves, wildfires, hurricanes, plastics being found in the stomachs of dead aquatic creatures, plastics coming out of the ocean. It's time to get real on these and so many other issues. We adults forget that we are leaving this planet to the grand-kids.
Click to expand...



yes, and we need to concentrate on the real problem of pollution as well as overpopulation.  What detracts from those pursuits is the lefts obsession with the fake link between pollution and climate.  Get over that lie and focus on the real problems facing mankind.


----------



## Theowl32

I think the interesting question would be is how much land does one singular person need to survive/thrive? I think the answer to that question is very interesting. We are omnivores, and we need water. Less than 5% of the water on earth is suitable for humans. Most that, is frozen in the caps. How much land is needed for instance to plant crops of wheat, potatoes, on and on and on? How much land is needed to graze cattle? So, the answer to how much land a human needs is actually quite complicated. 

I am actually somewhat surprised we have not figured out a way to colonize the sea floor. There are massive seabeds that I am guessing would need to utilized at some point.

So, the answer to how much land one person needs is interesting based on how much land it takes to sustain human needs.


----------



## Redfish

Theowl32 said:


> I think the interesting question would be is how much land does one singular person need to survive/thrive? I think the answer to that question is very interesting. We are omnivores, and we need water. Less than 5% of the water on earth is suitable for humans. Most that, is frozen in the caps. How much land is needed for instance to plant crops of wheat, potatoes, on and on and on? How much land is needed to graze cattle? So, the answer to how much land a human needs is actually quite complicated.
> 
> I am actually somewhat surprised we have not figured out a way to colonize the sea floor. There are massive seabeds that I am guessing would need to utilized at some point.
> 
> So, the answer to how much land one person needs is interesting based on how much land it takes to sustain human needs.




very true and the amount of land needed for each human has been greatly reduced by modern technology.   But there are limits and we are approaching them very quickly.   We no longer have wars, diseases and famines to keep the population in check.   I don't have the answer but someone needs to figure it out.  Maybe another world war would save mankind,  hate to think of that but it might be the only answer.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

Silhouette said:


> Yes.  If we were animals on a farm or in an micro ecosystem, the "Farmer" would've culled most of us long ago.
> 
> Is The Reversible Vasectomy The Magic Bullet For A Thousand Ills? (Abortion, Single Moms, Etc.)



You would have been the first to go, right?


----------



## sealybobo

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?


Yes

Microplastics Are Turning Up Everywhere, Even In Human Excrement


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LaDexter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> We will NEVER use all the fresh water on this planet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So sayeth an idiot with no clue or basis to comment initially...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He is an idiot no doubt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let me know when I’m wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> All day every day.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is there fresh water on this planet?
Click to expand...

No.  It has microplastics in it.  

Microplastics Are Turning Up Everywhere, Even In Human Excrement


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> evenflow1969 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LaDexter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> We will NEVER use all the fresh water on this planet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So sayeth an idiot with no clue or basis to comment initially...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He is an idiot no doubt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let me know when I’m wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> All day every day.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is there fresh water on this planet?
Click to expand...

Here you go you stupid fuck.  

Beer, Drinking Water And Fish: Tiny Plastic Is Everywhere

So no.  There is no fresh water on this planet anymore.  Too many of us.


----------



## Toronado3800

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?



The U.S?  If we want to be a superpower then we are at the bottom end of our needed population.

How do I identify myself?  A human?  What are the choices here.


----------



## Unkotare

It’s official, Bobobrainless thinks we have no freshwater on earth. Amazing any of us are alive.


----------



## TheDude

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?



It's likely our biggest problem.  They're not being 100% truthful as to why we need to control our borders. Perhaps the biggest reason is over-population.


----------



## The Original Tree

It's better to let Honduras and Quatemala and other countries handle their own populations instead of exporting them elsewhere.


----------



## Unkotare

TheDude said:


> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's likely our biggest problem.  They're not being 100% truthful as to why we need to control our borders. Perhaps the biggest reason is over-population.
Click to expand...



False crisis. The challenges of the future will be about the opposite.


----------



## TheDude

Unkotare said:


> TheDude said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's likely our biggest problem.  They're not being 100% truthful as to why we need to control our borders. Perhaps the biggest reason is over-population.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> False crisis. The challenges of the future will be about the opposite.
Click to expand...


Other than perhaps a decline in white population, what's your point?


----------



## Unkotare

TheDude said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheDude said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's likely our biggest problem.  They're not being 100% truthful as to why we need to control our borders. Perhaps the biggest reason is over-population.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> False crisis. The challenges of the future will be about the opposite.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Other than perhaps a decline in white population, what's your point?
Click to expand...




Within a century, global population will be in precipitous decline.


----------



## TheDude

Unkotare said:


> TheDude said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheDude said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's likely our biggest problem.  They're not being 100% truthful as to why we need to control our borders. Perhaps the biggest reason is over-population.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> False crisis. The challenges of the future will be about the opposite.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Other than perhaps a decline in white population, what's your point?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Within a century, global population will be in precipitous decline.
Click to expand...


Why would that be?


----------



## Frankeneinstein

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?


California an NYC overpopulated, most other cities just about right, like the rest of the world America has a disproportionate amount of its population living on its borders while the interior is somewhat under-populated...I could be wrong about this so look it up but I believe I read some where that 80% of all life [human, animal, plant] lives within 300 miles of a shore line


----------



## Rosy

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?


If 30 million are allowed to come from central and south America 100 million will come from Asia, and if they are allowed to come here, another billion will follow


----------



## Unkotare

TheDude said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheDude said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheDude said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's likely our biggest problem.  They're not being 100% truthful as to why we need to control our borders. Perhaps the biggest reason is over-population.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> False crisis. The challenges of the future will be about the opposite.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Other than perhaps a decline in white population, what's your point?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Within a century, global population will be in precipitous decline.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why would that be?
Click to expand...





 Fertility rates are slowing if not falling all over the world already. It’s called demographics. Let go of the false crisis some knucklehead has been pushing on you since the 1970s.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> TheDude said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's likely our biggest problem.  They're not being 100% truthful as to why we need to control our borders. Perhaps the biggest reason is over-population.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> False crisis. The challenges of the future will be about the opposite.
Click to expand...


Nonsense.

This Is The Deadly Ocean Plastic Pollution You Never Hear About | HuffPost

While cities and businesses across the country move to cut down on ocean pollution by banning plastic straws, there’s an even bigger plastic crisis devastating marine ecosystems ― and most of us aren’t aware of it.

Each year, millions of tons of plastics end up in the oceans. Drinking straws are thought to make up less than 1 percent of that debris. By comparison, commercial fishing fleets lose or abandon more than 700,000 tons of plastic nets, lines and traps ― an estimated 10 percent of the plastic waste in the oceans and seas. 

Known as “ghost gear,” abandoned fishing items can be practically invisible in dim, underwater light, and each year they entangle and kill millions of marine animals, including sharks, dolphins, seals and turtles. The plastic these nets are made of will linger below the surface for hundreds of years, slowly degrading into small fragments and becoming part of the food chain. What’s more, there is no registry for fishing gear like nets, so ghost items can’t be traced back to the owner, allowing commercial fishers to escape accountability. 

And yes we could do something about this but that would require regulations and we know how you Republicans feel about Regulations.

“There needs to be a global registry of fishing gear. When the fishing communities buy their nets, it is logged and registered, and at the end of the useful life of the gear, they are responsible for returning it for recycling,” he said.


----------



## Unkotare

Funny how all these humans are still alive. According to chicken shit-his-pants little we should all be late term abortions by now.



Or.....the weepy purveyors of false crisis are as full of shit as Bobobrainless’s pants.


----------



## Unkotare

Humans have a responsibility to be good stewards of this world. So far, we are not doing a great job of it, but that doesn’t validate the false crisis of supposed “overpopulation.” 


P.S. We have a great deal of fresh water.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> Funny how all these humans are still alive. According to chicken shit-his-pants little we should all be late term abortions by now.
> 
> 
> 
> Or.....the weepy purveyors of false crisis are as full of shit as Bobobrainless’s pants.


Oh is that your conclusion?  Because humans are still alive that means we aren't overpopulated?  I can't wait to be able to tell you I told you so.  Oh wait.  That won't be until we are all dead.  I guess I'll never get to tell you I told you so.  It'll be too late you stupid fuck.  

If we could just get rid of these people

Nearly *1/2* of the world's population — more than *3 billion* people — live on less than $2.50 a day. More than *1.3 billion* live in extreme poverty — less than $1.25 a day. *1 billion* children worldwide are living in poverty. According to UNICEF, *22,000* children die each day due to poverty.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> Humans have a responsibility to be good stewards of this world. So far, we are not doing a great job of it, but that doesn’t validate the false crisis of supposed “overpopulation.”
> 
> 
> P.S. We have a great deal of fresh water.


With plastic in it. I showed you that yesterday.


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Humans have a responsibility to be good stewards of this world. So far, we are not doing a great job of it, but that doesn’t validate the false crisis of supposed “overpopulation.”
> 
> 
> P.S. We have a great deal of fresh water.
> 
> 
> 
> With plastic in it. I showed you that yesterday.
Click to expand...





With hydrogen and oxygen in it.


----------



## BrokeLoser

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Funny how all these humans are still alive. According to chicken shit-his-pants little we should all be late term abortions by now.
> 
> 
> 
> Or.....the weepy purveyors of false crisis are as full of shit as Bobobrainless’s pants.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh is that your conclusion?  Because humans are still alive that means we aren't overpopulated?  I can't wait to be able to tell you I told you so.  Oh wait.  That won't be until we are all dead.  I guess I'll never get to tell you I told you so.  It'll be too late you stupid fuck.
> 
> If we could just get rid of these people
> 
> Nearly *1/2* of the world's population — more than *3 billion* people — live on less than $2.50 a day. More than *1.3 billion* live in extreme poverty — less than $1.25 a day. *1 billion* children worldwide are living in poverty. According to UNICEF, *22,000* children die each day due to poverty.
Click to expand...


Weird how commie-lite, semi globalists, free shit beggars can’t wrap their tiny little minds around the supply vs. demand principle and how it applies to nearly everything.


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Funny how all these humans are still alive. According to chicken shit-his-pants little we should all be late term abortions by now.
> 
> 
> 
> Or.....the weepy purveyors of false crisis are as full of shit as Bobobrainless’s pants.
> 
> 
> 
> ....I guess I'll never get to tell you I told you so.  ,....
Click to expand...



Because you are wrong, as usual.


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Funny how all these humans are still alive. According to chicken shit-his-pants little we should all be late term abortions by now.
> 
> 
> 
> Or.....the weepy purveyors of false crisis are as full of shit as Bobobrainless’s pants.
> 
> 
> 
> .....
> 
> If we could just get rid of these people
> 
> ....
Click to expand...



The motto of the democrat party


----------



## sealybobo

BrokeLoser said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Funny how all these humans are still alive. According to chicken shit-his-pants little we should all be late term abortions by now.
> 
> 
> 
> Or.....the weepy purveyors of false crisis are as full of shit as Bobobrainless’s pants.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh is that your conclusion?  Because humans are still alive that means we aren't overpopulated?  I can't wait to be able to tell you I told you so.  Oh wait.  That won't be until we are all dead.  I guess I'll never get to tell you I told you so.  It'll be too late you stupid fuck.
> 
> If we could just get rid of these people
> 
> Nearly *1/2* of the world's population — more than *3 billion* people — live on less than $2.50 a day. More than *1.3 billion* live in extreme poverty — less than $1.25 a day. *1 billion* children worldwide are living in poverty. According to UNICEF, *22,000* children die each day due to poverty.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Weird how commie-lite, semi globalists, free shit beggars can’t wrap their tiny little minds around the supply vs. demand principle and how it applies to nearly everything.
Click to expand...

Explain


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Funny how all these humans are still alive. According to chicken shit-his-pants little we should all be late term abortions by now.
> 
> 
> 
> Or.....the weepy purveyors of false crisis are as full of shit as Bobobrainless’s pants.
> 
> 
> 
> .....
> 
> If we could just get rid of these people
> 
> ....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The motto of the democrat party
Click to expand...

I thought we wanted those people so they would vote Democratic?  Do you see how your party talks out of both sides of it's mouth?  First you say we want to kill these people then you say we want open borders so they'll come here and vote for us.

You make no sense but thanks for trying, a little.

I agree with you that people need to start taking personal responsibility for themselves.  No way anyone living on $2.50 a day can say they are taking personal responsibility if they have kids they can't afford to feed.  

No way anyone working at Walmart who has kids and is on food stamps is taking personal responsibility either.  The responsible thing for them to have done was not have those kids.  You must agree.  There is no other option.  

Remember, if they aren't taking welfare I don't care how many kids they have.  But how many of the American poor are not on some kind of public assistance?  How many babies are covered free in the ACA?  Those kids should have never been born.  Or they should not be getting government help to have health insurance.  Right?


----------



## beautress

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?


You know there is overpopulation when large cities send garbage out to sea to be dumped on the whales and dolphin's pristine domain.





​


----------



## Unkotare

Another failure of reading comprehension.


----------



## Unkotare

beautress said:


> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> You know there is overpopulation when large cities send garbage out to sea to be dumped on the whales and dolphin's pristine domain.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ​
Click to expand...




Illogical conclusion


----------



## Godboy

g5000 said:


> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> I think resource distribution is the problem, not over-population.
> 
> There is plenty of food to go around for everyone.  It just doesn't get to everywhere it is needed, for various reasons.
> 
> So, no.  We do not have an over-population problem at this time.
> 
> The first real crush we will feel, as far as population goes, will be sources of fresh water.   We are going to need to find a way to economically desalinate ocean water in the near future, I think.
Click to expand...

Its easier to distribute resources to a smaller number of people, no? That sounds like an overpopulation problem to me.


----------



## bripat9643

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheDude said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's likely our biggest problem.  They're not being 100% truthful as to why we need to control our borders. Perhaps the biggest reason is over-population.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> False crisis. The challenges of the future will be about the opposite.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nonsense.
> 
> This Is The Deadly Ocean Plastic Pollution You Never Hear About | HuffPost
> 
> While cities and businesses across the country move to cut down on ocean pollution by banning plastic straws, there’s an even bigger plastic crisis devastating marine ecosystems ― and most of us aren’t aware of it.
> 
> Each year, millions of tons of plastics end up in the oceans. Drinking straws are thought to make up less than 1 percent of that debris. By comparison, commercial fishing fleets lose or abandon more than 700,000 tons of plastic nets, lines and traps ― an estimated 10 percent of the plastic waste in the oceans and seas.
> 
> Known as “ghost gear,” abandoned fishing items can be practically invisible in dim, underwater light, and each year they entangle and kill millions of marine animals, including sharks, dolphins, seals and turtles. The plastic these nets are made of will linger below the surface for hundreds of years, slowly degrading into small fragments and becoming part of the food chain. What’s more, there is no registry for fishing gear like nets, so ghost items can’t be traced back to the owner, allowing commercial fishers to escape accountability.
> 
> And yes we could do something about this but that would require regulations and we know how you Republicans feel about Regulations.
> 
> “There needs to be a global registry of fishing gear. When the fishing communities buy their nets, it is logged and registered, and at the end of the useful life of the gear, they are responsible for returning it for recycling,” he said.
Click to expand...

90% of all ocean pollution  comes from 10 rivers in Asia and Africa.  Americans aren't the problem, so you're just wasting bandwidth.

90% of plastic polluting our oceans comes from just 10 rivers


----------



## frigidweirdo

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?



Yes, the world will end up at war over resources due to too many people wanting too much stuff.


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> TheDude said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheDude said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheDude said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's likely our biggest problem.  They're not being 100% truthful as to why we need to control our borders. Perhaps the biggest reason is over-population.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> False crisis. The challenges of the future will be about the opposite.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Other than perhaps a decline in white population, what's your point?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Within a century, global population will be in precipitous decline.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why would that be?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fertility rates are slowing if not falling all over the world already. It’s called demographics. Let go of the false crisis some knucklehead has been pushing on you since the 1970s.
Click to expand...

False, China is massively overpopulated due to high fertility.  Japan is about the only place where fertility is falling


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheDude said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheDude said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> False crisis. The challenges of the future will be about the opposite.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Other than perhaps a decline in white population, what's your point?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Within a century, global population will be in precipitous decline.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why would that be?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fertility rates are slowing if not falling all over the world already. It’s called demographics. Let go of the false crisis some knucklehead has been pushing on you since the 1970s.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> False, China is massively overpopulated due to high fertility.  Japan is about the only place where fertility is falling
Click to expand...




Ignorant and incorrect. Why not at least bother to check before posting?


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheDude said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheDude said:
> 
> 
> 
> Other than perhaps a decline in white population, what's your point?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Within a century, global population will be in precipitous decline.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why would that be?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fertility rates are slowing if not falling all over the world already. It’s called demographics. Let go of the false crisis some knucklehead has been pushing on you since the 1970s.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> False, China is massively overpopulated due to high fertility.  Japan is about the only place where fertility is falling
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ignorant and incorrect. Why not at least bother to check before posting?
Click to expand...

I am correct, and I also own your mind, all three cells


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheDude said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Within a century, global population will be in precipitous decline.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why would that be?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fertility rates are slowing if not falling all over the world already. It’s called demographics. Let go of the false crisis some knucklehead has been pushing on you since the 1970s.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> False, China is massively overpopulated due to high fertility.  Japan is about the only place where fertility is falling
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ignorant and incorrect. Why not at least bother to check before posting?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am correct, and I also own your mind, all three cells
Click to expand...






You are completely wrong. Fertility rates are falling in most of the developed, and much of the developing world. South Korea, Germany, etc. The US fell below replacement level fertility some 20 years ago. China is facing a dire population implosion.


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheDude said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why would that be?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fertility rates are slowing if not falling all over the world already. It’s called demographics. Let go of the false crisis some knucklehead has been pushing on you since the 1970s.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> False, China is massively overpopulated due to high fertility.  Japan is about the only place where fertility is falling
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ignorant and incorrect. Why not at least bother to check before posting?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am correct, and I also own your mind, all three cells
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are completely wrong.
Click to expand...

Says the genius who said that Trump could not win....

Yawning at the class clown


----------



## boedicca

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheDude said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's likely our biggest problem.  They're not being 100% truthful as to why we need to control our borders. Perhaps the biggest reason is over-population.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> False crisis. The challenges of the future will be about the opposite.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nonsense.
> 
> This Is The Deadly Ocean Plastic Pollution You Never Hear About | HuffPost
> 
> While cities and businesses across the country move to cut down on ocean pollution by banning plastic straws, there’s an even bigger plastic crisis devastating marine ecosystems ― and most of us aren’t aware of it.
> 
> Each year, millions of tons of plastics end up in the oceans. Drinking straws are thought to make up less than 1 percent of that debris. By comparison, commercial fishing fleets lose or abandon more than 700,000 tons of plastic nets, lines and traps ― an estimated 10 percent of the plastic waste in the oceans and seas.
> 
> Known as “ghost gear,” abandoned fishing items can be practically invisible in dim, underwater light, and each year they entangle and kill millions of marine animals, including sharks, dolphins, seals and turtles. The plastic these nets are made of will linger below the surface for hundreds of years, slowly degrading into small fragments and becoming part of the food chain. What’s more, there is no registry for fishing gear like nets, so ghost items can’t be traced back to the owner, allowing commercial fishers to escape accountability.
> 
> And yes we could do something about this but that would require regulations and we know how you Republicans feel about Regulations.
> 
> “There needs to be a global registry of fishing gear. When the fishing communities buy their nets, it is logged and registered, and at the end of the useful life of the gear, they are responsible for returning it for recycling,” he said.
Click to expand...



And most of that plastic comes from China, Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand and Vietnam - NOT the U.S.

5 countries dump more plastic into the oceans than the rest of the world combined


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fertility rates are slowing if not falling all over the world already. It’s called demographics. Let go of the false crisis some knucklehead has been pushing on you since the 1970s.
> 
> 
> 
> False, China is massively overpopulated due to high fertility.  Japan is about the only place where fertility is falling
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ignorant and incorrect. Why not at least bother to check before posting?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am correct, and I also own your mind, all three cells
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are completely wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Says the genius who said that Trump could not win....
> 
> Yawning at the class clown
Click to expand...



Link?


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> False, China is massively overpopulated due to high fertility.  Japan is about the only place where fertility is falling
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ignorant and incorrect. Why not at least bother to check before posting?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am correct, and I also own your mind, all three cells
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are completely wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Says the genius who said that Trump could not win....
> 
> Yawning at the class clown
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Link?
Click to expand...

I could provide hundreds of links that prove aliens and bigfoot, the fact is that only little kids like you demand links on the fake internet to prove stuff.

So grow up, and accept your place as a follower


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ignorant and incorrect. Why not at least bother to check before posting?
> 
> 
> 
> I am correct, and I also own your mind, all three cells
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are completely wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Says the genius who said that Trump could not win....
> 
> Yawning at the class clown
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Link?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I could provide hundreds of links that prove aliens and bigfoot, the fact is that only little kids like you demand links on the fake internet to prove stuff.
> 
> So grow up, and accept your place as a follower
Click to expand...





So, you were lying. Stop lying.


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am correct, and I also own your mind, all three cells
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are completely wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Says the genius who said that Trump could not win....
> 
> Yawning at the class clown
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Link?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I could provide hundreds of links that prove aliens and bigfoot, the fact is that only little kids like you demand links on the fake internet to prove stuff.
> 
> So grow up, and accept your place as a follower
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, you were lying. Stop lying.
Click to expand...

I never lie


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are completely wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> Says the genius who said that Trump could not win....
> 
> Yawning at the class clown
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Link?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I could provide hundreds of links that prove aliens and bigfoot, the fact is that only little kids like you demand links on the fake internet to prove stuff.
> 
> So grow up, and accept your place as a follower
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, you were lying. Stop lying.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I never lie
Click to expand...




Where’s the link, liar?


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Says the genius who said that Trump could not win....
> 
> Yawning at the class clown
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Link?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I could provide hundreds of links that prove aliens and bigfoot, the fact is that only little kids like you demand links on the fake internet to prove stuff.
> 
> So grow up, and accept your place as a follower
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, you were lying. Stop lying.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I never lie
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Where’s the link, liar?
Click to expand...

What link are you babbling about?   You better get your Trump Derangement Syndrome looked at

Do you suffer from Trump Derangement Syndrome?


----------



## TroglocratsRdumb




----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Link?
> 
> 
> 
> I could provide hundreds of links that prove aliens and bigfoot, the fact is that only little kids like you demand links on the fake internet to prove stuff.
> 
> So grow up, and accept your place as a follower
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, you were lying. Stop lying.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I never lie
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Where’s the link, liar?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What link are you babbling about?   You better get your Trump Derangement Syndrome looked at
> 
> Do you suffer from Trump Derangement Syndrome?
Click to expand...

 It seems you might be confused as to whom you are communicating with right now. You’re making no sense at all.


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> I could provide hundreds of links that prove aliens and bigfoot, the fact is that only little kids like you demand links on the fake internet to prove stuff.
> 
> So grow up, and accept your place as a follower
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, you were lying. Stop lying.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I never lie
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Where’s the link, liar?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What link are you babbling about?   You better get your Trump Derangement Syndrome looked at
> 
> Do you suffer from Trump Derangement Syndrome?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It seems you might be confused as to whom you are communicating with right now. You’re making no sense at all.
Click to expand...

LOL and you keep asking for a link, but you have no idea what you want a link too.

okeedokee


----------



## Rosy

TroglocratsRdumb said:


> View attachment 224777


Your graph is bullshit you are confusing population and growth rate, lol I am still never wrong
 kids

World Population and Growth Rate 1900 to 2050 – DSS Research


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, you were lying. Stop lying.
> 
> 
> 
> I never lie
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Where’s the link, liar?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What link are you babbling about?   You better get your Trump Derangement Syndrome looked at
> 
> Do you suffer from Trump Derangement Syndrome?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It seems you might be confused as to whom you are communicating with right now. You’re making no sense at all.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> LOL and you keep asking for a link, but you have no idea what you want a link too.
> 
> okeedokee
Click to expand...





Save yourself some trouble next time and don’t lie.


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> I never lie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Where’s the link, liar?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What link are you babbling about?   You better get your Trump Derangement Syndrome looked at
> 
> Do you suffer from Trump Derangement Syndrome?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It seems you might be confused as to whom you are communicating with right now. You’re making no sense at all.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> LOL and you keep asking for a link, but you have no idea what you want a link too.
> 
> okeedokee
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Save yourself some trouble next time and don’t lie.
Click to expand...

Says the dumbass who believes that the population of the Earth is falling.

Did you study to be so dumb, or is it natural


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> TroglocratsRdumb said:
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 224777
> 
> 
> 
> Your graph is bullshit you are confusing population and growth rate, lol I am still never wrong
> kids
> 
> World Population and Growth Rate 1900 to 2050 – DSS Research
Click to expand...



 No we know that demographics is another subject you don’t understand at all.


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Where’s the link, liar?
> 
> 
> 
> What link are you babbling about?   You better get your Trump Derangement Syndrome looked at
> 
> Do you suffer from Trump Derangement Syndrome?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It seems you might be confused as to whom you are communicating with right now. You’re making no sense at all.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> LOL and you keep asking for a link, but you have no idea what you want a link too.
> 
> okeedokee
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Save yourself some trouble next time and don’t lie.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Says the dumbass who believes that the population of the Earth is falling.
> 
> ...
Click to expand...



I didn’t say that, liar.


----------



## Paul Motter

I think the entire world is over-populated, but as things stand the only less populated continent per sq mile is South America. Asia is insanely crowded, and Africa has 3 times as many people as N. America.

So, I know that we are not relatively overpopulated, but I certainly would not want to be any more populated than we are now. I think a zero-growth policy would be a good idea. I don't believe we have any obligation to take on the problems of the whole world.


----------



## g5000

Rosy said:


> Japan is about the only place where fertility is falling


Allow me to show you what a link looks like.  I'll post one which proves you wrong:  U.S. Fertility Rate Fell to a Record Low, for a Second Straight Year

See how that works, liar?   You made a totally false statement and got caught.


----------



## g5000

Fertility Rate

_ Over the last 50 years the global fertility rate has halved. And over the course of the modernization of societies the number of children per woman decreases very substantially._


----------



## Paul Motter

g5000 said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Japan is about the only place where fertility is falling
> 
> 
> 
> Allow me to show you what a link looks like.  I'll post one which proves you wrong:  U.S. Fertility Rate Fell to a Record Low, for a Second Straight Year
> 
> See how that works, liar?   You made a totally false statement and got caught.
Click to expand...


Wow - do you always talk and interact like a third grade child - natter natter natter, I'm rubber you're glue, geeeesh!


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> What link are you babbling about?   You better get your Trump Derangement Syndrome looked at
> 
> Do you suffer from Trump Derangement Syndrome?
> 
> 
> 
> It seems you might be confused as to whom you are communicating with right now. You’re making no sense at all.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> LOL and you keep asking for a link, but you have no idea what you want a link too.
> 
> okeedokee
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Save yourself some trouble next time and don’t lie.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Says the dumbass who believes that the population of the Earth is falling.
> 
> ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I didn’t say that, liar.
Click to expand...

I said the population of the Earth is rising, except for in Japan.  You said I was wrong.

You are a typical college burning sociopath.

And please tell me I'm wrong, because what you say means so much to me


----------



## Rosy

Paul Motter said:


> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Japan is about the only place where fertility is falling
> 
> 
> 
> Allow me to show you what a link looks like.  I'll post one which proves you wrong:  U.S. Fertility Rate Fell to a Record Low, for a Second Straight Year
> 
> See how that works, liar?   You made a totally false statement and got caught.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wow - do you always talk and interact like a third grade child - natter natter natter, I'm rubber you're glue, geeeesh!
Click to expand...

He doesn't see that the US fertility rate is not falling, but that the abortion rate is skyrocketing


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> It seems you might be confused as to whom you are communicating with right now. You’re making no sense at all.
> 
> 
> 
> LOL and you keep asking for a link, but you have no idea what you want a link too.
> 
> okeedokee
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Save yourself some trouble next time and don’t lie.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Says the dumbass who believes that the population of the Earth is falling.
> 
> ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I didn’t say that, liar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I said the population of the Earth is rising, except for in Japan.  ...me
Click to expand...



No, you didn’t.


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Paul Motter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Japan is about the only place where fertility is falling
> 
> 
> 
> Allow me to show you what a link looks like.  I'll post one which proves you wrong:  U.S. Fertility Rate Fell to a Record Low, for a Second Straight Year
> 
> See how that works, liar?   You made a totally false statement and got caught.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wow - do you always talk and interact like a third grade child - natter natter natter, I'm rubber you're glue, geeeesh!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He doesn't see that the US fertility rate is not falling,...
Click to expand...



Yes, it is.


----------



## Kondor3

Overpopulation is Nature's way of culling the herd.

So long as it doesn't affect First Worlders, and remains confined to the riff-raff, I doubt much will be done on this front.


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> LOL and you keep asking for a link, but you have no idea what you want a link too.
> 
> okeedokee
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Save yourself some trouble next time and don’t lie.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Says the dumbass who believes that the population of the Earth is falling.
> 
> ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I didn’t say that, liar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I said the population of the Earth is rising, except for in Japan.  ...me
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No, you didn’t.
Click to expand...

If you really put your mind to it I bet you could cure the drool on your shirt.


----------



## BrokeLoser

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TroglocratsRdumb said:
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 224777
> 
> 
> 
> Your graph is bullshit you are confusing population and growth rate, lol I am still never wrong
> kids
> 
> World Population and Growth Rate 1900 to 2050 – DSS Research
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No we know that demographics is another subject you don’t understand at all.
Click to expand...




g5000 said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Japan is about the only place where fertility is falling
> 
> 
> 
> Allow me to show you what a link looks like.  I'll post one which proves you wrong:  U.S. Fertility Rate Fell to a Record Low, for a Second Straight Year
> 
> See how that works, liar?   You made a totally false statement and got caught.
Click to expand...


All sane, decent, real Americans KNOW the U.S. is overpopulated with thirdworlder filth. Our founders would agree...look it up.


----------



## Rosy

BrokeLoser said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TroglocratsRdumb said:
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 224777
> 
> 
> 
> Your graph is bullshit you are confusing population and growth rate, lol I am still never wrong
> kids
> 
> World Population and Growth Rate 1900 to 2050 – DSS Research
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No we know that demographics is another subject you don’t understand at all.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Japan is about the only place where fertility is falling
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Allow me to show you what a link looks like.  I'll post one which proves you wrong:  U.S. Fertility Rate Fell to a Record Low, for a Second Straight Year
> 
> See how that works, liar?   You made a totally false statement and got caught.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> All sane, decent, real Americans KNOW the U.S. is overpopulated with thirdworlder filth. Our founders would agree...look it up.
Click to expand...


San Fran has a poop powerwash patrol now


----------



## BrokeLoser

Rosy said:


> BrokeLoser said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TroglocratsRdumb said:
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 224777
> 
> 
> 
> Your graph is bullshit you are confusing population and growth rate, lol I am still never wrong
> kids
> 
> World Population and Growth Rate 1900 to 2050 – DSS Research
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No we know that demographics is another subject you don’t understand at all.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Japan is about the only place where fertility is falling
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Allow me to show you what a link looks like.  I'll post one which proves you wrong:  U.S. Fertility Rate Fell to a Record Low, for a Second Straight Year
> 
> See how that works, liar?   You made a totally false statement and got caught.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> All sane, decent, real Americans KNOW the U.S. is overpopulated with thirdworlder filth. Our founders would agree...look it up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> San Fran has a poop powerwash patrol now
Click to expand...


Every big city in this shithole needs a human waste dept that patrols the streets. This place is truly thirdworld in many parts.


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Save yourself some trouble next time and don’t lie.
> 
> 
> 
> Says the dumbass who believes that the population of the Earth is falling.
> 
> ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I didn’t say that, liar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I said the population of the Earth is rising, except for in Japan.  ...me
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No, you didn’t.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If you really put your mind to it I bet you could cure the drool on your shirt.
Click to expand...




You just talking to yourself in the corner, headcase?


----------



## Unkotare

BrokeLoser said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TroglocratsRdumb said:
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 224777
> 
> 
> 
> Your graph is bullshit you are confusing population and growth rate, lol I am still never wrong
> kids
> 
> World Population and Growth Rate 1900 to 2050 – DSS Research
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No we know that demographics is another subject you don’t understand at all.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Japan is about the only place where fertility is falling
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Allow me to show you what a link looks like.  I'll post one which proves you wrong:  U.S. Fertility Rate Fell to a Record Low, for a Second Straight Year
> 
> See how that works, liar?   You made a totally false statement and got caught.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> All sane, decent, real Americans KNOW ....
Click to expand...



You are none of those things, so as usual you know nothing.


----------



## caddo kid

Moonglow said:


> I helped over populate the Earth, so I have done my duty...




and then you fvcked all of your progeny by failing to offer the court appointed child support


----------



## BrokeLoser

Unkotare said:


> BrokeLoser said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TroglocratsRdumb said:
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 224777
> 
> 
> 
> Your graph is bullshit you are confusing population and growth rate, lol I am still never wrong
> kids
> 
> World Population and Growth Rate 1900 to 2050 – DSS Research
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No we know that demographics is another subject you don’t understand at all.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Japan is about the only place where fertility is falling
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Allow me to show you what a link looks like.  I'll post one which proves you wrong:  U.S. Fertility Rate Fell to a Record Low, for a Second Straight Year
> 
> See how that works, liar?   You made a totally false statement and got caught.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> All sane, decent, real Americans KNOW ....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You are none of those things, so as usual you know nothing.
Click to expand...


Don’t take my word for it...Think once...Trump never could have become POTUS otherwise.


----------



## Unkotare

BrokeLoser said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BrokeLoser said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TroglocratsRdumb said:
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 224777
> 
> 
> 
> Your graph is bullshit you are confusing population and growth rate, lol I am still never wrong
> kids
> 
> World Population and Growth Rate 1900 to 2050 – DSS Research
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No we know that demographics is another subject you don’t understand at all.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Japan is about the only place where fertility is falling
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Allow me to show you what a link looks like.  I'll post one which proves you wrong:  U.S. Fertility Rate Fell to a Record Low, for a Second Straight Year
> 
> See how that works, liar?   You made a totally false statement and got caught.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> All sane, decent, real Americans KNOW ....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You are none of those things, so as usual you know nothing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Don’t take my word for it...Think once...Trump never could have become POTUS otherwise.
Click to expand...



 Do you have some quota of stupid irrational infantile idiotic comments you have to make each day?


----------



## BrokeLoser

Unkotare said:


> BrokeLoser said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BrokeLoser said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your graph is bullshit you are confusing population and growth rate, lol I am still never wrong
> kids
> 
> World Population and Growth Rate 1900 to 2050 – DSS Research
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No we know that demographics is another subject you don’t understand at all.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Japan is about the only place where fertility is falling
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Allow me to show you what a link looks like.  I'll post one which proves you wrong:  U.S. Fertility Rate Fell to a Record Low, for a Second Straight Year
> 
> See how that works, liar?   You made a totally false statement and got caught.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> All sane, decent, real Americans KNOW ....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You are none of those things, so as usual you know nothing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Don’t take my word for it...Think once...Trump never could have become POTUS otherwise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have some quota of stupid irrational infantile idiotic comments you have to make each day?
Click to expand...


Nah, I prefer to be direct, concise and usually abrasive...Stop letting your feelings get hurt...have some fun.


----------



## Unkotare

BrokeLoser said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BrokeLoser said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BrokeLoser said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> No we know that demographics is another subject you don’t understand at all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Allow me to show you what a link looks like.  I'll post one which proves you wrong:  U.S. Fertility Rate Fell to a Record Low, for a Second Straight Year
> 
> See how that works, liar?   You made a totally false statement and got caught.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> All sane, decent, real Americans KNOW ....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You are none of those things, so as usual you know nothing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Don’t take my word for it...Think once...Trump never could have become POTUS otherwise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have some quota of stupid irrational infantile idiotic comments you have to make each day?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nah, I prefer to be direct, concise and usually abrasive...Stop letting your feelings get hurt...have some fun.
Click to expand...




If that’s how you little girls have fun - pass.


----------



## LittleNipper

With all the earthquakes, landslides, wildfires, hurricanes, wars, mega tornadoes, diseases and tsunamis on the rise, I don't feel we need to worry with regards to over population.


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Says the dumbass who believes that the population of the Earth is falling.
> 
> ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I didn’t say that, liar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I said the population of the Earth is rising, except for in Japan.  ...me
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No, you didn’t.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If you really put your mind to it I bet you could cure the drool on your shirt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You just talking to yourself in the corner, headcase?
Click to expand...

Actually I am not talking, but I am laughing at your Trump Deranged excuse for a life, that believes that the Earths population is falling....


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> I didn’t say that, liar.
> 
> 
> 
> I said the population of the Earth is rising, except for in Japan.  ...me
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No, you didn’t.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If you really put your mind to it I bet you could cure the drool on your shirt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You just talking to yourself in the corner, headcase?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ...your Trump Deranged ....
Click to expand...



You must think you are talking to someone else. You’re really making no sense.


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> I didn’t say that, liar.
> 
> 
> 
> I said the population of the Earth is rising, except for in Japan.  ...me
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No, you didn’t.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If you really put your mind to it I bet you could cure the drool on your shirt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You just talking to yourself in the corner, headcase?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ..that believes that the Earths population is falling....
Click to expand...



Why do you continue to lie? I never said that. If you’re just trolling, you suck at it.


----------



## Unkotare

LittleNipper said:


> With all the earthquakes, landslides, wildfires, hurricanes, wars, mega tornadoes, diseases and tsunamis on the rise, I don't feel we need to worry with regards to over population.



All those things have been happening since before there were people.


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> I said the population of the Earth is rising, except for in Japan.  ...me
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, you didn’t.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If you really put your mind to it I bet you could cure the drool on your shirt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You just talking to yourself in the corner, headcase?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ...your Trump Deranged ....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You must think you are talking to someone else. You’re really making no sense.
Click to expand...

Yet you keep responding like a puppy


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, you didn’t.
> 
> 
> 
> If you really put your mind to it I bet you could cure the drool on your shirt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You just talking to yourself in the corner, headcase?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ...your Trump Deranged ....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You must think you are talking to someone else. You’re really making no sense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yet you keep responding like a puppy
Click to expand...



Is there something wrong with you?


----------



## Unkotare

There is no overpopulation, and demographic trends show fertility rates dropping which will in time translate to a shrinking global population perhaps within a century or so when this shrinking begins it will happen very fast and have a very immediate consequences.


----------



## Unkotare

Chyna in particular is facing a very steep population declined in the not too distant future.


----------



## Unkotare

The population of the United States would be on the decline right now if not for the very significant and steady rates of immigration we experience. American women fell below replacement level fertility sometime in the 1980s. Robust immigration keeps our population growing just slightly year on year. However, fertility rates among Latino immigrants in particular are falling and so even with steady immigration this trend cannot be sustained in perpetuity.


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Chyna in particular is facing a very steep population declined in the not too distant future.


Chinas population is soaring, which is why people are allowed 1 child, which represents a population halving, but nope it's still going up, everywhere but in your mind


----------



## Unkotare

The economic, social, military, cultural, etc. consequences of a shrinking global population will present thorny challenges that will demand immediate attention when they do arrive. Fortunately, we have time to prepare for such eventualities, but we do not have unlimited time as this demographic change is coming like it or not.


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> The economic, social, military, cultural, etc. consequences of a shrinking global population will present thorny challenges that will demand immediate attention when they do arrive. Fortunately, we have time to prepare for such eventualities, but we do not have unlimited time as this demographic change is coming like it or not.


Yawn


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Chyna in particular is facing a very steep population declined in the not too distant future.
> 
> 
> 
> Chinas population is soaring, which is why people are allowed 1 child, which represents a population halving, but nope it's still going up, everywhere but in your mind
Click to expand...



If you were not so ignorant and uninformed, you would know that law was repealed sometime ago precisely because people finally woke up to the consequences of what it was going to mean for Chinese society in the not-too-distant future. You need to go ask an adult to explain to you the difference between fertility rates and population growth. Maybe there are some books with big colorful pictures to help you understand.


----------



## Muhammed

Moonglow said:


> I helped over populate the Earth, so I have done my duty...



Mee too. I've got 7 kids that I know of. And there is probably a lot more because I used to donate to a sperm bank several times a week.


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Chyna in particular is facing a very steep population declined in the not too distant future.
> 
> 
> 
> Chinas population is soaring, which is why people are allowed 1 child, which represents a population halving, but nope it's still going up, everywhere but in your mind
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> If you were not so ignorant and uninformed, you would know that law was repealed sometime ago precisely because people finally woke up to the consequences of what it was going to mean for Chinese society in the not-too-distant future. You need to go ask an adult to explain to you the difference between fertility rates and population growth. Maybe there are some books with big colorful pictures to help you understand.
Click to expand...

Millions of people are on the way here right now or will come shortly because of the sad results of overpopulation where they were or are living...…………….

Remind us again what planet that you live on


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Chyna in particular is facing a very steep population declined in the not too distant future.
> 
> 
> 
> Chinas population is soaring, which is why people are allowed 1 child, which represents a population halving, but nope it's still going up, everywhere but in your mind
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> If you were not so ignorant and uninformed, you would know that law was repealed sometime ago precisely because people finally woke up to the consequences of what it was going to mean for Chinese society in the not-too-distant future. You need to go ask an adult to explain to you the difference between fertility rates and population growth. Maybe there are some books with big colorful pictures to help you understand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Millions of people are on the way here right or will come shortly now because of the sad results of overpopulation where they were or are living....n
Click to expand...




No, not because of ‘overpopulation.’


----------



## Unkotare

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Chyna in particular is facing a very steep population declined in the not too distant future.
> 
> 
> 
> Chinas population is soaring, which is why people are allowed 1 child, which represents a population halving, but nope it's still going up, everywhere but in your mind
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> If you were not so ignorant and uninformed, you would know that law was repealed sometime ago precisely because people finally woke up to the consequences of what it was going to mean for Chinese society in the not-too-distant future. You need to go ask an adult to explain to you the difference between fertility rates and population growth. Maybe there are some books with big colorful pictures to help you understand.
Click to expand...

.


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Chyna in particular is facing a very steep population declined in the not too distant future.
> 
> 
> 
> Chinas population is soaring, which is why people are allowed 1 child, which represents a population halving, but nope it's still going up, everywhere but in your mind
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> If you were not so ignorant and uninformed, you would know that law was repealed sometime ago precisely because people finally woke up to the consequences of what it was going to mean for Chinese society in the not-too-distant future. You need to go ask an adult to explain to you the difference between fertility rates and population growth. Maybe there are some books with big colorful pictures to help you understand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Millions of people are on the way here right or will come shortly now because of the sad results of overpopulation where they were or are living....n
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, not because of ‘overpopulation.’
Click to expand...

Overpopulation causes food shortages unemployment and crime.  They are coming because of overpopulation and because the poor people here are fatter then the rich ones


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Chyna in particular is facing a very steep population declined in the not too distant future.
> 
> 
> 
> Chinas population is soaring, which is why people are allowed 1 child, which represents a population halving, but nope it's still going up, everywhere but in your mind
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> If you were not so ignorant and uninformed, you would know that law was repealed sometime ago precisely because people finally woke up to the consequences of what it was going to mean for Chinese society in the not-too-distant future. You need to go ask an adult to explain to you the difference between fertility rates and population growth. Maybe there are some books with big colorful pictures to help you understand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Millions of people are on the way here right or will come shortly now because of the sad results of overpopulation where they were or are living....n
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, not because of ‘overpopulation.’
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Overpopulation causes food shortages unemployment and crime.  They are coming because of overpopulation and because the poor people here are fatter then the rich ones
Click to expand...


Food shortages, unemployment, and crime have existed at EVERY level of human population.

Central American nations are not crowded, they are largely jungle, you idiot.


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Chinas population is soaring, which is why people are allowed 1 child, which represents a population halving, but nope it's still going up, everywhere but in your mind
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you were not so ignorant and uninformed, you would know that law was repealed sometime ago precisely because people finally woke up to the consequences of what it was going to mean for Chinese society in the not-too-distant future. You need to go ask an adult to explain to you the difference between fertility rates and population growth. Maybe there are some books with big colorful pictures to help you understand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Millions of people are on the way here right or will come shortly now because of the sad results of overpopulation where they were or are living....n
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, not because of ‘overpopulation.’
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Overpopulation causes food shortages unemployment and crime.  They are coming because of overpopulation and because the poor people here are fatter then the rich ones
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Food shortages, unemployment, and crime have existed at EVERY level of human population.
> 
> Central American nations are not crowded, they are largely jungle, you idiot.
Click to expand...

Modern people can not live in the jungle, so all of that land is actually removed from the viable areas able to sustain modern human life.  Thus there are 2 options, leave or cut down the jungle, both are happening because of overpopulation


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you were not so ignorant and uninformed, you would know that law was repealed sometime ago precisely because people finally woke up to the consequences of what it was going to mean for Chinese society in the not-too-distant future. You need to go ask an adult to explain to you the difference between fertility rates and population growth. Maybe there are some books with big colorful pictures to help you understand.
> 
> 
> 
> Millions of people are on the way here right or will come shortly now because of the sad results of overpopulation where they were or are living....n
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, not because of ‘overpopulation.’
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Overpopulation causes food shortages unemployment and crime.  They are coming because of overpopulation and because the poor people here are fatter then the rich ones
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Food shortages, unemployment, and crime have existed at EVERY level of human population.
> 
> Central American nations are not crowded, they are largely jungle, you idiot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Modern people can not live in the jungle, so all of that land is actually removed from the viable areas able to sustain modern human life.  Thus there are 2 options, leave or cut down the jungle, both are happening because of overpopulation
Click to expand...



Space is not the problem, you stupid shit. The jungle provides cover for the gangsters and narco-terrorists. 

You really suck at this.


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Millions of people are on the way here right or will come shortly now because of the sad results of overpopulation where they were or are living....n
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, not because of ‘overpopulation.’
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Overpopulation causes food shortages unemployment and crime.  They are coming because of overpopulation and because the poor people here are fatter then the rich ones
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Food shortages, unemployment, and crime have existed at EVERY level of human population.
> 
> Central American nations are not crowded, they are largely jungle, you idiot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Modern people can not live in the jungle, so all of that land is actually removed from the viable areas able to sustain modern human life.  Thus there are 2 options, leave or cut down the jungle, both are happening because of overpopulation
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Space is not the problem, you stupid shit. The jungle provides cover for the gangsters and narco-terrorists.
> 
> You really suck at this.
Click to expand...

The jungle is the worst possible place for a human to live, I see you have never left your Moms basement


----------



## 80zephyr

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, not because of ‘overpopulation.’
> 
> 
> 
> Overpopulation causes food shortages unemployment and crime.  They are coming because of overpopulation and because the poor people here are fatter then the rich ones
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Food shortages, unemployment, and crime have existed at EVERY level of human population.
> 
> Central American nations are not crowded, they are largely jungle, you idiot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Modern people can not live in the jungle, so all of that land is actually removed from the viable areas able to sustain modern human life.  Thus there are 2 options, leave or cut down the jungle, both are happening because of overpopulation
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Space is not the problem, you stupid shit. The jungle provides cover for the gangsters and narco-terrorists.
> 
> You really suck at this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The jungle is the worst possible place for a human to live, I see you have never left your Moms basement
Click to expand...


Do you know that all the people on Earth can fit into Rhode Island?

Mark


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, not because of ‘overpopulation.’
> 
> 
> 
> Overpopulation causes food shortages unemployment and crime.  They are coming because of overpopulation and because the poor people here are fatter then the rich ones
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Food shortages, unemployment, and crime have existed at EVERY level of human population.
> 
> Central American nations are not crowded, they are largely jungle, you idiot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Modern people can not live in the jungle, so all of that land is actually removed from the viable areas able to sustain modern human life.  Thus there are 2 options, leave or cut down the jungle, both are happening because of overpopulation
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Space is not the problem, you stupid shit. The jungle provides cover for the gangsters and narco-terrorists.
> 
> You really suck at this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The jungle is the worst possible place for a human to live, I see you have never left your Moms basement
Click to expand...



Put the cap back on the glue.


----------



## Unkotare

80zephyr said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Overpopulation causes food shortages unemployment and crime.  They are coming because of overpopulation and because the poor people here are fatter then the rich ones
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Food shortages, unemployment, and crime have existed at EVERY level of human population.
> 
> Central American nations are not crowded, they are largely jungle, you idiot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Modern people can not live in the jungle, so all of that land is actually removed from the viable areas able to sustain modern human life.  Thus there are 2 options, leave or cut down the jungle, both are happening because of overpopulation
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Space is not the problem, you stupid shit. The jungle provides cover for the gangsters and narco-terrorists.
> 
> You really suck at this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The jungle is the worst possible place for a human to live, I see you have never left your Moms basement
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you know that all the people on Earth can fit into Rhode Island?
> 
> Mark
Click to expand...




But don’t wanna


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Overpopulation causes food shortages unemployment and crime.  They are coming because of overpopulation and because the poor people here are fatter then the rich ones
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Food shortages, unemployment, and crime have existed at EVERY level of human population.
> 
> Central American nations are not crowded, they are largely jungle, you idiot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Modern people can not live in the jungle, so all of that land is actually removed from the viable areas able to sustain modern human life.  Thus there are 2 options, leave or cut down the jungle, both are happening because of overpopulation
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Space is not the problem, you stupid shit. The jungle provides cover for the gangsters and narco-terrorists.
> 
> You really suck at this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The jungle is the worst possible place for a human to live, I see you have never left your Moms basement
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Put the cap back on the glue.
Click to expand...

Typical butthurt democrap


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Food shortages, unemployment, and crime have existed at EVERY level of human population.
> 
> Central American nations are not crowded, they are largely jungle, you idiot.
> 
> 
> 
> Modern people can not live in the jungle, so all of that land is actually removed from the viable areas able to sustain modern human life.  Thus there are 2 options, leave or cut down the jungle, both are happening because of overpopulation
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Space is not the problem, you stupid shit. The jungle provides cover for the gangsters and narco-terrorists.
> 
> You really suck at this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The jungle is the worst possible place for a human to live, I see you have never left your Moms basement
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Put the cap back on the glue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Typical butthurt democrap
Click to expand...






Again, you are confused about with whom you are speaking.


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Modern people can not live in the jungle, so all of that land is actually removed from the viable areas able to sustain modern human life.  Thus there are 2 options, leave or cut down the jungle, both are happening because of overpopulation
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Space is not the problem, you stupid shit. The jungle provides cover for the gangsters and narco-terrorists.
> 
> You really suck at this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The jungle is the worst possible place for a human to live, I see you have never left your Moms basement
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Put the cap back on the glue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Typical butthurt democrap
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again, you are confused about with whom you are speaking.
Click to expand...

Again I have not spoken once, but do refresh us on how the earths human population is falling.

PS. Just because you have never seen a woman naked and mated does not change the rest of humanity.

Try to accept this


----------



## Rosy

80zephyr said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Overpopulation causes food shortages unemployment and crime.  They are coming because of overpopulation and because the poor people here are fatter then the rich ones
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Food shortages, unemployment, and crime have existed at EVERY level of human population.
> 
> Central American nations are not crowded, they are largely jungle, you idiot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Modern people can not live in the jungle, so all of that land is actually removed from the viable areas able to sustain modern human life.  Thus there are 2 options, leave or cut down the jungle, both are happening because of overpopulation
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Space is not the problem, you stupid shit. The jungle provides cover for the gangsters and narco-terrorists.
> 
> You really suck at this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The jungle is the worst possible place for a human to live, I see you have never left your Moms basement
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you know that all the people on Earth can fit into Rhode Island?
> 
> Mark
Click to expand...

Not logistically possible to move them there, feed them there, or move away the poop that would cover them in a very short time


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Space is not the problem, you stupid shit. The jungle provides cover for the gangsters and narco-terrorists.
> 
> You really suck at this.
> 
> 
> 
> The jungle is the worst possible place for a human to live, I see you have never left your Moms basement
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Put the cap back on the glue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Typical butthurt democrap
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again, you are confused about with whom you are speaking.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ...do refresh us on how the earths human population is falling.
> 
> ...
Click to expand...




 Why do you keep lying? Are you afraid you would have to admit you were wrong in the first place? Try to grow a pair and be honest for once.


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> The jungle is the worst possible place for a human to live, I see you have never left your Moms basement
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Put the cap back on the glue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Typical butthurt democrap
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again, you are confused about with whom you are speaking.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ...do refresh us on how the earths human population is falling.
> 
> ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you keep lying? Are you afraid you would have to admit you were wrong in the first place? Try to grow a pair and be honest for once.
Click to expand...

This is your life, but at least you get some rudimentary human contact outside of your Moms basement


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Put the cap back on the glue.
> 
> 
> 
> Typical butthurt democrap
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again, you are confused about with whom you are speaking.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ...do refresh us on how the earths human population is falling.
> 
> ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you keep lying? Are you afraid you would have to admit you were wrong in the first place? Try to grow a pair and be honest for once.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> This is your life, but at least you get some rudimentary human contact outside of your Moms basement
Click to expand...




Nothing but trolling? That’s all you’ve got?


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Typical butthurt democrap
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again, you are confused about with whom you are speaking.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ...do refresh us on how the earths human population is falling.
> 
> ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you keep lying? Are you afraid you would have to admit you were wrong in the first place? Try to grow a pair and be honest for once.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> This is your life, but at least you get some rudimentary human contact outside of your Moms basement
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing but trolling? That’s all you’ve got?
Click to expand...

How exactly do you describe your behavior?

I would describe you as a childish and low IQ simpleton who has nothing to say or add, and who for some unknown reason believes that the Earths human population is falling.  Got educated by me and is now throwing a temper tantrum like a little girl who dropped her cheerios


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Again, you are confused about with whom you are speaking.
> 
> 
> 
> ...do refresh us on how the earths human population is falling.
> 
> ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you keep lying? Are you afraid you would have to admit you were wrong in the first place? Try to grow a pair and be honest for once.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> This is your life, but at least you get some rudimentary human contact outside of your Moms basement
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing but trolling? That’s all you’ve got?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How exactly do you describe your behavior?.....
Click to expand...



Do you want to discuss the topic, or do you just want to troll? Decide.


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Again, you are confused about with whom you are speaking.
> 
> 
> 
> ...do refresh us on how the earths human population is falling.
> 
> ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you keep lying? Are you afraid you would have to admit you were wrong in the first place? Try to grow a pair and be honest for once.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> This is your life, but at least you get some rudimentary human contact outside of your Moms basement
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing but trolling? That’s all you’ve got?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ...who for some unknown reason believes that the Earths human population is falling.  ...
Click to expand...


So, you’re just going to continue lying and trolling? Are you declaring that your intention?


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...do refresh us on how the earths human population is falling.
> 
> ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you keep lying? Are you afraid you would have to admit you were wrong in the first place? Try to grow a pair and be honest for once.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> This is your life, but at least you get some rudimentary human contact outside of your Moms basement
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing but trolling? That’s all you’ve got?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How exactly do you describe your behavior?.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Do you want to discuss the topic, or do you just want to troll? Decide.
Click to expand...

Your IQ is too low to discuss any topic that I would find intellectually stimulating, but feel free discuss at will what you feel is important, you may get as much help from your mom as you feel you need.

Again the earths human population is skyrocketing, as it has been for a very long time

Population counter, real time

World Population Clock: 7.7 Billion People (2018) - Worldometers


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...do refresh us on how the earths human population is falling.
> 
> ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you keep lying? Are you afraid you would have to admit you were wrong in the first place? Try to grow a pair and be honest for once.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> This is your life, but at least you get some rudimentary human contact outside of your Moms basement
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing but trolling? That’s all you’ve got?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ...who for some unknown reason believes that the Earths human population is falling.  ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, you’re just going to continue lying and trolling? Are you declaring that your intention?
Click to expand...

I have never lied here, and you are the ignorant troll

Population counter that proves your lack of intellect

World Population Clock: 7.7 Billion People (2018) - Worldometers


----------



## Unkotare

Unkotare said:


> TheDude said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheDude said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheDude said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's likely our biggest problem.  They're not being 100% truthful as to why we need to control our borders. Perhaps the biggest reason is over-population.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> False crisis. The challenges of the future will be about the opposite.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Other than perhaps a decline in white population, what's your point?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Within a century, global population will be in precipitous decline.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why would that be?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fertility rates are slowing if not falling all over the world already. It’s called demographics. Let go of the false crisis some knucklehead has been pushing on you since the 1970s.
Click to expand...

.


----------



## 80zephyr

Rosy said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Food shortages, unemployment, and crime have existed at EVERY level of human population.
> 
> Central American nations are not crowded, they are largely jungle, you idiot.
> 
> 
> 
> Modern people can not live in the jungle, so all of that land is actually removed from the viable areas able to sustain modern human life.  Thus there are 2 options, leave or cut down the jungle, both are happening because of overpopulation
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Space is not the problem, you stupid shit. The jungle provides cover for the gangsters and narco-terrorists.
> 
> You really suck at this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The jungle is the worst possible place for a human to live, I see you have never left your Moms basement
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you know that all the people on Earth can fit into Rhode Island?
> 
> Mark
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not logistically possible to move them there, feed them there, or move away the poop that would cover them in a very short time
Click to expand...


Not the point. That they can fit there tells us whether the earth is overpopulated or not.

Mark


----------



## 80zephyr

I do not believe the Earth is overpopulated, resource wise. I do believe there are too many people on Earth for us to live happily. 

Is our population expanding? Yes, because people are living longer. This will be coming to a halt, if current trends continue. The fertility rate needed for a stable population is 2.33

This has been our rate since 1990:

1990–1995 3.04
1995–2000 2.79
2000–2005 2.62
2005–2010 2.52
2010–2015 2.36 

As anyone can see, the Earth is quickly reaching a stable population growth, but once we get below 2.33, we will begin to see the population shrink.

Mark


----------



## Unkotare

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheDude said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why would that be?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fertility rates are slowing if not falling all over the world already. It’s called demographics. Let go of the false crisis some knucklehead has been pushing on you since the 1970s.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> False, China is massively overpopulated due to high fertility.  Japan is about the only place where fertility is falling
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ignorant and incorrect. Why not at least bother to check before posting?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am correct, and I also own your mind, all three cells
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are completely wrong. Fertility rates are falling in most of the developed, and much of the developing world. South Korea, Germany, etc. The US fell below replacement level fertility some 20 years ago. China is facing a dire population implosion.
Click to expand...

.


----------



## Rosy

80zephyr said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Modern people can not live in the jungle, so all of that land is actually removed from the viable areas able to sustain modern human life.  Thus there are 2 options, leave or cut down the jungle, both are happening because of overpopulation
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Space is not the problem, you stupid shit. The jungle provides cover for the gangsters and narco-terrorists.
> 
> You really suck at this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The jungle is the worst possible place for a human to live, I see you have never left your Moms basement
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you know that all the people on Earth can fit into Rhode Island?
> 
> Mark
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not logistically possible to move them there, feed them there, or move away the poop that would cover them in a very short time
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not the point. That they can fit there tells us whether the earth is overpopulated or not.
> 
> Mark
Click to expand...

Nope, because there is no way for those people to live, get food or exist.  Overpopulation happens when the environment can not provide a suitable symbiotic relationship with the life forms there.


----------



## Unkotare

TroglocratsRdumb said:


> View attachment 224777


.


----------



## Rosy

80zephyr said:


> I do not believe the Earth is overpopulated, resource wise. I do believe there are too many people on Earth for us to live happily.
> 
> Is our population expanding? Yes, because people are living longer. This will be coming to a halt, if current trends continue. The fertility rate needed for a stable population is 2.33
> 
> This has been our rate since 1990:
> 
> 1990–1995 3.04
> 1995–2000 2.79
> 2000–2005 2.62
> 2005–2010 2.52
> 2010–2015 2.36
> 
> As anyone can see, the Earth is quickly reaching a stable population growth, but once we get below 2.33, we will begin to see the population shrink.
> 
> Mark


You need to travel to China and india


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> TroglocratsRdumb said:
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 224777
> 
> 
> 
> .
Click to expand...

The troll presents zero new info


----------



## 80zephyr

Rosy said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> 
> I do not believe the Earth is overpopulated, resource wise. I do believe there are too many people on Earth for us to live happily.
> 
> Is our population expanding? Yes, because people are living longer. This will be coming to a halt, if current trends continue. The fertility rate needed for a stable population is 2.33
> 
> This has been our rate since 1990:
> 
> 1990–1995 3.04
> 1995–2000 2.79
> 2000–2005 2.62
> 2005–2010 2.52
> 2010–2015 2.36
> 
> As anyone can see, the Earth is quickly reaching a stable population growth, but once we get below 2.33, we will begin to see the population shrink.
> 
> Mark
> 
> 
> 
> You need to travel to China and india
Click to expand...


What if I travel to the US and Europe?

Mark


----------



## Rosy

80zephyr said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> 
> I do not believe the Earth is overpopulated, resource wise. I do believe there are too many people on Earth for us to live happily.
> 
> Is our population expanding? Yes, because people are living longer. This will be coming to a halt, if current trends continue. The fertility rate needed for a stable population is 2.33
> 
> This has been our rate since 1990:
> 
> 1990–1995 3.04
> 1995–2000 2.79
> 2000–2005 2.62
> 2005–2010 2.52
> 2010–2015 2.36
> 
> As anyone can see, the Earth is quickly reaching a stable population growth, but once we get below 2.33, we will begin to see the population shrink.
> 
> Mark
> 
> 
> 
> You need to travel to China and india
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What if I travel to the US and Europe?
> 
> Mark
Click to expand...

There are different ways to Express overpopulation I consider the USA overpopulated because there are people living under bridges that can not find work.  Thus a place can be overpopulated in relationship to the local economy.  The earth is clearly overpopulated because human pollution is destroying the food web


----------



## 80zephyr

Rosy said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> 
> I do not believe the Earth is overpopulated, resource wise. I do believe there are too many people on Earth for us to live happily.
> 
> Is our population expanding? Yes, because people are living longer. This will be coming to a halt, if current trends continue. The fertility rate needed for a stable population is 2.33
> 
> This has been our rate since 1990:
> 
> 1990–1995 3.04
> 1995–2000 2.79
> 2000–2005 2.62
> 2005–2010 2.52
> 2010–2015 2.36
> 
> As anyone can see, the Earth is quickly reaching a stable population growth, but once we get below 2.33, we will begin to see the population shrink.
> 
> Mark
> 
> 
> 
> You need to travel to China and india
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What if I travel to the US and Europe?
> 
> Mark
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There are different ways to Express overpopulation I consider the USA overpopulated because there are people living under bridges that can not find work.  Thus a place can be overpopulated in relationship to the local economy.  *The earth is clearly overpopulated because human pollution is destroying the food web*
Click to expand...


Then we disagree,


----------



## Rosy

80zephyr said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> 
> I do not believe the Earth is overpopulated, resource wise. I do believe there are too many people on Earth for us to live happily.
> 
> Is our population expanding? Yes, because people are living longer. This will be coming to a halt, if current trends continue. The fertility rate needed for a stable population is 2.33
> 
> This has been our rate since 1990:
> 
> 1990–1995 3.04
> 1995–2000 2.79
> 2000–2005 2.62
> 2005–2010 2.52
> 2010–2015 2.36
> 
> As anyone can see, the Earth is quickly reaching a stable population growth, but once we get below 2.33, we will begin to see the population shrink.
> 
> Mark
> 
> 
> 
> You need to travel to China and india
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What if I travel to the US and Europe?
> 
> Mark
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There are different ways to Express overpopulation I consider the USA overpopulated because there are people living under bridges that can not find work.  Thus a place can be overpopulated in relationship to the local economy.  *The earth is clearly overpopulated because human pollution is destroying the food web*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Then we disagree,
Click to expand...

Exactly how much pollution do you want on the earth?


----------



## Unkotare

g5000 said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Japan is about the only place where fertility is falling
> 
> 
> 
> Allow me to show you what a link looks like.  I'll post one which proves you wrong:  U.S. Fertility Rate Fell to a Record Low, for a Second Straight Year
> 
> See how that works, liar?   You made a totally false statement and got caught.
Click to expand...

.


----------



## Unkotare

g5000 said:


> Fertility Rate
> 
> _ Over the last 50 years the global fertility rate has halved. And over the course of the modernization of societies the number of children per woman decreases very substantially._


.


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> 
> I do not believe the Earth is overpopulated, resource wise. I do believe there are too many people on Earth for us to live happily.
> 
> Is our population expanding? Yes, because people are living longer. This will be coming to a halt, if current trends continue. The fertility rate needed for a stable population is 2.33
> 
> This has been our rate since 1990:
> 
> 1990–1995 3.04
> 1995–2000 2.79
> 2000–2005 2.62
> 2005–2010 2.52
> 2010–2015 2.36
> 
> As anyone can see, the Earth is quickly reaching a stable population growth, but once we get below 2.33, we will begin to see the population shrink.
> 
> Mark
> 
> 
> 
> You need to travel to China and india
Click to expand...




Illogical.


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> 
> I do not believe the Earth is overpopulated, resource wise. I do believe there are too many people on Earth for us to live happily.
> 
> Is our population expanding? Yes, because people are living longer. This will be coming to a halt, if current trends continue. The fertility rate needed for a stable population is 2.33
> 
> This has been our rate since 1990:
> 
> 1990–1995 3.04
> 1995–2000 2.79
> 2000–2005 2.62
> 2005–2010 2.52
> 2010–2015 2.36
> 
> As anyone can see, the Earth is quickly reaching a stable population growth, but once we get below 2.33, we will begin to see the population shrink.
> 
> Mark
> 
> 
> 
> You need to travel to China and india
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Illogical.
Click to expand...

For you the little snot who lives in his moms basement..... perhaps this is illogical


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Chyna in particular is facing a very steep population declined in the not too distant future.
> 
> 
> 
> Chinas population is soaring, which is why people are allowed 1 child, which represents a population halving, but nope it's still going up, everywhere but in your mind
Click to expand...




Remember this post, where you demonstrated your ignorance again? Remember how you didn’t know the one-child law had been repealed? Funny stuff.


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> 
> I do not believe the Earth is overpopulated, resource wise. I do believe there are too many people on Earth for us to live happily.
> 
> Is our population expanding? Yes, because people are living longer. This will be coming to a halt, if current trends continue. The fertility rate needed for a stable population is 2.33
> 
> This has been our rate since 1990:
> 
> 1990–1995 3.04
> 1995–2000 2.79
> 2000–2005 2.62
> 2005–2010 2.52
> 2010–2015 2.36
> 
> As anyone can see, the Earth is quickly reaching a stable population growth, but once we get below 2.33, we will begin to see the population shrink.
> 
> Mark
> 
> 
> 
> You need to travel to China and india
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Illogical.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> For you the little snot who lives in his moms basement..... perhaps this is illogical
Click to expand...




Don’t pretend that you know anything about logic.


----------



## Unkotare

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Chyna in particular is facing a very steep population declined in the not too distant future.
> 
> 
> 
> Chinas population is soaring, which is why people are allowed 1 child, which represents a population halving, but nope it's still going up, everywhere but in your mind
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> If you were not so ignorant and uninformed, you would know that law was repealed sometime ago precisely because people finally woke up to the consequences of what it was going to mean for Chinese society in the not-too-distant future. You need to go ask an adult to explain to you the difference between fertility rates and population growth. Maybe there are some books with big colorful pictures to help you understand.
Click to expand...

.


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> 
> I do not believe the Earth is overpopulated, resource wise. I do believe there are too many people on Earth for us to live happily.
> 
> Is our population expanding? Yes, because people are living longer. This will be coming to a halt, if current trends continue. The fertility rate needed for a stable population is 2.33
> 
> This has been our rate since 1990:
> 
> 1990–1995 3.04
> 1995–2000 2.79
> 2000–2005 2.62
> 2005–2010 2.52
> 2010–2015 2.36
> 
> As anyone can see, the Earth is quickly reaching a stable population growth, but once we get below 2.33, we will begin to see the population shrink.
> 
> Mark
> 
> 
> 
> You need to travel to China and india
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What if I travel to the US and Europe?
> 
> Mark
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There are different ways to Express overpopulation I consider the USA overpopulated because there are people living under bridges that can not find work.  ...
Click to expand...


Again, illogical. You don’t get to write your own dictionary, fool.


----------



## Unkotare

80zephyr said:


> I do not believe the Earth is overpopulated, resource wise. I do believe there are too many people on Earth for us to live happily.
> 
> Is our population expanding? Yes, because people are living longer. This will be coming to a halt, if current trends continue. The fertility rate needed for a stable population is 2.33
> 
> This has been our rate since 1990:
> 
> 1990–1995 3.04
> 1995–2000 2.79
> 2000–2005 2.62
> 2005–2010 2.52
> 2010–2015 2.36
> 
> As anyone can see, the Earth is quickly reaching a stable population growth, but once we get below 2.33, we will begin to see the population shrink.
> 
> Mark


.


----------



## Weatherman2020

Anyone who thinks the world is even close to being overpopulated has never traveled. 

You can take every human on earth, give them a quarter acre, and that would just fill Texas.


----------



## Rosy

Weatherman2020 said:


> Anyone who thinks the world is even close to being overpopulated has never traveled.
> 
> You can take every human on earth, give them a quarter acre, and that would just fill Texas.


Look turd, there is not enough food and clean water now.  You need to wake up and see the starvation
How many people can fit means nothing if they can not live properly

Google Image Result for https://www.sciencesource.com/Doc/SCS/Media/TR1_WATERMARKED/3/6/d/5/SS2658909.jpg?d63643131887


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> 
> I do not believe the Earth is overpopulated, resource wise. I do believe there are too many people on Earth for us to live happily.
> 
> Is our population expanding? Yes, because people are living longer. This will be coming to a halt, if current trends continue. The fertility rate needed for a stable population is 2.33
> 
> This has been our rate since 1990:
> 
> 1990–1995 3.04
> 1995–2000 2.79
> 2000–2005 2.62
> 2005–2010 2.52
> 2010–2015 2.36
> 
> As anyone can see, the Earth is quickly reaching a stable population growth, but once we get below 2.33, we will begin to see the population shrink.
> 
> Mark
> 
> 
> 
> You need to travel to China and india
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What if I travel to the US and Europe?
> 
> Mark
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There are different ways to Express overpopulation I consider the USA overpopulated because there are people living under bridges that can not find work.  ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again, illogical. You don’t get to write your own dictionary, fool.
Click to expand...

So you think this is normal and there is no population problem

Google Image Result for https://www.sciencesource.com/Doc/SCS/Media/TR1_WATERMARKED/3/6/d/5/SS2658909.jpg?d63643131887


----------



## Weatherman2020

Rosy said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone who thinks the world is even close to being overpopulated has never traveled.
> 
> You can take every human on earth, give them a quarter acre, and that would just fill Texas.
> 
> 
> 
> Look turd, there is not enough food and clean water now.  You need to wake up and see the starvation
> How many people can fit means nothing if they can not live properly
> 
> Google Image Result for https://www.sciencesource.com/Doc/SCS/Media/TR1_WATERMARKED/3/6/d/5/SS2658909.jpg?d63643131887
Click to expand...

BS. The world has a food surplus. 

The only places where people are not getting enough food is because of their socialist shithole government.


----------



## Weatherman2020

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> 
> I do not believe the Earth is overpopulated, resource wise. I do believe there are too many people on Earth for us to live happily.
> 
> Is our population expanding? Yes, because people are living longer. This will be coming to a halt, if current trends continue. The fertility rate needed for a stable population is 2.33
> 
> This has been our rate since 1990:
> 
> 1990–1995 3.04
> 1995–2000 2.79
> 2000–2005 2.62
> 2005–2010 2.52
> 2010–2015 2.36
> 
> As anyone can see, the Earth is quickly reaching a stable population growth, but once we get below 2.33, we will begin to see the population shrink.
> 
> Mark
> 
> 
> 
> You need to travel to China and india
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What if I travel to the US and Europe?
> 
> Mark
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There are different ways to Express overpopulation I consider the USA overpopulated because there are people living under bridges that can not find work.  ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again, illogical. You don’t get to write your own dictionary, fool.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So you think this is normal and there is no population problem
> 
> Google Image Result for https://www.sciencesource.com/Doc/SCS/Media/TR1_WATERMARKED/3/6/d/5/SS2658909.jpg?d63643131887
Click to expand...

I drove across America this summer. For hours of driving there was no sign of human structures.


----------



## Rosy

Weatherman2020 said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone who thinks the world is even close to being overpopulated has never traveled.
> 
> You can take every human on earth, give them a quarter acre, and that would just fill Texas.
> 
> 
> 
> Look turd, there is not enough food and clean water now.  You need to wake up and see the starvation
> How many people can fit means nothing if they can not live properly
> 
> Google Image Result for https://www.sciencesource.com/Doc/SCS/Media/TR1_WATERMARKED/3/6/d/5/SS2658909.jpg?d63643131887
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> BS. The world has a food surplus.
> 
> The only places where people are not getting enough food is because of their socialist shithole government.
Click to expand...

What animal protein sources of food are in surplus

Lol, you cant name one, as people are resorting to eating bugs for protein


----------



## Rosy

Weatherman2020 said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> You need to travel to China and india
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What if I travel to the US and Europe?
> 
> Mark
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There are different ways to Express overpopulation I consider the USA overpopulated because there are people living under bridges that can not find work.  ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again, illogical. You don’t get to write your own dictionary, fool.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So you think this is normal and there is no population problem
> 
> Google Image Result for https://www.sciencesource.com/Doc/SCS/Media/TR1_WATERMARKED/3/6/d/5/SS2658909.jpg?d63643131887
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I drove across America this summer. For hours of driving there was no sign of human structures.
Click to expand...

No jobs either
No job, no money, no food, no education, no nothing.
Empty space is empty for a reason, that you can not comprehend with your little intellect

Are you really so stupid that you believe that every inch of the earth must have a human on it before it is overpopulated.  You are outmatched here, clearly

130


----------



## Weatherman2020

Rosy said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> 
> What if I travel to the US and Europe?
> 
> Mark
> 
> 
> 
> There are different ways to Express overpopulation I consider the USA overpopulated because there are people living under bridges that can not find work.  ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again, illogical. You don’t get to write your own dictionary, fool.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So you think this is normal and there is no population problem
> 
> Google Image Result for https://www.sciencesource.com/Doc/SCS/Media/TR1_WATERMARKED/3/6/d/5/SS2658909.jpg?d63643131887
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I drove across America this summer. For hours of driving there was no sign of human structures.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No jobs either
> No job, no money, no food, no education, no nothing.
> Empty space is empty for a reason, that you can not comprehend with your little intellect
> 
> Are you really so stupid that you believe that every inch of the earth must have a human on it before it is overpopulated.  You are outmatched here, clearly
> 
> 130
Click to expand...

You need to get out of your tiny apartment and go to third world nations.


----------



## Weatherman2020

Rosy said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone who thinks the world is even close to being overpopulated has never traveled.
> 
> You can take every human on earth, give them a quarter acre, and that would just fill Texas.
> 
> 
> 
> Look turd, there is not enough food and clean water now.  You need to wake up and see the starvation
> How many people can fit means nothing if they can not live properly
> 
> Google Image Result for https://www.sciencesource.com/Doc/SCS/Media/TR1_WATERMARKED/3/6/d/5/SS2658909.jpg?d63643131887
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> BS. The world has a food surplus.
> 
> The only places where people are not getting enough food is because of their socialist shithole government.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What animal protein sources of food are in surplus
> 
> Lol, you cant name one, as people are resorting to eating bugs for protein
Click to expand...

What’s wrong with eating bugs? I’ve done it, as have people since day one. 

If you’re so worried about kids starving, then 
A. Be proactive in helping. 
B. Ask why their governments created such a mess.


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone who thinks the world is even close to being overpopulated has never traveled.
> 
> You can take every human on earth, give them a quarter acre, and that would just fill Texas.
> 
> 
> 
> ...there is not enough food and clean water now.  ....
Click to expand...


Yes there is.


----------



## Unkotare

Weatherman2020 said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> You need to travel to China and india
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What if I travel to the US and Europe?
> 
> Mark
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There are different ways to Express overpopulation I consider the USA overpopulated because there are people living under bridges that can not find work.  ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again, illogical. You don’t get to write your own dictionary, fool.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So you think this is normal and there is no population problem
> 
> Google Image Result for https://www.sciencesource.com/Doc/SCS/Media/TR1_WATERMARKED/3/6/d/5/SS2658909.jpg?d63643131887
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I drove across America this summer. For hours of driving there was no sign of human structures.
Click to expand...




You can drive through large parts of China and see no sign of human structures.


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone who thinks the world is even close to being overpopulated has never traveled.
> 
> You can take every human on earth, give them a quarter acre, and that would just fill Texas.
> 
> 
> 
> Look turd, there is not enough food and clean water now.  You need to wake up and see the starvation
> How many people can fit means nothing if they can not live properly
> 
> Google Image Result for https://www.sciencesource.com/Doc/SCS/Media/TR1_WATERMARKED/3/6/d/5/SS2658909.jpg?d63643131887
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> BS. The world has a food surplus.
> 
> The only places where people are not getting enough food is because of their socialist shithole government.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What animal protein sources of food are in surplus
> 
> Lol, you cant name one, as people are resorting to eating bugs for protein
Click to expand...



Look at them goal posts move!


----------



## Rosy

Weatherman2020 said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone who thinks the world is even close to being overpopulated has never traveled.
> 
> You can take every human on earth, give them a quarter acre, and that would just fill Texas.
> 
> 
> 
> Look turd, there is not enough food and clean water now.  You need to wake up and see the starvation
> How many people can fit means nothing if they can not live properly
> 
> Google Image Result for https://www.sciencesource.com/Doc/SCS/Media/TR1_WATERMARKED/3/6/d/5/SS2658909.jpg?d63643131887
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> BS. The world has a food surplus.
> 
> The only places where people are not getting enough food is because of their socialist shithole government.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What animal protein sources of food are in surplus
> 
> Lol, you cant name one, as people are resorting to eating bugs for protein
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What’s wrong with eating bugs? I’ve done it, as have people since day one.
> 
> If you’re so worried about kids starving, then
> A. Be proactive in helping.
> B. Ask why their governments created such a mess.
Click to expand...

I am in a conversation with a person with a 6 to 8 year old mental age, who eats bugs and is making the argument that the earth is not overpopulated, as all sorts of animals, plants, fish, and reptiles are vanishing chiefly because of human overpopulation

1500 years ago there was perhaps 100 million people on the planet, at the current rate of growth there will be 100 trillion in another 1500 years

Use your brain, bye the way even bugs are decreasing in numbers

Google Image Result for https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/courses-images/wp-content/uploads/sites/3141/2018/03/27183835/6a74bbf1e3a03cdcea4cb15b0416bd7e.jpg


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone who thinks the world is even close to being overpopulated has never traveled.
> 
> You can take every human on earth, give them a quarter acre, and that would just fill Texas.
> 
> 
> 
> Look turd, there is not enough food and clean water now.  You need to wake up and see the starvation
> How many people can fit means nothing if they can not live properly
> 
> Google Image Result for https://www.sciencesource.com/Doc/SCS/Media/TR1_WATERMARKED/3/6/d/5/SS2658909.jpg?d63643131887
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> BS. The world has a food surplus.
> 
> The only places where people are not getting enough food is because of their socialist shithole government.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What animal protein sources of food are in surplus
> 
> Lol, you cant name one, as people are resorting to eating bugs for protein
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What’s wrong with eating bugs? I’ve done it, as have people since day one.
> 
> If you’re so worried about kids starving, then
> A. Be proactive in helping.
> B. Ask why their governments created such a mess.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ...at the current rate of growth there will be 100 trillion in another 1500 years
> 
> ...
Click to expand...



“100 trillion”. 

Holy crap, you’re an idiot!


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Look turd, there is not enough food and clean water now.  You need to wake up and see the starvation
> How many people can fit means nothing if they can not live properly
> 
> Google Image Result for https://www.sciencesource.com/Doc/SCS/Media/TR1_WATERMARKED/3/6/d/5/SS2658909.jpg?d63643131887
> 
> 
> 
> BS. The world has a food surplus.
> 
> The only places where people are not getting enough food is because of their socialist shithole government.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What animal protein sources of food are in surplus
> 
> Lol, you cant name one, as people are resorting to eating bugs for protein
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What’s wrong with eating bugs? I’ve done it, as have people since day one.
> 
> If you’re so worried about kids starving, then
> A. Be proactive in helping.
> B. Ask why their governments created such a mess.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ...at the current rate of growth there will be 100 trillion in another 1500 years
> 
> ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> “100 trillion”.
> 
> Holy crap, you’re an idiot!
Click to expand...

Do the math, that said being an idiot you cant do that.

How long will it take human population to exceed one trillion?

How many algae are on the planet now?  They produce the O2 that you breath, and the current overpopulation here will have people exiting the earth very soon, plans are being made now.


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> BS. The world has a food surplus.
> 
> The only places where people are not getting enough food is because of their socialist shithole government.
> 
> 
> 
> What animal protein sources of food are in surplus
> 
> Lol, you cant name one, as people are resorting to eating bugs for protein
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What’s wrong with eating bugs? I’ve done it, as have people since day one.
> 
> If you’re so worried about kids starving, then
> A. Be proactive in helping.
> B. Ask why their governments created such a mess.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ...at the current rate of growth there will be 100 trillion in another 1500 years
> 
> ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> “100 trillion”.
> 
> Holy crap, you’re an idiot!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do the math, that said being an idiot you cant do that.
> 
> How long will it take human population to exceed one trillion?
> 
> How many algae are on the planet now?  They produce the O2 that you breath, and the current overpopulation here will have people exiting the earth very soon, plans are being made now.
Click to expand...







 It is hilarious how fucking stupid you are. I tried to tell you before that there is a difference between fertility rates and overall population you have been told before that there is a difference between living longer and having more and more children you have been told before the fertility rates are falling all around the world in most developed and many developing countries. At this point you are really making a jack ass of yourself. By all means, carry-on.


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> What animal protein sources of food are in surplus
> 
> Lol, you cant name one, as people are resorting to eating bugs for protein
> 
> 
> 
> What’s wrong with eating bugs? I’ve done it, as have people since day one.
> 
> If you’re so worried about kids starving, then
> A. Be proactive in helping.
> B. Ask why their governments created such a mess.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ...at the current rate of growth there will be 100 trillion in another 1500 years
> 
> ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> “100 trillion”.
> 
> Holy crap, you’re an idiot!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do the math, that said being an idiot you cant do that.
> 
> How long will it take human population to exceed one trillion?
> 
> How many algae are on the planet now?  They produce the O2 that you breath, and the current overpopulation here will have people exiting the earth very soon, plans are being made now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is hilarious how fucking stupid you are. I tried to tell you before that there is a difference between fertility rates and overall population you have been told before that there is a difference between living longer and having more and more children you have been told before the fertility rates are falling all around the world in most developed and many developing countries. At this point you are really making a jack ass of yourself. By all means, carry-on.
Click to expand...

And you can not grasp that there could be a trillion humans on the earth by 2500.   The population increases every minute, except in your schizzo mind


----------



## Weatherman2020

Rosy said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone who thinks the world is even close to being overpopulated has never traveled.
> 
> You can take every human on earth, give them a quarter acre, and that would just fill Texas.
> 
> 
> 
> Look turd, there is not enough food and clean water now.  You need to wake up and see the starvation
> How many people can fit means nothing if they can not live properly
> 
> Google Image Result for https://www.sciencesource.com/Doc/SCS/Media/TR1_WATERMARKED/3/6/d/5/SS2658909.jpg?d63643131887
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> BS. The world has a food surplus.
> 
> The only places where people are not getting enough food is because of their socialist shithole government.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What animal protein sources of food are in surplus
> 
> Lol, you cant name one, as people are resorting to eating bugs for protein
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What’s wrong with eating bugs? I’ve done it, as have people since day one.
> 
> If you’re so worried about kids starving, then
> A. Be proactive in helping.
> B. Ask why their governments created such a mess.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am in a conversation with a person with a 6 to 8 year old mental age, who eats bugs and is making the argument that the earth is not overpopulated, as all sorts of animals, plants, fish, and reptiles are vanishing chiefly because of human overpopulation
> 
> 1500 years ago there was perhaps 100 million people on the planet, at the current rate of growth there will be 100 trillion in another 1500 years
> 
> Use your brain, bye the way even bugs are decreasing in numbers
> 
> Google Image Result for https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/courses-images/wp-content/uploads/sites/3141/2018/03/27183835/6a74bbf1e3a03cdcea4cb15b0416bd7e.jpg
Click to expand...

I go to third world nations and sleep in jungles. Where’s your knowledge derived from?


----------



## The Sage of Main Street

Rosy said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> 
> I do not believe the Earth is overpopulated, resource wise. I do believe there are too many people on Earth for us to live happily.
> 
> Is our population expanding? Yes, because people are living longer. This will be coming to a halt, if current trends continue. The fertility rate needed for a stable population is 2.33
> 
> This has been our rate since 1990:
> 
> 1990–1995 3.04
> 1995–2000 2.79
> 2000–2005 2.62
> 2005–2010 2.52
> 2010–2015 2.36
> 
> As anyone can see, the Earth is quickly reaching a stable population growth, but once we get below 2.33, we will begin to see the population shrink.
> 
> Mark
> 
> 
> 
> You need to travel to China and india
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What if I travel to the US and Europe?
> 
> Mark
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There are different ways to Express overpopulation I consider the USA overpopulated because there are people living under bridges that can not find work.  Thus a place can be overpopulated in relationship to the local economy.  *The earth is clearly overpopulated because human pollution is destroying the food web*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Then we disagree,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Exactly how much pollution do you want on the earth?
Click to expand...

*Whoever Controls the Terms Used Determines the Debate's Outcome*

Pollution is antiseptic.  Low-talent pseudo-intellectuals, who are jealous of the advances made by geniuses, call byproducts "pollution" in order to make us believe that no level of that can possibly be beneficial.  But it is far more harmful to viruses, bacteria, and toxic insects than it is to humans.  "Clean" (more truth-distorting wordplay) air is the most toxic of all.

Imagine driving down a rocky, bumpy road.  That is pollution.  Then imagine driving down a road lined with people throwing rocks at you.  That is "pure" natural air.


----------



## Weatherman2020

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> What’s wrong with eating bugs? I’ve done it, as have people since day one.
> 
> If you’re so worried about kids starving, then
> A. Be proactive in helping.
> B. Ask why their governments created such a mess.
> 
> 
> 
> ...at the current rate of growth there will be 100 trillion in another 1500 years
> 
> ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> “100 trillion”.
> 
> Holy crap, you’re an idiot!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do the math, that said being an idiot you cant do that.
> 
> How long will it take human population to exceed one trillion?
> 
> How many algae are on the planet now?  They produce the O2 that you breath, and the current overpopulation here will have people exiting the earth very soon, plans are being made now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is hilarious how fucking stupid you are. I tried to tell you before that there is a difference between fertility rates and overall population you have been told before that there is a difference between living longer and having more and more children you have been told before the fertility rates are falling all around the world in most developed and many developing countries. At this point you are really making a jack ass of yourself. By all means, carry-on.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And you can not grasp that there could be a trillion humans on the earth by 2500.   The population increases every minute, except in your schizzo mind
Click to expand...

The world was supposed to have been overpopulated in 1975. It is now 2018 and you can fit the entire world inside Texas with lots of elbow room. 

But thanks to our work, many are climbing out of extreme poverty.


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> What’s wrong with eating bugs? I’ve done it, as have people since day one.
> 
> If you’re so worried about kids starving, then
> A. Be proactive in helping.
> B. Ask why their governments created such a mess.
> 
> 
> 
> ...at the current rate of growth there will be 100 trillion in another 1500 years
> 
> ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> “100 trillion”.
> 
> Holy crap, you’re an idiot!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do the math, that said being an idiot you cant do that.
> 
> How long will it take human population to exceed one trillion?
> 
> How many algae are on the planet now?  They produce the O2 that you breath, and the current overpopulation here will have people exiting the earth very soon, plans are being made now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is hilarious how fucking stupid you are. I tried to tell you before that there is a difference between fertility rates and overall population you have been told before that there is a difference between living longer and having more and more children you have been told before the fertility rates are falling all around the world in most developed and many developing countries. At this point you are really making a jack ass of yourself. By all means, carry-on.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And you can not grasp that there could be a trillion humans on the earth by 2500.   The population increases every minute, except in your schizzo mind
Click to expand...


----------



## The Sage of Main Street

Rosy said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> 
> What if I travel to the US and Europe?
> 
> Mark
> 
> 
> 
> There are different ways to Express overpopulation I consider the USA overpopulated because there are people living under bridges that can not find work.  ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> fool.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So you think this is normal and there is no population problem
> 
> Google Image Result for https://www.sciencesource.com/Doc/SCS/Media/TR1_WATERMARKED/3/6/d/5/SS2658909.jpg?d63643131887
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I drove across America this summer. For hours of driving there was no sign of human structures.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> that you can not comprehend with your little intellect
> 
> Are you really so stupid that you  You are outmatched here
> 
> 130
Click to expand...

*Robotic Boytoys for Father-Figure Zero-Growth Cult Leaders Always Give Themselves Away*

Anti-human nature-loving misfits, fanatically pushing an anti-progress agenda, are always forced by their nasty emptiness to resort to name-calling.


----------



## Rosy

Weatherman2020 said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Look turd, there is not enough food and clean water now.  You need to wake up and see the starvation
> How many people can fit means nothing if they can not live properly
> 
> Google Image Result for https://www.sciencesource.com/Doc/SCS/Media/TR1_WATERMARKED/3/6/d/5/SS2658909.jpg?d63643131887
> 
> 
> 
> BS. The world has a food surplus.
> 
> The only places where people are not getting enough food is because of their socialist shithole government.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What animal protein sources of food are in surplus
> 
> Lol, you cant name one, as people are resorting to eating bugs for protein
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What’s wrong with eating bugs? I’ve done it, as have people since day one.
> 
> If you’re so worried about kids starving, then
> A. Be proactive in helping.
> B. Ask why their governments created such a mess.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am in a conversation with a person with a 6 to 8 year old mental age, who eats bugs and is making the argument that the earth is not overpopulated, as all sorts of animals, plants, fish, and reptiles are vanishing chiefly because of human overpopulation
> 
> 1500 years ago there was perhaps 100 million people on the planet, at the current rate of growth there will be 100 trillion in another 1500 years
> 
> Use your brain, bye the way even bugs are decreasing in numbers
> 
> Google Image Result for https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/courses-images/wp-content/uploads/sites/3141/2018/03/27183835/6a74bbf1e3a03cdcea4cb15b0416bd7e.jpg
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I go to third world nations and sleep in jungles. Where’s your knowledge derived from?
Click to expand...

Overpopulation occurs when organisms requirements of the environment and the environments ability to process all of the waste of the organism are not in a symbiotic balance.  Jungles do not support large human populations, in fact the people who live in them are burning the jungles to create farmland, accelerating the symbiotic imbalance of plants to animals, CO2 sequestration and O2 production.

130


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...at the current rate of growth there will be 100 trillion in another 1500 years
> 
> ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “100 trillion”.
> 
> Holy crap, you’re an idiot!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do the math, that said being an idiot you cant do that.
> 
> How long will it take human population to exceed one trillion?
> 
> How many algae are on the planet now?  They produce the O2 that you breath, and the current overpopulation here will have people exiting the earth very soon, plans are being made now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is hilarious how fucking stupid you are. I tried to tell you before that there is a difference between fertility rates and overall population you have been told before that there is a difference between living longer and having more and more children you have been told before the fertility rates are falling all around the world in most developed and many developing countries. At this point you are really making a jack ass of yourself. By all means, carry-on.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And you can not grasp that there could be a trillion humans on the earth by 2500.   The population increases every minute, except in your schizzo mind
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

That is your intellectual level.


----------



## Weatherman2020

Rosy said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> BS. The world has a food surplus.
> 
> The only places where people are not getting enough food is because of their socialist shithole government.
> 
> 
> 
> What animal protein sources of food are in surplus
> 
> Lol, you cant name one, as people are resorting to eating bugs for protein
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What’s wrong with eating bugs? I’ve done it, as have people since day one.
> 
> If you’re so worried about kids starving, then
> A. Be proactive in helping.
> B. Ask why their governments created such a mess.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am in a conversation with a person with a 6 to 8 year old mental age, who eats bugs and is making the argument that the earth is not overpopulated, as all sorts of animals, plants, fish, and reptiles are vanishing chiefly because of human overpopulation
> 
> 1500 years ago there was perhaps 100 million people on the planet, at the current rate of growth there will be 100 trillion in another 1500 years
> 
> Use your brain, bye the way even bugs are decreasing in numbers
> 
> Google Image Result for https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/courses-images/wp-content/uploads/sites/3141/2018/03/27183835/6a74bbf1e3a03cdcea4cb15b0416bd7e.jpg
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I go to third world nations and sleep in jungles. Where’s your knowledge derived from?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Overpopulation occurs when organisms requirements of the environment and the environments ability to process all of the waste of the organism are not in a symbiotic balance.  Jungles do not support large human populations, in fact the people who live in them are burning the jungles to create farmland, accelerating the symbiotic imbalance of plants to animals, CO2 sequestration and O2 production.
> 
> 130
Click to expand...

The world can support a lot more people, as my graph showing the huge decline in poverty shows.


----------



## Weatherman2020

Rosy said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> BS. The world has a food surplus.
> 
> The only places where people are not getting enough food is because of their socialist shithole government.
> 
> 
> 
> What animal protein sources of food are in surplus
> 
> Lol, you cant name one, as people are resorting to eating bugs for protein
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What’s wrong with eating bugs? I’ve done it, as have people since day one.
> 
> If you’re so worried about kids starving, then
> A. Be proactive in helping.
> B. Ask why their governments created such a mess.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am in a conversation with a person with a 6 to 8 year old mental age, who eats bugs and is making the argument that the earth is not overpopulated, as all sorts of animals, plants, fish, and reptiles are vanishing chiefly because of human overpopulation
> 
> 1500 years ago there was perhaps 100 million people on the planet, at the current rate of growth there will be 100 trillion in another 1500 years
> 
> Use your brain, bye the way even bugs are decreasing in numbers
> 
> Google Image Result for https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/courses-images/wp-content/uploads/sites/3141/2018/03/27183835/6a74bbf1e3a03cdcea4cb15b0416bd7e.jpg
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I go to third world nations and sleep in jungles. Where’s your knowledge derived from?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Overpopulation occurs when organisms requirements of the environment and the environments ability to process all of the waste of the organism are not in a symbiotic balance.  Jungles do not support large human populations, in fact the people who live in them are burning the jungles to create farmland, accelerating the symbiotic imbalance of plants to animals, CO2 sequestration and O2 production.
> 
> 130
Click to expand...

Largest population and top economic center in the world a thousand years ago was in the jungles of Cambodia.


----------



## Rosy

Weatherman2020 said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> What animal protein sources of food are in surplus
> 
> Lol, you cant name one, as people are resorting to eating bugs for protein
> 
> 
> 
> What’s wrong with eating bugs? I’ve done it, as have people since day one.
> 
> If you’re so worried about kids starving, then
> A. Be proactive in helping.
> B. Ask why their governments created such a mess.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am in a conversation with a person with a 6 to 8 year old mental age, who eats bugs and is making the argument that the earth is not overpopulated, as all sorts of animals, plants, fish, and reptiles are vanishing chiefly because of human overpopulation
> 
> 1500 years ago there was perhaps 100 million people on the planet, at the current rate of growth there will be 100 trillion in another 1500 years
> 
> Use your brain, bye the way even bugs are decreasing in numbers
> 
> Google Image Result for https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/courses-images/wp-content/uploads/sites/3141/2018/03/27183835/6a74bbf1e3a03cdcea4cb15b0416bd7e.jpg
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I go to third world nations and sleep in jungles. Where’s your knowledge derived from?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Overpopulation occurs when organisms requirements of the environment and the environments ability to process all of the waste of the organism are not in a symbiotic balance.  Jungles do not support large human populations, in fact the people who live in them are burning the jungles to create farmland, accelerating the symbiotic imbalance of plants to animals, CO2 sequestration and O2 production.
> 
> 130
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The world can support a lot more people, as my graph showing the huge decline in poverty shows.
Click to expand...


There is no worldwide decline in poverty, you need to take your meds


----------



## Weatherman2020

Rosy said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> What’s wrong with eating bugs? I’ve done it, as have people since day one.
> 
> If you’re so worried about kids starving, then
> A. Be proactive in helping.
> B. Ask why their governments created such a mess.
> 
> 
> 
> I am in a conversation with a person with a 6 to 8 year old mental age, who eats bugs and is making the argument that the earth is not overpopulated, as all sorts of animals, plants, fish, and reptiles are vanishing chiefly because of human overpopulation
> 
> 1500 years ago there was perhaps 100 million people on the planet, at the current rate of growth there will be 100 trillion in another 1500 years
> 
> Use your brain, bye the way even bugs are decreasing in numbers
> 
> Google Image Result for https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/courses-images/wp-content/uploads/sites/3141/2018/03/27183835/6a74bbf1e3a03cdcea4cb15b0416bd7e.jpg
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I go to third world nations and sleep in jungles. Where’s your knowledge derived from?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Overpopulation occurs when organisms requirements of the environment and the environments ability to process all of the waste of the organism are not in a symbiotic balance.  Jungles do not support large human populations, in fact the people who live in them are burning the jungles to create farmland, accelerating the symbiotic imbalance of plants to animals, CO2 sequestration and O2 production.
> 
> 130
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The world can support a lot more people, as my graph showing the huge decline in poverty shows.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is no worldwide decline in poverty, you need to take your meds
Click to expand...

You’re an ignorant moron then.


----------



## Rosy

Weatherman2020 said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> What animal protein sources of food are in surplus
> 
> Lol, you cant name one, as people are resorting to eating bugs for protein
> 
> 
> 
> What’s wrong with eating bugs? I’ve done it, as have people since day one.
> 
> If you’re so worried about kids starving, then
> A. Be proactive in helping.
> B. Ask why their governments created such a mess.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am in a conversation with a person with a 6 to 8 year old mental age, who eats bugs and is making the argument that the earth is not overpopulated, as all sorts of animals, plants, fish, and reptiles are vanishing chiefly because of human overpopulation
> 
> 1500 years ago there was perhaps 100 million people on the planet, at the current rate of growth there will be 100 trillion in another 1500 years
> 
> Use your brain, bye the way even bugs are decreasing in numbers
> 
> Google Image Result for https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/courses-images/wp-content/uploads/sites/3141/2018/03/27183835/6a74bbf1e3a03cdcea4cb15b0416bd7e.jpg
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I go to third world nations and sleep in jungles. Where’s your knowledge derived from?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Overpopulation occurs when organisms requirements of the environment and the environments ability to process all of the waste of the organism are not in a symbiotic balance.  Jungles do not support large human populations, in fact the people who live in them are burning the jungles to create farmland, accelerating the symbiotic imbalance of plants to animals, CO2 sequestration and O2 production.
> 
> 130
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Largest population and top economic center in the world a thousand years ago was in the jungles of Cambodia.
Click to expand...

Wrong, as usual

*Largest cities in the year 1000AD*

Córdoba, Caliphate of Córdoba – 450,000
Kaifeng, Song Dynasty (China) – 400,000
Constantinople, Byzantine Empire – 300,000
Angkor, Khmer Empire (Cambodia) – 200,000
Kyoto, Heian Period (Japan) – 175,000
Cairo, Fatimid Caliphate – 135,000
Baghdad, Buyid Dynasty (Iraq) – 125,000
Nishapur, Ghaznavid Dynasty (Iran) – 125,000
Al-Hasa, Qarmatian State (Arabia) – 110,000
Patan, Chaulukya Dynasty (India) – 100,000


----------



## Weatherman2020

Rosy said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> What’s wrong with eating bugs? I’ve done it, as have people since day one.
> 
> If you’re so worried about kids starving, then
> A. Be proactive in helping.
> B. Ask why their governments created such a mess.
> 
> 
> 
> I am in a conversation with a person with a 6 to 8 year old mental age, who eats bugs and is making the argument that the earth is not overpopulated, as all sorts of animals, plants, fish, and reptiles are vanishing chiefly because of human overpopulation
> 
> 1500 years ago there was perhaps 100 million people on the planet, at the current rate of growth there will be 100 trillion in another 1500 years
> 
> Use your brain, bye the way even bugs are decreasing in numbers
> 
> Google Image Result for https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/courses-images/wp-content/uploads/sites/3141/2018/03/27183835/6a74bbf1e3a03cdcea4cb15b0416bd7e.jpg
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I go to third world nations and sleep in jungles. Where’s your knowledge derived from?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Overpopulation occurs when organisms requirements of the environment and the environments ability to process all of the waste of the organism are not in a symbiotic balance.  Jungles do not support large human populations, in fact the people who live in them are burning the jungles to create farmland, accelerating the symbiotic imbalance of plants to animals, CO2 sequestration and O2 production.
> 
> 130
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The world can support a lot more people, as my graph showing the huge decline in poverty shows.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is no worldwide decline in poverty, you need to take your meds
Click to expand...

Extreme poverty should be eliminated in the world by 2030. 

Report: Extreme Poverty Declining Worldwide

Decline of Global Extreme Poverty Continues but Has Slowed: World Bank

Extreme poverty falls to record low


----------



## Rosy

Weatherman2020 said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am in a conversation with a person with a 6 to 8 year old mental age, who eats bugs and is making the argument that the earth is not overpopulated, as all sorts of animals, plants, fish, and reptiles are vanishing chiefly because of human overpopulation
> 
> 1500 years ago there was perhaps 100 million people on the planet, at the current rate of growth there will be 100 trillion in another 1500 years
> 
> Use your brain, bye the way even bugs are decreasing in numbers
> 
> Google Image Result for https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/courses-images/wp-content/uploads/sites/3141/2018/03/27183835/6a74bbf1e3a03cdcea4cb15b0416bd7e.jpg
> 
> 
> 
> I go to third world nations and sleep in jungles. Where’s your knowledge derived from?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Overpopulation occurs when organisms requirements of the environment and the environments ability to process all of the waste of the organism are not in a symbiotic balance.  Jungles do not support large human populations, in fact the people who live in them are burning the jungles to create farmland, accelerating the symbiotic imbalance of plants to animals, CO2 sequestration and O2 production.
> 
> 130
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The world can support a lot more people, as my graph showing the huge decline in poverty shows.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is no worldwide decline in poverty, you need to take your meds
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Extreme poverty should be eliminated in the world by 2030.
> 
> Report: Extreme Poverty Declining Worldwide
> 
> Decline of Global Extreme Poverty Continues but Has Slowed: World Bank
> 
> Extreme poverty falls to record low
Click to expand...


Extreme poverty will never be eliminated while the population increases...…………… Just a rational fact


----------



## Weatherman2020

Rosy said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I go to third world nations and sleep in jungles. Where’s your knowledge derived from?
> 
> 
> 
> Overpopulation occurs when organisms requirements of the environment and the environments ability to process all of the waste of the organism are not in a symbiotic balance.  Jungles do not support large human populations, in fact the people who live in them are burning the jungles to create farmland, accelerating the symbiotic imbalance of plants to animals, CO2 sequestration and O2 production.
> 
> 130
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The world can support a lot more people, as my graph showing the huge decline in poverty shows.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is no worldwide decline in poverty, you need to take your meds
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Extreme poverty should be eliminated in the world by 2030.
> 
> Report: Extreme Poverty Declining Worldwide
> 
> Decline of Global Extreme Poverty Continues but Has Slowed: World Bank
> 
> Extreme poverty falls to record low
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Extreme poverty will never be eliminated while the population increases...…………… Just a rational fact
Click to expand...

You need to get out of your apartment now and then.


----------



## Rosy

Weatherman2020 said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Overpopulation occurs when organisms requirements of the environment and the environments ability to process all of the waste of the organism are not in a symbiotic balance.  Jungles do not support large human populations, in fact the people who live in them are burning the jungles to create farmland, accelerating the symbiotic imbalance of plants to animals, CO2 sequestration and O2 production.
> 
> 130
> 
> 
> 
> The world can support a lot more people, as my graph showing the huge decline in poverty shows.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is no worldwide decline in poverty, you need to take your meds
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Extreme poverty should be eliminated in the world by 2030.
> 
> Report: Extreme Poverty Declining Worldwide
> 
> Decline of Global Extreme Poverty Continues but Has Slowed: World Bank
> 
> Extreme poverty falls to record low
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Extreme poverty will never be eliminated while the population increases...…………… Just a rational fact
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You need to get out of your apartment now and then.
> View attachment 224983
Click to expand...

You are retarded, you are claiming that in under 12 years by 2030 there will be no World poverty


----------



## Rosy

Weatherman2020 said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Overpopulation occurs when organisms requirements of the environment and the environments ability to process all of the waste of the organism are not in a symbiotic balance.  Jungles do not support large human populations, in fact the people who live in them are burning the jungles to create farmland, accelerating the symbiotic imbalance of plants to animals, CO2 sequestration and O2 production.
> 
> 130
> 
> 
> 
> The world can support a lot more people, as my graph showing the huge decline in poverty shows.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is no worldwide decline in poverty, you need to take your meds
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Extreme poverty should be eliminated in the world by 2030.
> 
> Report: Extreme Poverty Declining Worldwide
> 
> Decline of Global Extreme Poverty Continues but Has Slowed: World Bank
> 
> Extreme poverty falls to record low
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Extreme poverty will never be eliminated while the population increases...…………… Just a rational fact
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You need to get out of your apartment now and then.
> View attachment 224983
Click to expand...

I do not live in a rent controlled apartment like you do.  I own a home, 2 cars 3 SUV's 1 boat, 403b, 401k, Roth IRA's taxable investments, and more apples then you have ever seen.

Now grow up kiddy


----------



## Weatherman2020

Rosy said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The world can support a lot more people, as my graph showing the huge decline in poverty shows.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is no worldwide decline in poverty, you need to take your meds
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Extreme poverty should be eliminated in the world by 2030.
> 
> Report: Extreme Poverty Declining Worldwide
> 
> Decline of Global Extreme Poverty Continues but Has Slowed: World Bank
> 
> Extreme poverty falls to record low
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Extreme poverty will never be eliminated while the population increases...…………… Just a rational fact
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You need to get out of your apartment now and then.
> View attachment 224983
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are retarded, you are claiming that in under 12 years by 2030 there will be no World poverty
Click to expand...

Not my claim. 

Ending Extreme Poverty by 2030 Looks Possible  in This Nifty Chart


----------



## Weatherman2020

Rosy said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The world can support a lot more people, as my graph showing the huge decline in poverty shows.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is no worldwide decline in poverty, you need to take your meds
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Extreme poverty should be eliminated in the world by 2030.
> 
> Report: Extreme Poverty Declining Worldwide
> 
> Decline of Global Extreme Poverty Continues but Has Slowed: World Bank
> 
> Extreme poverty falls to record low
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Extreme poverty will never be eliminated while the population increases...…………… Just a rational fact
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You need to get out of your apartment now and then.
> View attachment 224983
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I do not live in a rent controlled apartment like you do.  I own a home, 2 cars 3 SUV's 1 boat, 403b, 401k, Roth IRA's taxable investments, and more apples then you have ever seen.
> 
> Now grow up kiddy
Click to expand...

I’ve been to 19 nations, most of them third world.


----------



## Rosy

Weatherman2020 said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is no worldwide decline in poverty, you need to take your meds
> 
> 
> 
> Extreme poverty should be eliminated in the world by 2030.
> 
> Report: Extreme Poverty Declining Worldwide
> 
> Decline of Global Extreme Poverty Continues but Has Slowed: World Bank
> 
> Extreme poverty falls to record low
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Extreme poverty will never be eliminated while the population increases...…………… Just a rational fact
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You need to get out of your apartment now and then.
> View attachment 224983
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are retarded, you are claiming that in under 12 years by 2030 there will be no World poverty
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not my claim.
> 
> Ending Extreme Poverty by 2030 Looks Possible  in This Nifty Chart
Click to expand...


You are using the link to express your opinion that the claim is valid.  You are as irrational as any fool who believes what they read on the internet is real because they read it on the internet


----------



## Rosy

Weatherman2020 said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is no worldwide decline in poverty, you need to take your meds
> 
> 
> 
> Extreme poverty should be eliminated in the world by 2030.
> 
> Report: Extreme Poverty Declining Worldwide
> 
> Decline of Global Extreme Poverty Continues but Has Slowed: World Bank
> 
> Extreme poverty falls to record low
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Extreme poverty will never be eliminated while the population increases...…………… Just a rational fact
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You need to get out of your apartment now and then.
> View attachment 224983
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I do not live in a rent controlled apartment like you do.  I own a home, 2 cars 3 SUV's 1 boat, 403b, 401k, Roth IRA's taxable investments, and more apples then you have ever seen.
> 
> Now grow up kiddy
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I’ve been to 19 nations, most of them third world.
Click to expand...

Yea so?

Gilligan had his own island


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> “100 trillion”.
> 
> Holy crap, you’re an idiot!
> 
> 
> 
> Do the math, that said being an idiot you cant do that.
> 
> How long will it take human population to exceed one trillion?
> 
> How many algae are on the planet now?  They produce the O2 that you breath, and the current overpopulation here will have people exiting the earth very soon, plans are being made now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is hilarious how fucking stupid you are. I tried to tell you before that there is a difference between fertility rates and overall population you have been told before that there is a difference between living longer and having more and more children you have been told before the fertility rates are falling all around the world in most developed and many developing countries. At this point you are really making a jack ass of yourself. By all means, carry-on.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And you can not grasp that there could be a trillion humans on the earth by 2500.   The population increases every minute, except in your schizzo mind
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is your intellectual level.
Click to expand...




Yeah, trying to play the “intellectual” is really not working for you what with all the screwy shit you’ve posted on this thread. Try a different persona.


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do the math, that said being an idiot you cant do that.
> 
> How long will it take human population to exceed one trillion?
> 
> How many algae are on the planet now?  They produce the O2 that you breath, and the current overpopulation here will have people exiting the earth very soon, plans are being made now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is hilarious how fucking stupid you are. I tried to tell you before that there is a difference between fertility rates and overall population you have been told before that there is a difference between living longer and having more and more children you have been told before the fertility rates are falling all around the world in most developed and many developing countries. At this point you are really making a jack ass of yourself. By all means, carry-on.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And you can not grasp that there could be a trillion humans on the earth by 2500.   The population increases every minute, except in your schizzo mind
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is your intellectual level.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, trying to play the “intellectual” is really not working for you what with all the screwy shit you’ve posted on this thread. Try a different persona.
Click to expand...


Another highly absent of value bunch of empty words.

You know you are allowed to call your Mom


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> What’s wrong with eating bugs? I’ve done it, as have people since day one.
> 
> If you’re so worried about kids starving, then
> A. Be proactive in helping.
> B. Ask why their governments created such a mess.
> 
> 
> 
> I am in a conversation with a person with a 6 to 8 year old mental age, who eats bugs and is making the argument that the earth is not overpopulated, as all sorts of animals, plants, fish, and reptiles are vanishing chiefly because of human overpopulation
> 
> 1500 years ago there was perhaps 100 million people on the planet, at the current rate of growth there will be 100 trillion in another 1500 years
> 
> Use your brain, bye the way even bugs are decreasing in numbers
> 
> Google Image Result for https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/courses-images/wp-content/uploads/sites/3141/2018/03/27183835/6a74bbf1e3a03cdcea4cb15b0416bd7e.jpg
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I go to third world nations and sleep in jungles. Where’s your knowledge derived from?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Overpopulation occurs when organisms requirements of the environment and the environments ability to process all of the waste of the organism are not in a symbiotic balance.  Jungles do not support large human populations, in fact the people who live in them are burning the jungles to create farmland, accelerating the symbiotic imbalance of plants to animals, CO2 sequestration and O2 production.
> 
> 130
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The world can support a lot more people, as my graph showing the huge decline in poverty shows.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is no worldwide decline in poverty, you need to take your meds
Click to expand...




Once again you are wrong in the extreme. Why don’t you actually learn about things before opening your mouth and letting whatever shit is there fall out?


----------



## Weatherman2020

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am in a conversation with a person with a 6 to 8 year old mental age, who eats bugs and is making the argument that the earth is not overpopulated, as all sorts of animals, plants, fish, and reptiles are vanishing chiefly because of human overpopulation
> 
> 1500 years ago there was perhaps 100 million people on the planet, at the current rate of growth there will be 100 trillion in another 1500 years
> 
> Use your brain, bye the way even bugs are decreasing in numbers
> 
> Google Image Result for https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/courses-images/wp-content/uploads/sites/3141/2018/03/27183835/6a74bbf1e3a03cdcea4cb15b0416bd7e.jpg
> 
> 
> 
> I go to third world nations and sleep in jungles. Where’s your knowledge derived from?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Overpopulation occurs when organisms requirements of the environment and the environments ability to process all of the waste of the organism are not in a symbiotic balance.  Jungles do not support large human populations, in fact the people who live in them are burning the jungles to create farmland, accelerating the symbiotic imbalance of plants to animals, CO2 sequestration and O2 production.
> 
> 130
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The world can support a lot more people, as my graph showing the huge decline in poverty shows.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is no worldwide decline in poverty, you need to take your meds
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Once again you are wrong in the extreme. Why don’t you actually learn about things before opening your mouth and letting whatever shit is there fall out?
Click to expand...

She’s a troll.


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am in a conversation with a person with a 6 to 8 year old mental age, who eats bugs and is making the argument that the earth is not overpopulated, as all sorts of animals, plants, fish, and reptiles are vanishing chiefly because of human overpopulation
> 
> 1500 years ago there was perhaps 100 million people on the planet, at the current rate of growth there will be 100 trillion in another 1500 years
> 
> Use your brain, bye the way even bugs are decreasing in numbers
> 
> Google Image Result for https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/courses-images/wp-content/uploads/sites/3141/2018/03/27183835/6a74bbf1e3a03cdcea4cb15b0416bd7e.jpg
> 
> 
> 
> I go to third world nations and sleep in jungles. Where’s your knowledge derived from?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Overpopulation occurs when organisms requirements of the environment and the environments ability to process all of the waste of the organism are not in a symbiotic balance.  Jungles do not support large human populations, in fact the people who live in them are burning the jungles to create farmland, accelerating the symbiotic imbalance of plants to animals, CO2 sequestration and O2 production.
> 
> 130
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The world can support a lot more people, as my graph showing the huge decline in poverty shows.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is no worldwide decline in poverty, you need to take your meds
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Once again you are wrong in the extreme. Why don’t you actually learn about things before opening your mouth and letting whatever shit is there fall out?
Click to expand...

How many continents do you own stocks on?

Me, 6, until they begin drilling on Antarctica that is

All you have is that funny car payment


----------



## Rosy

Weatherman2020 said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I go to third world nations and sleep in jungles. Where’s your knowledge derived from?
> 
> 
> 
> Overpopulation occurs when organisms requirements of the environment and the environments ability to process all of the waste of the organism are not in a symbiotic balance.  Jungles do not support large human populations, in fact the people who live in them are burning the jungles to create farmland, accelerating the symbiotic imbalance of plants to animals, CO2 sequestration and O2 production.
> 
> 130
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The world can support a lot more people, as my graph showing the huge decline in poverty shows.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is no worldwide decline in poverty, you need to take your meds
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Once again you are wrong in the extreme. Why don’t you actually learn about things before opening your mouth and letting whatever shit is there fall out?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> She’s a troll.
Click to expand...

And you claim that there will be no world poverty in 2030...…………………..

You are mentally not more then 14


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is hilarious how fucking stupid you are. I tried to tell you before that there is a difference between fertility rates and overall population you have been told before that there is a difference between living longer and having more and more children you have been told before the fertility rates are falling all around the world in most developed and many developing countries. At this point you are really making a jack ass of yourself. By all means, carry-on.
> 
> 
> 
> And you can not grasp that there could be a trillion humans on the earth by 2500.   The population increases every minute, except in your schizzo mind
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is your intellectual level.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, trying to play the “intellectual” is really not working for you what with all the screwy shit you’ve posted on this thread. Try a different persona.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Another highly absent of value bunch of empty words.
> 
> You know you are allowed to call your Mom
Click to expand...




Why are you so determined to embarrass yourself?

- fertility rates are falling in many parts of the world, a trend set to accelerate in the relatively near future.

- China no longer has a “one-child law.” It was repealed because it finally became clear what dire consequences it carried. Now the Chinese government is trying to encourage families to have more children, but so far they are not convincing couples. 

- there will NEVER be “a trillion” people in the world.  


- war, poverty, hunger, and pollution are not proof of “overpopulation,” because they have been a part of human history at all population levels.


- over the past 50 years more people have been lifted out of poverty than during the rest of all human history combined.


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> And you can not grasp that there could be a trillion humans on the earth by 2500.   The population increases every minute, except in your schizzo mind
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is your intellectual level.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, trying to play the “intellectual” is really not working for you what with all the screwy shit you’ve posted on this thread. Try a different persona.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Another highly absent of value bunch of empty words.
> 
> You know you are allowed to call your Mom
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why are you so determined to embarrass yourself?
> 
> - fertility rates are falling in many parts of the world, a trend set to accelerate in the relatively near future.
> 
> - China no longer has a “one-child law.” It was repealed because it finally became clear what dire consequences it carried. Now the Chinese government is trying to encourage families to have more children, but so far they are not convincing couples.
> 
> - there will NEVER be “a trillion” people in the world.
> 
> 
> - war, poverty, hunger, and pollution are not proof of “overpopulation,” because they have been a part of human history at all population levels.
> 
> 
> - over the past 50 years more people have been lifted out of poverty than during the rest of all human history combined.
Click to expand...


Fertility rates are not falling faster then the population is rising, if they were the population could not be rising.  (((third grade math)))  Thus all falling fertility rates will do is slow the rate of population growth.   Bye the way infertility rates are linked to poor nutrition and poverty, those with proper nutrition and adequate resources have higher rates.  Thus poverty and infertility are increasing.

2+2=4

World population - right now


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is your intellectual level.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, trying to play the “intellectual” is really not working for you what with all the screwy shit you’ve posted on this thread. Try a different persona.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Another highly absent of value bunch of empty words.
> 
> You know you are allowed to call your Mom
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why are you so determined to embarrass yourself?
> 
> - fertility rates are falling in many parts of the world, a trend set to accelerate in the relatively near future.
> 
> - China no longer has a “one-child law.” It was repealed because it finally became clear what dire consequences it carried. Now the Chinese government is trying to encourage families to have more children, but so far they are not convincing couples.
> 
> - there will NEVER be “a trillion” people in the world.
> 
> 
> - war, poverty, hunger, and pollution are not proof of “overpopulation,” because they have been a part of human history at all population levels.
> 
> 
> - over the past 50 years more people have been lifted out of poverty than during the rest of all human history combined.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ...Bye[sic] the way infertility rates are linked to poor nutrition and poverty,
Click to expand...


Fallling fertility corresponds to national economic maturity.

You are wrong again.


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is your intellectual level.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, trying to play the “intellectual” is really not working for you what with all the screwy shit you’ve posted on this thread. Try a different persona.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Another highly absent of value bunch of empty words.
> 
> You know you are allowed to call your Mom
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why are you so determined to embarrass yourself?
> 
> - fertility rates are falling in many parts of the world, a trend set to accelerate in the relatively near future.
> 
> - China no longer has a “one-child law.” It was repealed because it finally became clear what dire consequences it carried. Now the Chinese government is trying to encourage families to have more children, but so far they are not convincing couples.
> 
> - there will NEVER be “a trillion” people in the world.
> 
> 
> - war, poverty, hunger, and pollution are not proof of “overpopulation,” because they have been a part of human history at all population levels.
> 
> 
> - over the past 50 years more people have been lifted out of poverty than during the rest of all human history combined.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fertility rates are not falling faster then the population is rising, if they were the population could not be ....
Click to expand...



Holy shit you’re stupid


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is your intellectual level.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, trying to play the “intellectual” is really not working for you what with all the screwy shit you’ve posted on this thread. Try a different persona.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Another highly absent of value bunch of empty words.
> 
> You know you are allowed to call your Mom
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why are you so determined to embarrass yourself?
> 
> - fertility rates are falling in many parts of the world, a trend set to accelerate in the relatively near future.
> 
> - China no longer has a “one-child law.” It was repealed because it finally became clear what dire consequences it carried. Now the Chinese government is trying to encourage families to have more children, but so far they are not convincing couples.
> 
> - there will NEVER be “a trillion” people in the world.
> 
> 
> - war, poverty, hunger, and pollution are not proof of “overpopulation,” because they have been a part of human history at all population levels.
> 
> 
> - over the past 50 years more people have been lifted out of poverty than during the rest of all human history combined.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fertility rates are not falling faster then the population is rising, if they were the population could not be ....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Holy shit you’re stupid
Click to expand...


Fertility rates are not falling faster then the population is rising, if they were the population could not be rising. (((third grade math))) Thus all falling fertility rates will do is slow the rate of population growth. Bye the way infertility rates are linked to poor nutrition and poverty, those with proper nutrition and adequate resources have higher rates. Thus poverty and infertility are increasing.

2+2=4

World population - right now

How is your 401k doing...………………………

Your car payment in yet


----------



## Unkotare




----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


>


Smiley faces must be your IQ

Fertility rates are not falling faster then the population is rising, if they were the population could not be rising. (((third grade math))) Thus all falling fertility rates will do is slow the rate of population growth. Bye the way infertility rates are linked to poor nutrition and poverty, those with proper nutrition and adequate resources have higher rates. Thus poverty and infertility are increasing.

2+2=4

World population - right now

How is your 401k doing...………………………


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ....
> 
> Fertility rates are not falling faster then the population is rising, ....
Click to expand...




Goal posts moved again.


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...all falling fertility rates will do is slow the rate of population growth. ....
Click to expand...



Until eventually.......



I told you you didn’t understand demographics. Your keyboard accidentally taught you a little.


----------



## Unkotare

“By the way,” not “bye the way.”


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...all falling fertility rates will do is slow the rate of population growth. ....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Until eventually.......
> 
> 
> 
> I told you you didn’t understand demographics. Your keyboard accidentally taught you a little.
Click to expand...

slowing population growth still entails a growing population as the current population growth is off the planetary scale.  Slowing it a little means nothing, as it is still wildly going to grow.

But we know, you failed all maths


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...all falling fertility rates will do is slow the rate of population growth. ....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Until eventually.......
> 
> 
> 
> I told you you didn’t understand demographics. Your keyboard accidentally taught you a little.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> slowing population growth still entails a growing population as the current population growth is off the planetary scale.  Slowing it a little means nothing, as it is still wildly going to grow.
> 
> But we know, you failed all maths
Click to expand...


Fertility Rate
"Globally, the fertility rate has fallen to *2.5 children per woman* and low fertility rates are the norm in most parts of the world: The huge majority of the world population – 80% – now live in countries with a fertility rate below 3 children per woman."


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...all falling fertility rates will do is slow the rate of population growth. ....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Until eventually.......
> 
> 
> 
> I told you you didn’t understand demographics. Your keyboard accidentally taught you a little.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> slowing population growth still entails a growing population as the current population growth is off the planetary scale.  Slowing it a little means nothing, as it is still wildly going to grow.
> 
> But we know, you failed all maths
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fertility Rate
> "Globally, the fertility rate has fallen to *2.5 children per woman* and low fertility rates are the norm in most parts of the world: The huge majority of the world population – 80% – now live in countries with a fertility rate below 3 children per woman."
Click to expand...

There is not enough food and water now, the population is still rising.

Conclusion, the world is overpopulated and getting more so with each passing minute


----------



## Unkotare

China Population: From Explosion to Implosion


----------



## Dan Stubbs

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?


*Over populated with Drug sellers, welfare Moms, Illegal border jumpers, and stupid Progressives.*


----------



## Dan Stubbs

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...all falling fertility rates will do is slow the rate of population growth. ....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Until eventually.......
> 
> 
> 
> I told you you didn’t understand demographics. Your keyboard accidentally taught you a little.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> slowing population growth still entails a growing population as the current population growth is off the planetary scale.  Slowing it a little means nothing, as it is still wildly going to grow.
> 
> But we know, you failed all maths
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fertility Rate
> "Globally, the fertility rate has fallen to *2.5 children per woman* and low fertility rates are the norm in most parts of the world: The huge majority of the world population – 80% – now live in countries with a fertility rate below 3 children per woman."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There is not enough food and water now, the population is still rising.
> 
> Conclusion, the world is overpopulated and getting more so with each passing minute
Click to expand...

*We need to thin the herd someway.*


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...all falling fertility rates will do is slow the rate of population growth. ....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Until eventually.......
> 
> 
> 
> I told you you didn’t understand demographics. Your keyboard accidentally taught you a little.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> slowing population growth still entails a growing population as the current population growth is off the planetary scale.  Slowing it a little means nothing, as it is still wildly going to grow.
> 
> But we know, you failed all maths
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fertility Rate
> "Globally, the fertility rate has fallen to *2.5 children per woman* and low fertility rates are the norm in most parts of the world: The huge majority of the world population – 80% – now live in countries with a fertility rate below 3 children per woman."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There is not enough food and water now, .......
Click to expand...


Yes there is.


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...all falling fertility rates will do is slow the rate of population growth. ....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Until eventually.......
> 
> 
> 
> I told you you didn’t understand demographics. Your keyboard accidentally taught you a little.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> slowing population growth still entails a growing population as the current population growth is off the planetary scale.  Slowing it a little means nothing, as it is still wildly going to grow.
> 
> But we know, you failed all maths
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fertility Rate
> "Globally, the fertility rate has fallen to *2.5 children per woman* and low fertility rates are the norm in most parts of the world: The huge majority of the world population – 80% – now live in countries with a fertility rate below 3 children per woman."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There is not enough food and water now, .......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes there is.
Click to expand...

It must get to the people who need it or it does not matter.  Are you saying that there are no thirsty and hungry people?

You live in some sort of delusion


----------



## Unkotare

""We have two or three times the amount of food right now that is needed to feed the number of people in the world," said Joshua Muldavin, a geography professor at Sarah Lawrence College who focuses on food and agricultural instruction."


A hungry world: Lots of food, in too few places


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Until eventually.......
> 
> 
> 
> I told you you didn’t understand demographics. Your keyboard accidentally taught you a little.
> 
> 
> 
> slowing population growth still entails a growing population as the current population growth is off the planetary scale.  Slowing it a little means nothing, as it is still wildly going to grow.
> 
> But we know, you failed all maths
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fertility Rate
> "Globally, the fertility rate has fallen to *2.5 children per woman* and low fertility rates are the norm in most parts of the world: The huge majority of the world population – 80% – now live in countries with a fertility rate below 3 children per woman."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There is not enough food and water now, .......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes there is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It must get to the people who need it or it does not matter.  Are you saying that there are no thirsty and hungry people?
> 
> You live in some sort of delusion
Click to expand...



spinspinspin

Don't throw out your back moving those goal posts around so often.


Salvage whatever dignity you might still have and just admit you got into this thread not knowing a thing about the topic. Slink away on your belly while you still can.


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Until eventually.......
> 
> 
> 
> I told you you didn’t understand demographics. Your keyboard accidentally taught you a little.
> 
> 
> 
> slowing population growth still entails a growing population as the current population growth is off the planetary scale.  Slowing it a little means nothing, as it is still wildly going to grow.
> 
> But we know, you failed all maths
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fertility Rate
> "Globally, the fertility rate has fallen to *2.5 children per woman* and low fertility rates are the norm in most parts of the world: The huge majority of the world population – 80% – now live in countries with a fertility rate below 3 children per woman."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There is not enough food and water now, .......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes there is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It must get to the people who need it or it does not matter.  Are you saying that there are no thirsty and hungry people?.....
Click to expand...




That's not "overpopulation," dumbass.


----------



## Unkotare

Dan Stubbs said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...all falling fertility rates will do is slow the rate of population growth. ....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Until eventually.......
> 
> 
> 
> I told you you didn’t understand demographics. Your keyboard accidentally taught you a little.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> slowing population growth still entails a growing population as the current population growth is off the planetary scale.  Slowing it a little means nothing, as it is still wildly going to grow.
> 
> But we know, you failed all maths
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fertility Rate
> "Globally, the fertility rate has fallen to *2.5 children per woman* and low fertility rates are the norm in most parts of the world: The huge majority of the world population – 80% – now live in countries with a fertility rate below 3 children per woman."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There is not enough food and water now, the population is still rising.
> 
> Conclusion, the world is overpopulated and getting more so with each passing minute
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *We need to thin the herd someway.*
Click to expand...



You volunteering?


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> slowing population growth still entails a growing population as the current population growth is off the planetary scale.  Slowing it a little means nothing, as it is still wildly going to grow.
> 
> But we know, you failed all maths
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fertility Rate
> "Globally, the fertility rate has fallen to *2.5 children per woman* and low fertility rates are the norm in most parts of the world: The huge majority of the world population – 80% – now live in countries with a fertility rate below 3 children per woman."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There is not enough food and water now, .......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes there is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It must get to the people who need it or it does not matter.  Are you saying that there are no thirsty and hungry people?.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's not "overpopulation," dumbass.
Click to expand...

It is overpopulation as overpopulation happens once the number of inhabitants exceeds what the ecosystem can support.  As such one person about to die in an arid desert is in an overpopulated place because the place can not support life.  You and your retard friends seem to think that the earth can only be overpopulated after people are crammed in like fish in a barrel.

Overpopulation the condition of having a population so dense as to cause environmental deterioration, an impaired quality of life, or a population crash


----------



## Unkotare

Some people don’t know when to stop embarrassing themselves.


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Some people don’t know when to stop embarrassing themselves.


Yea, you.  Tell us again that the world population is dropping.  Lol

So is your family hiking in from Honduras, pooping on the street as they go


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Some people don’t know when to stop embarrassing themselves.
> 
> 
> 
> Yea, you.  Tell us again that the world population is dropping.  Lol
> 
> ....go
Click to expand...



I can’t tell you “again” what I never said in the first place, you lying little punk.


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Some people don’t know when to stop embarrassing themselves.
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> So is your family hiking in from Honduras, pooping on the street as they go
Click to expand...



There you go being illogical again.


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Some people don’t know when to stop embarrassing themselves.
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> So is your family hiking in from Honduras, pooping on the street as they go
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> There you go being illogical again.
Click to expand...

Be careful kid, as it seems that I have control of your little brain


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Some people don’t know when to stop embarrassing themselves.
> 
> 
> 
> Yea, you.  Tell us again that the world population is dropping.  Lol
> 
> ....go
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I can’t tell you “again” what I never said in the first place, you lying little punk.
Click to expand...

You just did

Lol


----------



## 80zephyr

Unkotare said:


> China Population: From Explosion to Implosion



And we have to remember, that these countries with a 1.5 or a 1.6 fertility rate today, would have to have tomorrows women have 3 or 4 children in the future to even stabilize their population.

Thats not gonna happen.

Mark


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Some people don’t know when to stop embarrassing themselves.
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> So is your family hiking in from Honduras, pooping on the street as they go
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> There you go being illogical again.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Be careful kid, as it seems that I have control of your little brain
Click to expand...




By displaying your ignorance over and over again? Yeah, way to go, champ.


----------



## Unkotare

80zephyr said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> China Population: From Explosion to Implosion
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And we have to remember, that these countries with a 1.5 or a 1.6 fertility rate today, would have to have tomorrows women have 3 or 4 children in the future to even stabilize their population.
> 
> Thats not gonna happen.
> 
> Mark
Click to expand...




Tomorrow’s women who don’t exist due to gender preference during the time of the one-child policy. A great many of the (fewer) males in China today cannot find a mate because Chinese demographics have become so lop-sided.


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Some people don’t know when to stop embarrassing themselves.
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> So is your family hiking in from Honduras, pooping on the street as they go
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> There you go being illogical again.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Be careful kid, as it seems that I have control of your little brain
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> By displaying your ignorance over and over again? Yeah, way to go, champ.
Click to expand...

Good doggie


----------



## Rosy

80zephyr said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> China Population: From Explosion to Implosion
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And we have to remember, that these countries with a 1.5 or a 1.6 fertility rate today, would have to have tomorrows women have 3 or 4 children in the future to even stabilize their population.
> 
> Thats not gonna happen.
> 
> Mark
Click to expand...

Do you idiots understand that every minute the worlds population increases?  
The  population increases by 200,000 people every day 140 per minute


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Some people don’t know when to stop embarrassing themselves.
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> So is your family hiking in from Honduras, pooping on the street as they go
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> There you go being illogical again.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Be careful kid, as it seems that I have control of your little brain
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> By displaying your ignorance over and over again? Yeah, way to go, champ.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Good doggie
Click to expand...




You’re not covering your retreat very effectively, loser.


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> So is your family hiking in from Honduras, pooping on the street as they go
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There you go being illogical again.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Be careful kid, as it seems that I have control of your little brain
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> By displaying your ignorance over and over again? Yeah, way to go, champ.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Good doggie
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You’re not covering your retreat very effectively, loser.
Click to expand...

You are not accepting that the Earths population rose by 300,000 people since you began babbling that the population is falling



Lol


----------



## 80zephyr

Rosy said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> China Population: From Explosion to Implosion
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And we have to remember, that these countries with a 1.5 or a 1.6 fertility rate today, would have to have tomorrows women have 3 or 4 children in the future to even stabilize their population.
> 
> Thats not gonna happen.
> 
> Mark
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you idiots understand that every minute the worlds population increases?
> The  population increases by 200,000 people every day 140 per minute
Click to expand...


Sure, its easy enough to understand. The future demographics are based on today's realities. And those realities show a declining future population. 

The world population is aging rapidly. When the die off happens, there won't be enough replacements. 

Mark


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> There you go being illogical again.
> 
> 
> 
> Be careful kid, as it seems that I have control of your little brain
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> By displaying your ignorance over and over again? Yeah, way to go, champ.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Good doggie
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You’re not covering your retreat very effectively, loser.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ..... you began babbling that the population is falling
> 
> 
> 
> Lol
Click to expand...



Why do you keep lying, punk? No self-respect at all?


----------



## Rosy

80zephyr said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> China Population: From Explosion to Implosion
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And we have to remember, that these countries with a 1.5 or a 1.6 fertility rate today, would have to have tomorrows women have 3 or 4 children in the future to even stabilize their population.
> 
> Thats not gonna happen.
> 
> Mark
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you idiots understand that every minute the worlds population increases?
> The  population increases by 200,000 people every day 140 per minute
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sure, its easy enough to understand. The future demographics are based on today's realities. And those realities show a declining future population.
> 
> The world population is aging rapidly. When the die off happens, there won't be enough replacements.
> 
> Mark
Click to expand...

The reality shows an increasing population, you are expressing a hope of some sort that is just not based in fact.   Japan seems to have a declining birthrate, no problem though, if the island becomes available the Chinese will fill it quickly


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> By displaying your ignorance over and over again? Yeah, way to go, champ.
> 
> 
> 
> Good doggie
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You’re not covering your retreat very effectively, loser.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ..... you began babbling that the population is falling
> 
> 
> 
> Lol
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you keep lying, punk? No self-respect at all?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I never need to lie....
Click to expand...



Then why do you choose to? You have, in the most clumsy, obvious manner, attempted to misrepresent my words here many times. You should have more respect for yourself than that.


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good doggie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You’re not covering your retreat very effectively, loser.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ..... you began babbling that the population is falling
> 
> 
> 
> Lol
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you keep lying, punk? No self-respect at all?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I never need to lie....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Then why do you choose to? You have, in the most clumsy, obvious manner, attempted to misrepresent my words here many times. You should have more respect for yourself than that.
Click to expand...

You can not understand, but I will tell you anyway.  I do not need to lie, because the truth is my friend.  You continue ignoring the 200,000 new hungry people who are born every day


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> China Population: From Explosion to Implosion
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And we have to remember, that these countries with a 1.5 or a 1.6 fertility rate today, would have to have tomorrows women have 3 or 4 children in the future to even stabilize their population.
> 
> Thats not gonna happen.
> 
> Mark
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you idiots understand that every minute the worlds population increases?
> The  population increases by 200,000 people every day 140 per minute
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sure, its easy enough to understand. The future demographics are based on today's realities. And those realities show a declining future population.
> 
> The world population is aging rapidly. When the die off happens, there won't be enough replacements.
> 
> Mark
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The reality shows an increasing population, you are expressing a hope of some sort that is just not based in fact.   ...
Click to expand...




Why do you keep pretending that we haven’t explained the difference between current population and fertility rates?


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> China Population: From Explosion to Implosion
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And we have to remember, that these countries with a 1.5 or a 1.6 fertility rate today, would have to have tomorrows women have 3 or 4 children in the future to even stabilize their population.
> 
> Thats not gonna happen.
> 
> Mark
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you idiots understand that every minute the worlds population increases?
> The  population increases by 200,000 people every day 140 per minute
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sure, its easy enough to understand. The future demographics are based on today's realities. And those realities show a declining future population.
> 
> The world population is aging rapidly. When the die off happens, there won't be enough replacements.
> 
> Mark
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The reality shows an increasing population, you are expressing a hope of some sort that is just not based in fact.   ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you keep pretending that we haven’t explained the difference between current population and fertility rates?
Click to expand...

Again, if the population is increasing, fertility rates are either holding steady, or increasing.  Mathematics takes no prisoners


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> You’re not covering your retreat very effectively, loser.
> 
> 
> 
> ..... you began babbling that the population is falling
> 
> 
> 
> Lol
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you keep lying, punk? No self-respect at all?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I never need to lie....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Then why do you choose to? You have, in the most clumsy, obvious manner, attempted to misrepresent my words here many times. You should have more respect for yourself than that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ... I do not need to lie...
Click to expand...




Then why do you keep doing it?


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> 
> And we have to remember, that these countries with a 1.5 or a 1.6 fertility rate today, would have to have tomorrows women have 3 or 4 children in the future to even stabilize their population.
> 
> Thats not gonna happen.
> 
> Mark
> 
> 
> 
> Do you idiots understand that every minute the worlds population increases?
> The  population increases by 200,000 people every day 140 per minute
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sure, its easy enough to understand. The future demographics are based on today's realities. And those realities show a declining future population.
> 
> The world population is aging rapidly. When the die off happens, there won't be enough replacements.
> 
> Mark
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The reality shows an increasing population, you are expressing a hope of some sort that is just not based in fact.   ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you keep pretending that we haven’t explained the difference between current population and fertility rates?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Again, if the population is increasing, fertility rates are either holding steady, or increasing.  Mathematics takes no prisoners
Click to expand...





I gave you a link to the study of demographics. At least look at it. You’re quite confused.


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> ..... you began babbling that the population is falling
> 
> 
> 
> Lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you keep lying, punk? No self-respect at all?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I never need to lie....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Then why do you choose to? You have, in the most clumsy, obvious manner, attempted to misrepresent my words here many times. You should have more respect for yourself than that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ... I do not need to lie...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then why do you keep doing it?
Click to expand...

I keep responding because I find little minded people like you mildly entertaining...……………………….


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 80zephyr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you idiots understand that every minute the worlds population increases?
> The  population increases by 200,000 people every day 140 per minute
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sure, its easy enough to understand. The future demographics are based on today's realities. And those realities show a declining future population.
> 
> The world population is aging rapidly. When the die off happens, there won't be enough replacements.
> 
> Mark
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The reality shows an increasing population, you are expressing a hope of some sort that is just not based in fact.   ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you keep pretending that we haven’t explained the difference between current population and fertility rates?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Again, if the population is increasing, fertility rates are either holding steady, or increasing.  Mathematics takes no prisoners
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I gave you a link to the study of demographics. At least look at it. You’re quite confused.
Click to expand...

If I give you a map of bigfoot sightings will you look at it? What grand meaning does it have?

Do you believe the shit on the net?
Seems so


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you keep lying, punk? No self-respect at all?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I never need to lie....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Then why do you choose to? You have, in the most clumsy, obvious manner, attempted to misrepresent my words here many times. You should have more respect for yourself than that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ... I do not need to lie...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then why do you keep doing it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I keep responding because ... .……………………….
Click to expand...



 I didn’t ask why you keep responding. I asked why you keep lying. You know this, and therefore have lied yet again. I can only conclude you are a person of the lowest character and the most woefully limited intellect to carry on this way for so long for no reason other than petty trolling to cover your embarrassment at being wrong about every single thing you have said on this thread.


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> I never need to lie....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then why do you choose to? You have, in the most clumsy, obvious manner, attempted to misrepresent my words here many times. You should have more respect for yourself than that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ... I do not need to lie...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then why do you keep doing it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I keep responding because ... .……………………….
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I didn’t ask why you keep responding. I asked why you keep lying. You know this, and therefore have lied yet again. I can only conclude you are a person of the lowest character and the most woefully limited intellect to carry on this way for so long for no reason other than petty trolling to cover your embarrassment at being wrong about every single thing you have said on this thread.
Click to expand...

You keep telling me that I am lying, but can't provide one lie.

How fast is the world's population growing?

In terms of net gain (births minus deaths), we are adding over 200,000 people to this planet _every day_, or over 140 people every minute. That equals over 75 million more people every year, about the same as the combined populations of California and Canada. Although we have made encouraging progress in slowing the growth rate, our current population is unsustainable.  To create long-term sustainability we must first stabilize and then reduce global population humanely through dramatic and voluntary reduction in birth rates


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then why do you choose to? You have, in the most clumsy, obvious manner, attempted to misrepresent my words here many times. You should have more respect for yourself than that.
> 
> 
> 
> ... I do not need to lie...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then why do you keep doing it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I keep responding because ... .……………………….
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I didn’t ask why you keep responding. I asked why you keep lying. You know this, and therefore have lied yet again. I can only conclude you are a person of the lowest character and the most woefully limited intellect to carry on this way for so long for no reason other than petty trolling to cover your embarrassment at being wrong about every single thing you have said on this thread.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You keep telling me that I am lying, but can't provide one lie.
> 
> ....
Click to expand...




I have pointed out many of your lies, troll.


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> ... I do not need to lie...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then why do you keep doing it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I keep responding because ... .……………………….
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I didn’t ask why you keep responding. I asked why you keep lying. You know this, and therefore have lied yet again. I can only conclude you are a person of the lowest character and the most woefully limited intellect to carry on this way for so long for no reason other than petty trolling to cover your embarrassment at being wrong about every single thing you have said on this thread.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You keep telling me that I am lying, but can't provide one lie.
> 
> ....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have pointed out many of your lies, troll.
Click to expand...

You keep saying that, without any evidence of even one.


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then why do you keep doing it?
> 
> 
> 
> I keep responding because ... .……………………….
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I didn’t ask why you keep responding. I asked why you keep lying. You know this, and therefore have lied yet again. I can only conclude you are a person of the lowest character and the most woefully limited intellect to carry on this way for so long for no reason other than petty trolling to cover your embarrassment at being wrong about every single thing you have said on this thread.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You keep telling me that I am lying, but can't provide one lie.
> 
> ....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have pointed out many of your lies, troll.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You keep saying that, without any evidence of even one.
Click to expand...


I have called you out on each one as you posted the lie. Stop being such a greasy little punk.


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> ...... do refresh us on how the earths human population is falling......




LIE

I never said earth's population was currently falling.

Stop lying.


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Chyna in particular is facing a very steep population declined in the not too distant future.
> 
> 
> 
> Chinas population is soaring, which is why people are allowed 1 child.....
Click to expand...





LIE


----------



## Unkotare

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> I didn’t say that, liar.
> 
> 
> 
> I said the population of the Earth is rising, except for in Japan.  ...me
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No, you didn’t.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If you really put your mind to it I bet you could cure the drool on your shirt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You just talking to yourself in the corner, headcase?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ... your... life, that believes that the Earths population is falling....
Click to expand...



LIE

I never said that


----------



## Rosy

Unkotare said:


> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> I said the population of the Earth is rising, except for in Japan.  ...me
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, you didn’t.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If you really put your mind to it I bet you could cure the drool on your shirt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You just talking to yourself in the corner, headcase?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ... your... life, that believes that the Earths population is falling....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> LIE
> 
> I never said that
Click to expand...

At this point you have stopped saying anything because you are intellectually inferior.


----------



## Unkotare

To reiterate, the earth is NOT “overpopulated,” and future generations are going to need to figure out how to deal with a declining global population. Might be a good idea to start thinking about it now.


----------



## sealybobo

Rosy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fertility Rate
> "Globally, the fertility rate has fallen to *2.5 children per woman* and low fertility rates are the norm in most parts of the world: The huge majority of the world population – 80% – now live in countries with a fertility rate below 3 children per woman."
> 
> 
> 
> There is not enough food and water now, .......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes there is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It must get to the people who need it or it does not matter.  Are you saying that there are no thirsty and hungry people?.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's not "overpopulation," dumbass.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It is overpopulation as overpopulation happens once the number of inhabitants exceeds what the ecosystem can support.  As such one person about to die in an arid desert is in an overpopulated place because the place can not support life.  You and your retard friends seem to think that the earth can only be overpopulated after people are crammed in like fish in a barrel.
> 
> Overpopulation the condition of having a population so dense as to cause environmental deterioration, an impaired quality of life, or a population crash
Click to expand...

You tried explaining it to him I see and he refuses to listen.  

Insects Are Dying En Masse, Risking 'Catastrophic' Collapse Of Earth's Ecosystems | HuffPost


Why is this happening to bees?  Too many people putting pollution in the air I suppose.

Unkotare is a dumb fuck.  He will say we are not overpopulated instead he will say we need greener cars.  Then we won't be overpopulated.

Well until we come up with green cars, we are overpopulated.  Too many people pumping garbage into our oceans and atmosphere.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> To reiterate, the earth is NOT “overpopulated,” and future generations are going to need to figure out how to deal with a declining global population. Might be a good idea to start thinking about it now.


Boy were you wrong

Scientists have warned that a human-caused sixth mass extinction is now underway on Earth. Vertebrate species, both on land and under the sea, are threatened at a global scale because of human activities.

But according to the new review, the proportion of insects in decline is currently twice as high as that of vertebrates and the insect extinction rate is eight times faster than that of mammals, birds and reptiles.

Insects play a profoundly important role in Earth’s ecosystems. They are a food source for many animals, are critical pollinators and recycle nutrients back into the soil.


It is maddening how fucking stupid you conservative are.  Never wrong about anything.

According to the new scientific review, habitat loss because of intensive agriculture is the top driver of insect population declines. The heavy use of pesticides and climate change were also causes.

All things happening because,        WE ARE OVERPOPULATED you fool.


----------



## Likkmee

PredFan said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I believe the world is. We see it in the prevalence of hunger around the world. .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There were people starving to death when the global population was half of what it is today, and when it was half of that, and half of that, and half of that...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> True, but not whole countries or regions.
Click to expand...


Here. This help at all ?


----------



## koshergrl

China’s Looming Crisis: A Shrinking Population


----------



## toomuchtime_

koshergrl said:


> China’s Looming Crisis: A Shrinking Population


Really?  I thought the Chinese were getting taller.


----------



## Rigby5

koshergrl said:


> China’s Looming Crisis: A Shrinking Population



The article makes no sense.
China has over twice the sustainable population.
Every country will have to greatly shrink populations as fossil fuel runs out.
The ONLY thing that made the dire predictions of Malthus wrong, were fossil fuels.
Without fossil fuels, there will be no fertilizers, no shipping in food from distant lands, etc.
Populations will have to reduce by at least half what they are now.


----------



## Rigby5

toomuchtime_ said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> China’s Looming Crisis: A Shrinking Population
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  I thought the Chinese were getting taller.
Click to expand...


Maybe they are referring to swimming "shrinkage" as per Jason Alexander on "Seinfeld".


----------



## koshergrl

Rigby5 said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> China’s Looming Crisis: A Shrinking Population
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The article makes no sense.
> China has over twice the sustainable population.
> Every country will have to greatly shrink populations as fossil fuel runs out.
> The ONLY thing that made the dire predictions of Malthus wrong, were fossil fuels.
> Without fossil fuels, there will be no fertilizers, no shipping in food from distant lands, etc.
> Populations will have to reduce by at least half what they are now.
Click to expand...

Fossil fuel isn't running out.
And if it does, it will only be the city dwelling scumbags who die off.

I'm okay with that.


----------



## koshergrl

toomuchtime_ said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> China’s Looming Crisis: A Shrinking Population
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  I thought the Chinese were getting taller.
Click to expand...


Must be capitalism doing it to them.


----------



## Rigby5

koshergrl said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> China’s Looming Crisis: A Shrinking Population
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The article makes no sense.
> China has over twice the sustainable population.
> Every country will have to greatly shrink populations as fossil fuel runs out.
> The ONLY thing that made the dire predictions of Malthus wrong, were fossil fuels.
> Without fossil fuels, there will be no fertilizers, no shipping in food from distant lands, etc.
> Populations will have to reduce by at least half what they are now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Fossil fuel isn't running out.
> And if it does, it will only be the city dwelling scumbags who die off.
> 
> I'm okay with that.
Click to expand...


Of course fossil fuel is running out.
All fossil fuel was created from swamps over 100 million years ago.
There have been no huge inland seas turned into swamps since then, so there are no new fossil fuels of any concentration.
And without fossil fuels, we can't produce fertilizers on the scale we are now, so then farm production will drop by around 75%.
It is likely true that rural people will be able to survive better than urban people, but that means not only no electricity, cars, or metal production, but lots of wars and fighting over what is left.  And rural people won't have the numbers or arms, like tanks.


----------



## Rigby5

koshergrl said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> China’s Looming Crisis: A Shrinking Population
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  I thought the Chinese were getting taller.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Must be capitalism doing it to them.
Click to expand...


China has been capitalist since Mao.
Mao was supported by Stalin, who was likely the greatest capitalist of all history.


----------



## Mudda

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?


Yes, global warming is directly related to overpopulation.


----------



## sealybobo

Mudda said:


> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, global warming is directly related to overpopulation.
Click to expand...


Another Whale Has Washed Up Dead With Plastic Packing Its Stomach | HuffPost

Yes, we are overpopulated.  If you ask unkotare we aren't but if you ask any other animal on this planet they'll say yes.


----------



## pismoe

I don't think so of the world but YES , the USA is overpopulated Sealy .


----------



## Polishprince

sealybobo said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, global warming is directly related to overpopulation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Another Whale Has Washed Up Dead With Plastic Packing Its Stomach | HuffPost
> 
> Yes, we are overpopulated.  If you ask unkotare we aren't but if you ask any other animal on this planet they'll say yes.
Click to expand...



Some parts of the planet are overpopulated, but there is still plenty of room for more people IMHO.

Cities like New York can certainly thinned out, and folks be shipped to rural areas.  

If we can get global warming, a lot of Alaska could be quite temperate.


----------



## pismoe

keep those scum in 'new york' and 'los angeles' just on principle .   But send them rural and it just hurts Rural  PP .


----------



## sealybobo

pismoe said:


> I don't think so of the world but YES , the USA is overpopulated Sealy .



Are you sure?


----------



## Polishprince

sealybobo said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think so of the world but YES , the USA is overpopulated Sealy .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you sure?
> 
> View attachment 253472
Click to expand...



2100 is 81 years from now.   How accurate were the population projects for 2019 back in 1938?


----------



## pismoe

sealybobo said:


> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think so of the world but YES , the USA is overpopulated Sealy .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you sure?
> 
> View attachment 253472
Click to expand...

-------------------------------------   no , not sure and mostly don't care about other countries .   But the USA is populated by 310 million in 2010 and that's too many for a country to be well run and pleasant and full of Freedom Sealy .


----------



## sealybobo

Polishprince said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, global warming is directly related to overpopulation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Another Whale Has Washed Up Dead With Plastic Packing Its Stomach | HuffPost
> 
> Yes, we are overpopulated.  If you ask unkotare we aren't but if you ask any other animal on this planet they'll say yes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Some parts of the planet are overpopulated, but there is still plenty of room for more people IMHO.
> 
> Cities like New York can certainly thinned out, and folks be shipped to rural areas.
> 
> If we can get global warming, a lot of Alaska could be quite temperate.
Click to expand...

We don't want the people in all our major cities to spread out across the USA.  So much for the small towns in America and wide open spaces.

The fact is, we don't have too many rich or middle class people.  We have too many poor people.  We see middle class people are having less kids, even rich people are having less kids but the poor keep on pumping them out.  This is why I like it that Republicans are making cuts to social programs that help the poor.  If poor people get less help, chances are they'll have less kids.  If they have to work for welfare, chances are they won't even apply for it.

In other words the same reason middle class people don't have more kids than they can afford, will be the same reasons why poor people don't have kids.  Middle class people don't want to fall into poverty.  Well, poor people now don't worry about that.  It's just one more kid to ask for welfare for and one more kid to put on the ACA.  If they had to pay for the extra kids they might fix themselves and have fewer "accidents"


----------



## sealybobo

Polishprince said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think so of the world but YES , the USA is overpopulated Sealy .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you sure?
> 
> View attachment 253472
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 2100 is 81 years from now.   How accurate were the population projects for 2019 back in 1938?
Click to expand...


Oh you want now?  I was just pointing out it's not just the USA.  In fact Africa is going to have the most babies in the next few decades.  






By 2070, the bulk of the world's *population growth* is predicted to take place in *Africa*: of the additional 2.4 billion people projected between 2015 and 2050, 1.3 billion will be added in *Africa*, 0.9 billion in Asia and only 0.2 billion in the rest of the world.


----------



## there4eyeM

Certain areas of the globe still have open, habitable areas, but any honest estimation of current affairs must admit that the population of humans has passed a sane level.


----------



## Polishprince

there4eyeM said:


> Certain areas of the globe still have open, habitable areas, but any honest estimation of current affairs must admit that the population of humans has passed a sane level.




The ability to grow food has increased more that the population has.

And there are areas of the world which have decreasing populations.   The city of Youngstown Ohio had a significantly higher population in 1910 than it does today, example given.


----------



## 2aguy

there4eyeM said:


> Certain areas of the globe still have open, habitable areas, but any honest estimation of current affairs must admit that the population of humans has passed a sane level.




No....actual science shows that population levels are declining, not increasing, and that population density isn't even close to being too high......the entire world population can fit into Texas with the density of New York city..... that isn't too many people for the planet...

What is it with you left wingers and your desire to kill people?


----------



## xyz

sealybobo said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, global warming is directly related to overpopulation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Another Whale Has Washed Up Dead With Plastic Packing Its Stomach | HuffPost
> 
> Yes, we are overpopulated.  If you ask unkotare we aren't but if you ask any other animal on this planet they'll say yes.
Click to expand...

I think it's not only overpopulation, but the huge amounts of garbage and packaging. I've noticed how much garbage I take out every week and it's a whole lot, because every food item has a lot of packaging, often several layers.

I don't think it was this much 100 years ago and certainly not 200 years ago.


----------



## sealybobo

Polishprince said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think so of the world but YES , the USA is overpopulated Sealy .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you sure?
> 
> View attachment 253472
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 2100 is 81 years from now.   How accurate were the population projects for 2019 back in 1938?
Click to expand...


Many scientists think Earth has a maximum carrying capacity of 9 billion to *10 billion people*. 

Why would we want to push it to the max?

The median estimate for future growth sees the world population reaching *8.6 billion* in 2030, *9.8 billion* in 2050 and 11.2 billion by 2100 assuming a continuing decrease in average fertility rate from 2.5 births per woman in 2010–2015 to 2.2 in 2045–2050 and to 2.0 in 2095–2100, according to the medium-variant ...

We are overpopulated people!!!!


----------



## pismoe

pismoe said:


> I don't think so of the world but YES , the USA is overpopulated Sealy .


-----------------------------------   the only reason i say that the USA is overpopulated is because i like the USA with lighter population because that scenario is more pleasant for ME , my family and personal likes .   I can't imagine the traffic in 'los angeles' or 'chicago' for example .    I live rural , biggest road around here is 2 lane highway with the biggest slowdown coming because the wild animal herds are blocking - crossing the highway .


----------



## Likkmee

No. Either WW3 or a huge pandemic( maybe illegals/maybe not) is gonna clean you up like 1918 but on a larger scale.


----------



## toobfreak

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?




I would have been here to be your #2 post, but I was stuck in a long line of unmoving bumper to bumper traffic, jammed elevators and crammed full subway cars coming home!


----------



## bripat9643

xyz said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, global warming is directly related to overpopulation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Another Whale Has Washed Up Dead With Plastic Packing Its Stomach | HuffPost
> 
> Yes, we are overpopulated.  If you ask unkotare we aren't but if you ask any other animal on this planet they'll say yes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think it's not only overpopulation, but the huge amounts of garbage and packaging. I've noticed how much garbage I take out every week and it's a whole lot, because every food item has a lot of packaging, often several layers.
> 
> I don't think it was this much 100 years ago and certainly not 200 years ago.
Click to expand...

Your garbage goes into a landfill, not the ocean.  95% of the plastic in the ocean comes from third world countries in Africa and Asia.

95% of plastic in the oceans comes from Third World countries - Voice of Europe


----------



## xyz

bripat9643 said:


> xyz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, global warming is directly related to overpopulation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Another Whale Has Washed Up Dead With Plastic Packing Its Stomach | HuffPost
> 
> Yes, we are overpopulated.  If you ask unkotare we aren't but if you ask any other animal on this planet they'll say yes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think it's not only overpopulation, but the huge amounts of garbage and packaging. I've noticed how much garbage I take out every week and it's a whole lot, because every food item has a lot of packaging, often several layers.
> 
> I don't think it was this much 100 years ago and certainly not 200 years ago.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your garbage goes into a landfill, not the ocean.  95% of the plastic in the ocean comes from third world countries in Africa and Asia.
> 
> 95% of plastic in the oceans comes from Third World countries - Voice of Europe
Click to expand...

That is an idiotic white supremacist site supported by bonehead morons like you. You are basically saying white people do not litter and all landfills are far away from water, except in the third world.


----------



## bripat9643

xyz said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> xyz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, global warming is directly related to overpopulation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Another Whale Has Washed Up Dead With Plastic Packing Its Stomach | HuffPost
> 
> Yes, we are overpopulated.  If you ask unkotare we aren't but if you ask any other animal on this planet they'll say yes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think it's not only overpopulation, but the huge amounts of garbage and packaging. I've noticed how much garbage I take out every week and it's a whole lot, because every food item has a lot of packaging, often several layers.
> 
> I don't think it was this much 100 years ago and certainly not 200 years ago.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your garbage goes into a landfill, not the ocean.  95% of the plastic in the ocean comes from third world countries in Africa and Asia.
> 
> 95% of plastic in the oceans comes from Third World countries - Voice of Europe
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is an idiotic white supremacist site supported by bonehead morons like you. You are basically saying white people do not litter and all landfills are far away from water, except in the third world.
Click to expand...

It's a "white supremacist" site?  I suppose you have some evidence to back that up other than they post the truth about your imbecile leftwing propaganda.

Go look outside and tell me how much litter you see?  A landfill can be one mile from the ocean and none of what goes into it will ever end up in the ocean.

Have you ever been to a third world country?  I have been to a number of them.  Some of them are relatively clean, but a lot of them are just one big garbage dump.  People throw their trash right into the street and into rivers.


----------



## Polishprince

sealybobo said:


> Polishprince said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pismoe said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think so of the world but YES , the USA is overpopulated Sealy .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you sure?
> 
> View attachment 253472
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 2100 is 81 years from now.   How accurate were the population projects for 2019 back in 1938?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Many scientists think Earth has a maximum carrying capacity of 9 billion to *10 billion people*.
> 
> Why would we want to push it to the max?
> 
> The median estimate for future growth sees the world population reaching *8.6 billion* in 2030, *9.8 billion* in 2050 and 11.2 billion by 2100 assuming a continuing decrease in average fertility rate from 2.5 births per woman in 2010–2015 to 2.2 in 2045–2050 and to 2.0 in 2095–2100, according to the medium-variant ...
> 
> We are overpopulated people!!!!
Click to expand...



Assume that is true- the earth has a 10 billion person capacity.

There is no way to reduce fertility in Africa, and India and Latin America where most of the population is growing. Since there is nothing we can do about, don't worry, be happy.

Although IMHO, Almighty God is still in charge, and He is committed to rapturing us before things get out of hand


----------



## there4eyeM

Humans have such a capacity for intelligence. If only it were more often applied!


----------



## Redfish

Mudda said:


> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, global warming is directly related to overpopulation.
Click to expand...



first of all, global warming is a hoax,  man made climate change is a hoax.   

Yes, the climate of the planet is changing, it has been changing for hundreds of millions of years, man has never had anything to do with it, never will, and cannot stop, slow, or reverse it.   the climate will be changing millions of years after the last human is gone from the earth.   We are a blink of the eye in the life of the earth.  

To think we can change the climate is the height of stupidity, we can pollute and we should work to stop that, but there is no proven link between man made pollution and climate change.  and it has nothing to do with the number of humans on earth.

To the OP's question:  yes, the planet is currently over populated.


----------



## there4eyeM

Pollution is ugly and disgusting in itself. That alone is more than reason enough to stop it. Whether or not it provokes climate changes, intelligent beings would address the issue and resolve it if on no more than aesthetic grounds. It is embarrassing to the human race that money overrules good sense.


----------



## ralfy

Redfish said:


> first of all, global warming is a hoax,  man made climate change is a hoax.
> 
> Yes, the climate of the planet is changing, it has been changing for hundreds of millions of years, man has never had anything to do with it, never will, and cannot stop, slow, or reverse it.   the climate will be changing millions of years after the last human is gone from the earth.   We are a blink of the eye in the life of the earth.
> 
> To think we can change the climate is the height of stupidity, we can pollute and we should work to stop that, but there is no proven link between man made pollution and climate change.  and it has nothing to do with the number of humans on earth.
> 
> To the OP's question:  yes, the planet is currently over populated.



The problem is that skeptics funded an independent study (Berkeley Earth) to debunk AGW but ended up confirming it.


----------



## ralfy

In terms of ecological footprint, the world is overpopulated. That is, the resources need per capita to meet basic needs (those that ensure optimal health) have reached biocapacity, and the resources needed for middle class conveniences exceed the same.

This does not yet consider the effects of pollution and global warming on ecosystems.


----------



## bripat9643

there4eyeM said:


> Pollution is ugly and disgusting in itself. That alone is more than reason enough to stop it. Whether or not it provokes climate changes, intelligent beings would address the issue and resolve it if on no more than aesthetic grounds. It is embarrassing to the human race that money overrules good sense.


CO2 isn't pollution.  Plants need it to live.


----------



## Blues Man

g5000 said:


> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> I think resource distribution is the problem, not over-population.
> 
> There is plenty of food to go around for everyone.  It just doesn't get to everywhere it is needed, for various reasons.
> 
> So, no.  We do not have an over-population problem at this time.
> 
> The first real crush we will feel, as far as population goes, will be sources of fresh water.   We are going to need to find a way to economically desalinate ocean water in the near future, I think.
Click to expand...


that's easy

nuclear power


----------



## g5000

Blues Man said:


> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> I think resource distribution is the problem, not over-population.
> 
> There is plenty of food to go around for everyone.  It just doesn't get to everywhere it is needed, for various reasons.
> 
> So, no.  We do not have an over-population problem at this time.
> 
> The first real crush we will feel, as far as population goes, will be sources of fresh water.   We are going to need to find a way to economically desalinate ocean water in the near future, I think.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> that's easy
> 
> nuclear power
Click to expand...

Do you think nuclear power is cheap?


----------



## bripat9643

g5000 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> I think resource distribution is the problem, not over-population.
> 
> There is plenty of food to go around for everyone.  It just doesn't get to everywhere it is needed, for various reasons.
> 
> So, no.  We do not have an over-population problem at this time.
> 
> The first real crush we will feel, as far as population goes, will be sources of fresh water.   We are going to need to find a way to economically desalinate ocean water in the near future, I think.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> that's easy
> 
> nuclear power
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you think nuclear power is cheap?
Click to expand...

It's far cheaper than solar.  The only reason it's expensive is all the lawsuits environmentalists file to prevent it from ever getting built.


----------



## sealybobo

bripat9643 said:


> xyz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, global warming is directly related to overpopulation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Another Whale Has Washed Up Dead With Plastic Packing Its Stomach | HuffPost
> 
> Yes, we are overpopulated.  If you ask unkotare we aren't but if you ask any other animal on this planet they'll say yes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think it's not only overpopulation, but the huge amounts of garbage and packaging. I've noticed how much garbage I take out every week and it's a whole lot, because every food item has a lot of packaging, often several layers.
> 
> I don't think it was this much 100 years ago and certainly not 200 years ago.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your garbage goes into a landfill, not the ocean.  95% of the plastic in the ocean comes from third world countries in Africa and Asia.
> 
> 95% of plastic in the oceans comes from Third World countries - Voice of Europe
Click to expand...


You are correct.  So we are overpopulated.  No one said just the USA.  

Here is another example of how too many humans is destroying the planet

*Climate Change Drives Collapse Of Baby Corals In Great Barrier Reef*
The catastrophic die-off from recent ocean heat waves severely affected the reef’s ability to produce new corals and bounce back.


The deadly back-to-back bleaching events that hammered Australia’s Great Barrier Reef in 2016 and 2017 led to a collapse in the recruitment of new corals, severely affecting the ecosystem’s ability to recover from the devastation.


----------



## Blues Man

g5000 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> I think resource distribution is the problem, not over-population.
> 
> There is plenty of food to go around for everyone.  It just doesn't get to everywhere it is needed, for various reasons.
> 
> So, no.  We do not have an over-population problem at this time.
> 
> The first real crush we will feel, as far as population goes, will be sources of fresh water.   We are going to need to find a way to economically desalinate ocean water in the near future, I think.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> that's easy
> 
> nuclear power
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you think nuclear power is cheap?
Click to expand...


we already have plants built


----------



## Redfish

ralfy said:


> Redfish said:
> 
> 
> 
> first of all, global warming is a hoax,  man made climate change is a hoax.
> 
> Yes, the climate of the planet is changing, it has been changing for hundreds of millions of years, man has never had anything to do with it, never will, and cannot stop, slow, or reverse it.   the climate will be changing millions of years after the last human is gone from the earth.   We are a blink of the eye in the life of the earth.
> 
> To think we can change the climate is the height of stupidity, we can pollute and we should work to stop that, but there is no proven link between man made pollution and climate change.  and it has nothing to do with the number of humans on earth.
> 
> To the OP's question:  yes, the planet is currently over populated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The problem is that skeptics funded an independent study (Berkeley Earth) to debunk AGW but ended up confirming it.
Click to expand...


'
wrong, what they said was that man was polluting the planet, they never established a proven link between pollution and climate.   So, tell me, why isn't it enough to fight pollution?  Why do you need to try to link it to climate?


----------



## Redfish

g5000 said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> I think resource distribution is the problem, not over-population.
> 
> There is plenty of food to go around for everyone.  It just doesn't get to everywhere it is needed, for various reasons.
> 
> So, no.  We do not have an over-population problem at this time.
> 
> The first real crush we will feel, as far as population goes, will be sources of fresh water.   We are going to need to find a way to economically desalinate ocean water in the near future, I think.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> that's easy
> 
> nuclear power
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you think nuclear power is cheap?
Click to expand...



cheaper than solar and wind and more reliable.


----------



## ralfy

Redfish said:


> wrong, what they said was that man was polluting the planet, they never established a proven link between pollution and climate.   So, tell me, why isn't it enough to fight pollution?  Why do you need to try to link it to climate?



I am referring to Berkeley Earth. You are talking about another organization.


----------



## xyz

bripat9643 said:


> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> I think resource distribution is the problem, not over-population.
> 
> There is plenty of food to go around for everyone.  It just doesn't get to everywhere it is needed, for various reasons.
> 
> So, no.  We do not have an over-population problem at this time.
> 
> The first real crush we will feel, as far as population goes, will be sources of fresh water.   We are going to need to find a way to economically desalinate ocean water in the near future, I think.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> that's easy
> 
> nuclear power
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you think nuclear power is cheap?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's far cheaper than solar.  The only reason it's expensive is all the lawsuits environmentalists file to prevent it from ever getting built.
Click to expand...

You probably wouldn't mind if nuclear waste was buried under your house. Based on the things you write, it probably has been.


----------



## bripat9643

xyz said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> I think resource distribution is the problem, not over-population.
> 
> There is plenty of food to go around for everyone.  It just doesn't get to everywhere it is needed, for various reasons.
> 
> So, no.  We do not have an over-population problem at this time.
> 
> The first real crush we will feel, as far as population goes, will be sources of fresh water.   We are going to need to find a way to economically desalinate ocean water in the near future, I think.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> that's easy
> 
> nuclear power
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you think nuclear power is cheap?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's far cheaper than solar.  The only reason it's expensive is all the lawsuits environmentalists file to prevent it from ever getting built.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You probably wouldn't mind if nuclear waste was buried under your house. Based on the things you write, it probably has been.
Click to expand...

Only lunatics and retards believe nuclear waste isn't safe in the facility constructed for it.  They file lawsuits because they want to end nuclear power.  It has nothing to do with any concern about safety.  Your kind will have us all living in Tee Pees by the time your done.


----------



## Unkotare

The earth is most certainly NOT overpopulated.


----------



## bripat9643

Unkotare said:


> The earth is most certainly NOT overpopulated.


It most certainly is.  The ideal population would be around $2 billion.  Why would anyone want more people on this earth polluting it and clogging our highways and beaches?


----------



## Unkotare

bripat9643 said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> The earth is most certainly NOT overpopulated.
> 
> 
> 
> It most certainly is.  The ideal population would be around $2 billion.  Why would anyone want more people on this earth polluting it and clogging our highways and beaches?
Click to expand...


Who set the "ideal"? We are nowhere near the limit of what we can provide for, and we are staring down a dire global population implosion in the next 50 years or so. 

Who would want more people? Me. Any time you feel there are too many and somehow find the courage of your convictions...


----------



## bripat9643

Unkotare said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> The earth is most certainly NOT overpopulated.
> 
> 
> 
> It most certainly is.  The ideal population would be around $2 billion.  Why would anyone want more people on this earth polluting it and clogging our highways and beaches?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who set the "ideal"? We are nowhere near the limit of what we can provide for, and we are staring down a dire global population implosion in the next 50 years or so.
> 
> Who would want more people? Me. Any time you feel there are too many and somehow find the courage of your convictions...
Click to expand...

The maximum we can support isn't the number we wan't to live in.  We don't want our country to become an endless sea of humanity.  The goal is the desirable population, not the maximum possible population.  You have to be a moron to support the latter.

Feel free to move to India, since you find that idea so attractive.


----------



## Unkotare

bripat9643 said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> The earth is most certainly NOT overpopulated.
> 
> 
> 
> It most certainly is.  The ideal population would be around $2 billion.  Why would anyone want more people on this earth polluting it and clogging our highways and beaches?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who set the "ideal"? We are nowhere near the limit of what we can provide for, and we are staring down a dire global population implosion in the next 50 years or so.
> 
> Who would want more people? Me. Any time you feel there are too many and somehow find the courage of your convictions...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The maximum we can support isn't the number we wan't to live in.  We don't want our country to become an endless sea of humanity.  The goal is the desirable population, not the maximum possible population.  You have to be a moron to support the latter.
> 
> Feel free to move to India, since you find that idea so attractive.
Click to expand...




The United States has vast, vast amounts of land and resources......


----------



## bripat9643

Unkotare said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> The earth is most certainly NOT overpopulated.
> 
> 
> 
> It most certainly is.  The ideal population would be around $2 billion.  Why would anyone want more people on this earth polluting it and clogging our highways and beaches?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who set the "ideal"? We are nowhere near the limit of what we can provide for, and we are staring down a dire global population implosion in the next 50 years or so.
> 
> Who would want more people? Me. Any time you feel there are too many and somehow find the courage of your convictions...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The maximum we can support isn't the number we wan't to live in.  We don't want our country to become an endless sea of humanity.  The goal is the desirable population, not the maximum possible population.  You have to be a moron to support the latter.
> 
> Feel free to move to India, since you find that idea so attractive.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The United States has vast, vast amounts of land and resources......
Click to expand...

How many miles of unspoiled beaches does it have?  How many Yellowstone Parks does it have?  How many Yosemite Parks does it have?  Have you ever been to Yosemite park?  Do you believe you would still enjoy it if 4 times as many people were there?


----------



## WillMunny

Worldwide I want population to level off and stay steady.  I think 7 billion is more than enough human beings for one planet.  Especially when there are so many worthless human beings out there.  Like my grandpa always said, "Why does the world have more horses' asses than horses?"


----------



## Mr Natural

Seven billion of us is not nearly enough.

We need at least 10 billion,  half of which can’t feed themselves but that’s OK.


----------



## fncceo

Fretting about over-population is the ultimate in narcissism.

You're effectively saying "Just enough of me ... way too many of you".


----------



## bripat9643

fncceo said:


> Fretting about over-population is the ultimate in narcissism.
> 
> You're effectively saying "Just enough of me ... way too many of you".



Yeah, right.  So?

You're talking about people that haven't even been born yet.


----------



## Unkotare

bripat9643 said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> The earth is most certainly NOT overpopulated.
> 
> 
> 
> It most certainly is.  The ideal population would be around $2 billion.  Why would anyone want more people on this earth polluting it and clogging our highways and beaches?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who set the "ideal"? We are nowhere near the limit of what we can provide for, and we are staring down a dire global population implosion in the next 50 years or so.
> 
> Who would want more people? Me. Any time you feel there are too many and somehow find the courage of your convictions...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The maximum we can support isn't the number we wan't to live in.  We don't want our country to become an endless sea of humanity.  The goal is the desirable population, not the maximum possible population.  You have to be a moron to support the latter.
> 
> Feel free to move to India, since you find that idea so attractive.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The United States has vast, vast amounts of land and resources......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How many miles of unspoiled beaches does it have?  How many Yellowstone Parks does it have?  How many Yosemite Parks does it have?  Have you ever been to Yosemite park?  Do you believe you would still enjoy it if 4 times as many people were there?
Click to expand...





Of course.


----------



## fncceo

bripat9643 said:


> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fretting about over-population is the ultimate in narcissism.
> 
> You're effectively saying "Just enough of me ... way too many of you".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, right.  So?
> 
> You're talking about people that haven't even been born yet.
Click to expand...


If you're saying the earth is overpopulated and you're not willing to take one for the team, that would make you a hypocrite.


----------



## Likkmee

Here; rationalize a bit


----------



## bripat9643

Unkotare said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It most certainly is.  The ideal population would be around $2 billion.  Why would anyone want more people on this earth polluting it and clogging our highways and beaches?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who set the "ideal"? We are nowhere near the limit of what we can provide for, and we are staring down a dire global population implosion in the next 50 years or so.
> 
> Who would want more people? Me. Any time you feel there are too many and somehow find the courage of your convictions...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The maximum we can support isn't the number we wan't to live in.  We don't want our country to become an endless sea of humanity.  The goal is the desirable population, not the maximum possible population.  You have to be a moron to support the latter.
> 
> Feel free to move to India, since you find that idea so attractive.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The United States has vast, vast amounts of land and resources......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How many miles of unspoiled beaches does it have?  How many Yellowstone Parks does it have?  How many Yosemite Parks does it have?  Have you ever been to Yosemite park?  Do you believe you would still enjoy it if 4 times as many people were there?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course.
Click to expand...

You are irrational.


----------



## bripat9643

fncceo said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fretting about over-population is the ultimate in narcissism.
> 
> You're effectively saying "Just enough of me ... way too many of you".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, right.  So?
> 
> You're talking about people that haven't even been born yet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you're saying the earth is overpopulated and you're not willing to take one for the team, that would make you a hypocrite.
Click to expand...

No it wouldn't, dumbass.  reducing population growth doesn't require anyone to commit suicide.


----------



## Unkotare

bripat9643 said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who set the "ideal"? We are nowhere near the limit of what we can provide for, and we are staring down a dire global population implosion in the next 50 years or so.
> 
> Who would want more people? Me. Any time you feel there are too many and somehow find the courage of your convictions...
> 
> 
> 
> The maximum we can support isn't the number we wan't to live in.  We don't want our country to become an endless sea of humanity.  The goal is the desirable population, not the maximum possible population.  You have to be a moron to support the latter.
> 
> Feel free to move to India, since you find that idea so attractive.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The United States has vast, vast amounts of land and resources......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How many miles of unspoiled beaches does it have?  How many Yellowstone Parks does it have?  How many Yosemite Parks does it have?  Have you ever been to Yosemite park?  Do you believe you would still enjoy it if 4 times as many people were there?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are irrational.
Click to expand...






What? You asked a question and I answered it.


----------



## Unkotare

The people in a panic about population must also be in a panic over the coming Ice Age, another false crisis that was pushed on impressionable minds back in the 70s.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> The people in a panic about population must also be in a panic over the coming Ice Age, another false crisis that was pushed on impressionable minds back in the 70s.



How much more evidence do you need there are too many humans on this planet?

World's highest dump? Mount Everest is covered in tons of trash and dead bodies

A clean-up team in Nepal recently picked up more than three tons of garbage from the area around the world's highest peak, and they plan to grab a total of 11 tons in a 45 day cleaning initiative that started April 14, local media reported.



Mount Everest glaciers are melting: And it's exposing the bodies of dead climbers

Around 500 foreign climbers and 1,000 climbing support staff will make it to Everest's higher camps this year, according to the tourism department. As they climb, mountaineers need large packs and often leave behind trash, both degradable and not.

Ghimire said the team would also bring down bodies of climbers who died trying to scale the peak. According to the Himalayan Times, four bodies were already found at the base camp.


Last month, officials said that more bodies were being revealed on Everest as the mountain's glaciers melt amid a warming climate THAT HUMANS ARE CAUSING!


----------



## Unkotare

The most ridiculously illogical argument ever for the false claim of overpopulation-that the infinitesimally small percentage of humans who ever climb Mount Everest leave their trash up there when they do. It’s hard to get more absurdly idiotic than that.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> The most ridiculously illogical argument ever for the false claim of overpopulation-that the infinitesimally small percentage of humans who ever climb Mount Everest leave their trash up there when they do. It’s hard to get more absurdly idiotic than that.


I’ve posted dozens of examples showing we are overpopulated. This was just one.

I’m surprised you didn’t point out how they are engineering a solution

Also did you see Everest is thawing because of global warming? Did you miss that point?


----------



## rightwinger

America is full....we can’t take any more people

Unless Trump needs a new wife


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> The most ridiculously illogical argument ever for the false claim of overpopulation-that the infinitesimally small percentage of humans who ever climb Mount Everest leave their trash up there when they do. It’s hard to get more absurdly idiotic than that.
> 
> 
> 
> I’ve posted dozens of examples showing we are overpopulated. This was just one.
> ...
Click to expand...



You’ve shown nothing that proves your chicken little false crisis. This was just one of the most ridiculous attempts.


----------



## Votto

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?



If you are worried, join these Left wing fruitcakes

VHEMT

One woman had an abortion to help mother earth reduce another carbon footprint.

AOC and Planned Parenthood, save us!


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> The most ridiculously illogical argument ever for the false claim of overpopulation-that the infinitesimally small percentage of humans who ever climb Mount Everest leave their trash up there when they do. It’s hard to get more absurdly idiotic than that.
> 
> 
> 
> I’ve posted dozens of examples showing we are overpopulated. This was just one.
> ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You’ve shown nothing that proves your chicken little false crisis. This was just one of the most ridiculous attempts.
Click to expand...


Whatever.  Who benefits when the middle class is divided stupid?  If it weren't for God, Gays, Guns and Racism the Republican party would only get 1% of the vote.  Because only the top 1% should be voting GOP.

Put it this way.  Democrats should be getting 58% of the vote in every state

58% of Americans Have Less Than $1,000 in Savings, Survey Finds


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> The most ridiculously illogical argument ever for the false claim of overpopulation-that the infinitesimally small percentage of humans who ever climb Mount Everest leave their trash up there when they do. It’s hard to get more absurdly idiotic than that.
> 
> 
> 
> I’ve posted dozens of examples showing we are overpopulated. This was just one.
> ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You’ve shown nothing that proves your chicken little false crisis. This was just one of the most ridiculous attempts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Whatever.  Who benefits when the middle class is divided ..?
Click to expand...




The democrats desperate need for a phony class war is most certainly not the topic of this thread.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> The most ridiculously illogical argument ever for the false claim of overpopulation-that the infinitesimally small percentage of humans who ever climb Mount Everest leave their trash up there when they do. It’s hard to get more absurdly idiotic than that.
> 
> 
> 
> I’ve posted dozens of examples showing we are overpopulated. This was just one.
> ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You’ve shown nothing that proves your chicken little false crisis. This was just one of the most ridiculous attempts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Whatever.  Who benefits when the middle class is divided ..?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The democrats desperate need for a phony class war is most certainly not the topic of this thread.
Click to expand...


Phony class war?  How has the middle class done since the corporations and Ronald Reagan waged class warfare on us in the late 70's?  

How has the middle class done since the GOP broke the unions?  Since union membership dropped from 35% of our workforce to 10%.

God I hope they break your teachers union and renig on your pension.  Because of Trump's Great Recession they'll only be able to pay teachers 50% of their pensions.  And social security and medicare will take hits.  And they'll raise your retirement to 70.

But you can always get a 4th job if the 3 you have now aren't enough dummy.  Any 60 year old who wants to retire is just lazy right unkotare?  Dope.

So let me get this straight stupid.  You don't think the rich hiring illegals is class warfare?  Do you know what hiring illegals costs the American workers?  Billions of dollars a year.  That means it saves the rich billions of dollars a year.

Cutting rich people's taxes knowing that's going to ultimately raise taxes on us, isn't class warfare?  Knowing it's going to mean cuts to schools and social security and medicare and medicaid.  That's not class warfare?

Class warfare is real stupid and you have been losing since 1980 when Ronny got in.  Bush fucked you even more and Trump now is going to really stick it to you.  

I'm talking to a public union worker.  A teacher.  Someone who has never worked in the private sector.  Someone who's BROKE and blames liberals.  

I make $250 a day and only have to support myself.  I'm going to guess you make about $190 a day and you have to support a family of 4.  Am I right?


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> The most ridiculously illogical argument ever for the false claim of overpopulation-that the infinitesimally small percentage of humans who ever climb Mount Everest leave their trash up there when they do. It’s hard to get more absurdly idiotic than that.
> 
> 
> 
> I’ve posted dozens of examples showing we are overpopulated. This was just one.
> ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You’ve shown nothing that proves your chicken little false crisis. This was just one of the most ridiculous attempts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Whatever.  Who benefits when the middle class is divided ..?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The democrats desperate need for a phony class war is most certainly not the topic of this thread.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Phony class war?  ...
> 
> ....?
Click to expand...



 Yeah, phony fake false baseless unreal not grounded in reality, just like the bullshit phony crisis of so-called over population which also does not exist no matter how much empty-headed Democrat drones want it to be.


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> The most ridiculously illogical argument ever for the false claim of overpopulation-that the infinitesimally small percentage of humans who ever climb Mount Everest leave their trash up there when they do. It’s hard to get more absurdly idiotic than that.
> 
> 
> 
> I’ve posted dozens of examples showing we are overpopulated. This was just one.
> ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You’ve shown nothing that proves your chicken little false crisis. This was just one of the most ridiculous attempts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Whatever.  Who benefits when the middle class is divided ..?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The democrats desperate need for a phony class war is most certainly not the topic of this thread.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ....
> 
> I'm talking to ...Someone who has never worked in the private sector.  ...
> 
> .....?
Click to expand...




 You must be talking to someone else, dumbass.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> I’ve posted dozens of examples showing we are overpopulated. This was just one.
> ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You’ve shown nothing that proves your chicken little false crisis. This was just one of the most ridiculous attempts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Whatever.  Who benefits when the middle class is divided ..?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The democrats desperate need for a phony class war is most certainly not the topic of this thread.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ....
> 
> I'm talking to ...Someone who has never worked in the private sector.  ...
> 
> .....?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You must be talking to someone else, dumbass.
Click to expand...


Working at Meijers on weekends as a greeter doesn't count.  Part time jobs to make ends meet doesn't make you a captain of industry.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> I’ve posted dozens of examples showing we are overpopulated. This was just one.
> ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You’ve shown nothing that proves your chicken little false crisis. This was just one of the most ridiculous attempts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Whatever.  Who benefits when the middle class is divided ..?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The democrats desperate need for a phony class war is most certainly not the topic of this thread.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Phony class war?  ...
> 
> ....?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, phony fake false baseless unreal not grounded in reality, just like the bullshit phony crisis of so-called over population which also does not exist no matter how much empty-headed Democrat drones want it to be.
Click to expand...


I wonder if idiots like you cried class warfare when workers were being treated like shit right before they organized into unions.  You certainly don't appreciate the union that protects you now so I can only imagine you would not have appreciated them even when they first formed and brought your wages up.  And gave you a pension, job security, good medical benefits, etc.

Ungrateful loser.


----------



## Likkmee

You tell me ?


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> You’ve shown nothing that proves your chicken little false crisis. This was just one of the most ridiculous attempts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Whatever.  Who benefits when the middle class is divided ..?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The democrats desperate need for a phony class war is most certainly not the topic of this thread.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ....
> 
> I'm talking to ...Someone who has never worked in the private sector.  ...
> 
> .....?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You must be talking to someone else, dumbass.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Working at Meijers on weekends as a greeter .....Part time jobs to make ends .....
Click to expand...




Wrong again, dope. You still suck at guessing.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Whatever.  Who benefits when the middle class is divided ..?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The democrats desperate need for a phony class war is most certainly not the topic of this thread.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ....
> 
> I'm talking to ...Someone who has never worked in the private sector.  ...
> 
> .....?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You must be talking to someone else, dumbass.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Working at Meijers on weekends as a greeter .....Part time jobs to make ends .....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong again, dope. You still suck at guessing.
Click to expand...

Yes I know of your fake business credential professor. Not buying it and not even impressed


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> The democrats desperate need for a phony class war is most certainly not the topic of this thread.
> 
> 
> 
> ....
> 
> I'm talking to ...Someone who has never worked in the private sector.  ...
> 
> .....?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You must be talking to someone else, dumbass.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Working at Meijers on weekends as a greeter .....Part time jobs to make ends .....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong again, dope. You still suck at guessing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes I know of your fake business credential professor. Not buying it and not even impressed
Click to expand...




 Once again it must be asked, What the fuck are you talking about?


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....
> 
> I'm talking to ...Someone who has never worked in the private sector.  ...
> 
> .....?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You must be talking to someone else, dumbass.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Working at Meijers on weekends as a greeter .....Part time jobs to make ends .....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong again, dope. You still suck at guessing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes I know of your fake business credential professor. Not buying it and not even impressed
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Once again it must be asked, What the fuck are you talking about?
Click to expand...

Here is more evidence we are overpopulated. In order to meet the worlds demand for meat scientists are exploring the possibility of eating maggots, locusts and other bugs.


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> You must be talking to someone else, dumbass.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Working at Meijers on weekends as a greeter .....Part time jobs to make ends .....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong again, dope. You still suck at guessing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes I know of your fake business credential professor. Not buying it and not even impressed
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Once again it must be asked, What the fuck are you talking about?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Here is more evidence we are overpopulated. In order to meet the worlds demand for meat scientists are exploring the possibility of eating maggots, locusts and other bugs.
Click to expand...




Another absurdly illogical failure to ‘prove’ a crisis that doesn’t exist.


----------



## Slyhunter

The coasts might be over-populated but we have plenty of empty space in the center of the country. We just have too many selfish self-centered idiots around.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Working at Meijers on weekends as a greeter .....Part time jobs to make ends .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong again, dope. You still suck at guessing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes I know of your fake business credential professor. Not buying it and not even impressed
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Once again it must be asked, What the fuck are you talking about?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Here is more evidence we are overpopulated. In order to meet the worlds demand for meat scientists are exploring the possibility of eating maggots, locusts and other bugs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another absurdly illogical failure to ‘prove’ a crisis that doesn’t exist.
Click to expand...

We don’t have enough meat to feed all the parasites. That’s not enough evidence?


----------



## sealybobo

Slyhunter said:


> The coasts might be over-populated but we have plenty of empty space in the center of the country. We just have too many selfish self-centered idiots around.


Plenty more room to pack more sardines in


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong again, dope. You still suck at guessing.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes I know of your fake business credential professor. Not buying it and not even impressed
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Once again it must be asked, What the fuck are you talking about?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Here is more evidence we are overpopulated. In order to meet the worlds demand for meat scientists are exploring the possibility of eating maggots, locusts and other bugs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another absurdly illogical failure to ‘prove’ a crisis that doesn’t exist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We don’t have enough meat ....... That’s not enough evidence?
Click to expand...


It's evidence of nothing but dietary choices, you buffoon.  The same could have been said when the global population was half of what it is today, or half of that, or half of that. Depends on how agriculture is structured and foods distributed, stupid.


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> The coasts might be over-populated but we have plenty of empty space in the center of the country. We just have too many selfish self-centered idiots around.
> 
> 
> 
> Plenty more room to pack more sardines in
Click to expand...



The United States of America is one of the least populous countries in the world for its size. We have lots and lots of room.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> The coasts might be over-populated but we have plenty of empty space in the center of the country. We just have too many selfish self-centered idiots around.
> 
> 
> 
> Plenty more room to pack more sardines in
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The United States of America is one of the least populous countries in the world for its size. We have lots and lots of room.
Click to expand...

Sure we could pack way more people in. I live in metro Detroit. We go 4 hours up north. Besides flint and Saginaw every other town along the way is a small under developed town. They would all love to have more business, more subdivisions, more money for their schools, a Walmart, Starbucks, subway, Applebee’s etc.

I thank god there are still a lot of small under developed cities and towns in Michigan. We need less people not more.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> The coasts might be over-populated but we have plenty of empty space in the center of the country. We just have too many selfish self-centered idiots around.
> 
> 
> 
> Plenty more room to pack more sardines in
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The United States of America is one of the least populous countries in the world for its size. We have lots and lots of room.
Click to expand...


It really is scary that a dummy like you teaches children.  Ok so you need more evidence we are overpopulated?  

*Shocking New Report On Loss Of Nature Paints A Terrifying Picture For The Future Of Humanity*
Up to 1 million species are at risk of extinction.

Planet Earth has been put on red alert by hundreds of leading scientists who have warned that humanity faces an existential threat within decades if the steep decline of nature is not reversed.

The conclusions of the greatest-ever stock-taking of the living world, published on Monday, show that ecosystems and wild populations are shrinking, deteriorating or vanishing completely, and up to 1 million species of land and marine life could be made extinct by humans’ actions if present trends continue.


CHECK MATE BITCH!!!!

Food, pollination, clean water and a stable climate all depend on a thriving plant and animal population. But forests and wetlands are being erased worldwide and oceans are under growing stress, says the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), the United Nations’ expert nature panel, in the landmark global assessment report. The three-year study, compiled by nearly 500 scientists, analyzed around 15,000 academic studies that focused on everything from plankton and fish to bees, coral, forests, frogs and insects, as well as drawing on indigenous knowledge.

If we continue to pollute the planet and waste natural resources as we have been doing, it won’t just affect people’s quality of life but will lead to a further deterioration of earth’s planetary systems, said the IPBES scientists.


----------



## sealybobo

“The essential, interconnected web of life on Earth is getting smaller and increasingly frayed. This loss is a direct result of human activity and constitutes a direct threat to human well-being in all regions of the world,”

The scale and rapid speed of this decline of nature is unprecedented in human history and is likely to continue for at least 50 years, say the authors of the global study, but can still largely be turned around if governments, businesses and individuals urgently commit to working together to conserve and restore nature, and to use fewer natural resources better.

It will require a concerted worldwide effort to change the way we live

it identifies both the direct drivers of nature’s losses ― such as climate change, agricultural expansion, pollution and the exploitation of oceans and forests.  In other words all the shit I've been telling you unky.


----------



## sealybobo

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?



What do you think?

These indirect drivers are more controversial and include world population, which has doubled since 1970 (from 3.7 billion to 7.6 billion people)

Shocking New Report On Loss Of Nature Paints A Terrifying Picture For The Future Of Humanity | HuffPost

Here is why the right denies this is a problem:  “The present system [of environmental protection] has not worked well enough. Governments must get serious about reining in the power of business to regulate itself.

The global assessment report also shows:

• Urban areas have more than doubled in size since 1992, and 100 million hectares of tropical forest were lost from 1980 to 2000.

• Around 25% of animal and plant species are threatened, and around 1 million species already face extinction, many within decades if no action is taken.

• The current rate of species extinction is at least tens to hundreds of times higher than it has averaged over the past 10 million years.

• Nearly half the live coral cover on coral reefs has been lost since the 1870s, with losses in recent decades accelerating due to climate change.

• Two-thirds of the oceans are under stress, and over 85% of wetlands area has been lost.

• The frequency and intensity of extreme weather events have increased in the past 50 years, while the global average sea level has risen by between 6 and 8 inches since 1900.

• Climate change is projected to become increasingly important as a direct driver of changes in nature and its contributions to humanity in the next decades.

• There are around 2,500 conflicts over fossil fuels, water, food and land currently occurring worldwide.


----------



## sealybobo

we must stop treating our oceans like a waste dump while also exploiting their resources to the point of collapse


----------



## Meister




----------



## Unkotare

You know the other time in history when the  climate was changing and many species were becoming extinct? Answer: every single period of history, all the damn time.


----------



## Meister

It's a good time for another mass extinction....maybe global climate change will help.
Earth has survived several mass extinctions in the past.  it's a cyclical thing.


----------



## sealybobo

Meister said:


>



1.  We have done better since 1989.  If we kept doing what we were doing, we'd be worse off than we are now.  
2.  We are in trouble now.  You act like global warming isn't a major problem.  It is if you ask anyone except corporate polluters and Republicans who defend them.

So do we have to be under water before you will wise up?  

Shocking New Report On Loss Of Nature Paints A Terrifying Picture For The Future Of Humanity | HuffPost


----------



## Meister

sealybobo said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1.  We have done better since 1989.  If we kept doing what we were doing, we'd be worse off than we are now.
> 2.  We are in trouble now.  You act like global warming isn't a major problem.  It is if you ask anyone except corporate polluters and Republicans who defend them.
> 
> So do we have to be under water before you will wise up?
> 
> Shocking New Report On Loss Of Nature Paints A Terrifying Picture For The Future Of Humanity | HuffPost
Click to expand...

The sky has been falling for over 30 years, Silly.  A lot of hypocrites have made a fortune off
of their schtick.
We have done our part, time for other nations to do their part, once that is done, let's see where
we are when the dust settles.  Losing trillions in our economy is just ridiculous as an answer.


----------



## sealybobo

Meister said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1.  We have done better since 1989.  If we kept doing what we were doing, we'd be worse off than we are now.
> 2.  We are in trouble now.  You act like global warming isn't a major problem.  It is if you ask anyone except corporate polluters and Republicans who defend them.
> 
> So do we have to be under water before you will wise up?
> 
> Shocking New Report On Loss Of Nature Paints A Terrifying Picture For The Future Of Humanity | HuffPost
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The sky has been falling for over 30 years, Silly.  A lot of hypocrites have made a fortune off
> of their schtick.
> We have done our part, time for other nations to do their part, once that is done, let's see where
> we are when the dust settles.  Losing trillions in our economy is just ridiculous as an answer.
Click to expand...

True those nations have to do their part.

But also remember before they were manufacturing, we were the big bad industrialized nation.  Everything was made here.  Now to keep our air clean we make it over there.  Let them get lead poisoning and suffer unsafe work environments like we did for centuries.

And the sky has been falling for 30 years.  Thing are worse today than they were 30 years ago.

How bad do things have to get before you'll say ok?


----------



## sealybobo

Meister said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1.  We have done better since 1989.  If we kept doing what we were doing, we'd be worse off than we are now.
> 2.  We are in trouble now.  You act like global warming isn't a major problem.  It is if you ask anyone except corporate polluters and Republicans who defend them.
> 
> So do we have to be under water before you will wise up?
> 
> Shocking New Report On Loss Of Nature Paints A Terrifying Picture For The Future Of Humanity | HuffPost
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The sky has been falling for over 30 years, Silly.  A lot of hypocrites have made a fortune off
> of their schtick.
> We have done our part, time for other nations to do their part, once that is done, let's see where
> we are when the dust settles.  Losing trillions in our economy is just ridiculous as an answer.
Click to expand...


Funny you mention 30 years


In the 30-year period prior to Hansen’s testimony, the Earth’s surface was, on average, less than 0.2°F warmer than the 20th-century average. In the 30 years since, the planet’s surface has, on average, undergone a six-fold temperature increase.

The Earth has gotten warmer.
So warm, in fact, that the temperature trend was almost certainly due to the greenhouse effect, which is enhanced by emissions of gases like carbon dioxide and methane from burning fossil fuels.
As a result, summer heat waves and other extreme weather events will become more common.
"The greenhouse effect has been detected, and it is changing our climate now,” Hansen said. When he spoke, 1988 was on track to become the hottest year of all-time. Since then, that record has been broken six more times – in 1990, 1998, 2010, 2014, 2015 and 2016.


----------



## Meister

No matter what you say.....just follow the money and see where it goes.  Lol!
The UN is a joke, I needed to mention that.


----------



## sealybobo

Meister said:


> No matter what you say.....just follow the money and see where it goes.  Lol!
> The UN is a joke, I needed to mention that.



I do follow the money.  Corporations pay lobbyists and scientists millions of dollars to say global warming isn't real.

The rest of the world isn't lying.  Scientists from all over the world aren't lying.  

It only seems to be right wingers, the GOP and Corporations who are denying global warming.

Just remember we went through this 2 times before in my lifetime.  They said cigarettes don't cause cancer and they said lead was safe.  They were lying but it took decades to end the fight because they were able to get half of our government to go along.  The GOP who side with corporations denied and lied for decades.

And now they are doing it again on global warming.  We even see the progression.  Its no longer a hoax.  Now they have different arguments.  It's now real but not that big of a deal.


----------



## Meister

sealybobo said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> No matter what you say.....just follow the money and see where it goes.  Lol!
> The UN is a joke, I needed to mention that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I do follow the money.  Corporations pay lobbyists and scientists millions of dollars to say global warming isn't real.
> 
> The rest of the world isn't lying.  Scientists from all over the world aren't lying.
> 
> It only seems to be right wingers, the GOP and Corporations who are denying global warming.
> 
> Just remember we went through this 2 times before in my lifetime.  They said cigarettes don't cause cancer and they said lead was safe.  They were lying but it took decades to end the fight because they were able to get half of our government to go along.  The GOP who side with corporations denied and lied for decades.
> 
> And now they are doing it again on global warming.  We even see the progression.  Its no longer a hoax.  Now they have different arguments.  It's now real but not that big of a deal.
Click to expand...

Good grief, get off the meds that they gave you.  They can't even get their models to work right without a twist here and a jerk there.


----------



## sealybobo

Meister said:


> No matter what you say.....just follow the money and see where it goes.  Lol!
> The UN is a joke, I needed to mention that.


Yes, no matter what we say.

*Republican climate rhetoric shifts (again), but the goal remains the same.*

*In recent years, leaders of the Republican Party have become aware that denying the existence of global warming makes them look like idiots. Changes in climate have become obvious, not just to scientists, but to ordinary people — they can be directly measured, with such exotic instruments as a “thermometer.” Majorities of every group except the most conservative Republicans (who will trust their media over their lying eyes) believe it is happening.

Denying visible, tangible reality is a dicey business, even for the modern US right. It makes the party look like a death cult. So Republican climate-communication strategy has undergone something of an adjustment.

Not a large adjustment, mind you. The GOP remains dead set against doing anything about climate change, against any policy that would threaten the profits of fossil fuel companies. That is the non-negotiable baseline, despite a few fringe figures who signal otherwise (until the time comes for votes).

But front-line, hardcore denialism of the “it’s a hoax” variety has largely receded to the base. Republican leaders and spokespeople have moved back to the next line of defense: Yes, the climate is changing, but we don’t know to what extent humans are responsible.

Professional double-talker Marco Rubio, senator from the climate-battered state of Florida, ran a version of this on CNN’s Jake Tapper show earlier this month.

“Sea level rise and changes in the climate, those are measurable,” Rubio said. “I don’t think there’s a debate about whether that’s happening because you can measure that.” See? He’s a reasonable guy! Not some crazy denier.

“The secondary aspect,” he adds, “is how much of that is due to human activity...”

Tapper pushes on: “Do you believe it is man-made?”

“Humanity and its behavior, scientists say, is contributing to that,” Rubio acknowledged. “I can’t tell you to what percentage is contributing and many scientists would debate the percentage is contributable to man versus normal fluctuations, but there’s a rise in sea level, temperatures are warmer in the waters than they were 50, 80, 100 years ago. That’s measurable.”

In short: The climate is changing but we’re not sure why.

Rubio’s is not a new rhetorical ploy, of course, nor is it unique to him. But it has helped the GOP wriggle out from under the uncomfortable “denier” label. Conservative leaders who pull this move tend to get the headlines they want: “Republican acknowledges climate change.”

There are two things to say about this rhetorical move by the GOP.

First, this is still denialism. It doesn’t get Republicans out of the trap like they think it does, unless the media is incredibly lazy. (Ahem.) Second, and more broadly, the ever-shifting rhetoric of climate denial reveals that particular arguments about science were never really offered in good faith. The fact is, the GOP is the party of fossil fuels; it recognizes, accurately, that to acknowledge climate change is to empower its opponents.

Human responsibility is the whole point. It is the heart of the matter. That is precisely what the much-discussed scientific consensus is a consensus about. Denying it — or muddying it up, saying “many scientists would debate the percentage [that] is contributable to man versus normal fluctuations” — is what we mean when we talk about denialism.

It’s just not true that “many scientists” debate the human contribution to climate change. Climate scientists are effectively certain that human beings are responsible for most or all of the warming over the past few centuries. (Or more than all of it — there’s some evidence we’d be drifting toward an ice age if not for global warming.)

Nothing is 100 percent certain in science, but the reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which summarize the state of science, express a 95 percent confidence that humans have caused more than half and most likely all or more than all of recent global temperature rise. That is about as close to certain as scientists ever get about anything.

Here, from Skeptical Science, is a selection of independent peer-reviewed studies and their conclusions about the balance of human and natural “forcings” that warm the climate:

As you can see, most put the human contribution at or above 100 percent. Natural forcings are small and possibly negative, i.e., cooling.

So: Yes, humans are causing global warming and the only thing that can slow it is a rapid reduction in human greenhouse gas emissions. That is a fact, at least insofar as anything counts as a fact in these ridiculous post-truth times. There is simply no other plausible story.

Why conservatives keep gaslighting the nation about climate change

*


----------



## sealybobo

Look at lyin Donny

Lesley Stahl of 60 Minutes presses Trump about his climate change views. He says: "I think something’s happening. Something’s changing - and it’ll change back again. I don't think it's a hoax, I think there's probably a difference. But I don't know that it's man-made."

There’s no argument here. Trump does not make arguments. There are just ... phrases, unconnected to the phrases that precede and follow them. It’s just bits of rhetoric Trump has heard — his impression of what his people say about these things — jumbled up in his brain.

Note that someone clearly told him before the interview that the “hoax” thing is a trap and he should not outright deny climate change. You can tell, because he just blurts it out: “I don’t think it’s a hoax.” And then, “I’m not denying climate change.”

But he is.

He says “something’s changing and it’ll change back again.” That’s denying climate change. He says “I don’t know that it’s manmade.” That’s denying climate change (see above). He says there’s no way to know if Greenland glaciers would be melting without human activity. That’s denying climate change.

She protests: “But that’s denying it.” She asks, “What about all the scientists?”

“Scientists also have a political agenda,” he says. That sounds like he’s calling it a hoax!

The point here is not to catch Trump in a contradiction. Trump contradicts himself every time he opens his mouth. He does not have beliefs as such, not like we ordinarily understand them, and so he can’t really contradict himself. Nothing divided by nothing is nothing.

Rather, the point is that Trump, in this as in so many other areas, is a rawer, truer reflection of right-wing thinking on this subject.

Listening to him talk, it’s clear that everything is geared around defending the right’s tribal position. He just says whatever comes to mind in that pursuit, grabs whatever talking point bubbles up from his Fox-informed subconscious. It doesn’t matter — I’m sure it never occurs to him — that half the things he says don’t fit with the other half. He’s not offering good-faith arguments, statements of fact or reasoning meant to be subject to critical scrutiny.

Persuasion is not any part of this, in either direction. The goal is only to deflect, confuse, and mislead, in defense of the status quo.


----------



## sealybobo

Meister said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> No matter what you say.....just follow the money and see where it goes.  Lol!
> The UN is a joke, I needed to mention that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I do follow the money.  Corporations pay lobbyists and scientists millions of dollars to say global warming isn't real.
> 
> The rest of the world isn't lying.  Scientists from all over the world aren't lying.
> 
> It only seems to be right wingers, the GOP and Corporations who are denying global warming.
> 
> Just remember we went through this 2 times before in my lifetime.  They said cigarettes don't cause cancer and they said lead was safe.  They were lying but it took decades to end the fight because they were able to get half of our government to go along.  The GOP who side with corporations denied and lied for decades.
> 
> And now they are doing it again on global warming.  We even see the progression.  Its no longer a hoax.  Now they have different arguments.  It's now real but not that big of a deal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Good grief, get off the meds that they gave you.  They can't even get their models to work right without a twist here and a jerk there.
Click to expand...

So you are denying global warming is man made.  Got it flat earther.


----------



## sealybobo

Despite the best efforts of President Donald Trump and his administration to disappear information about our increasingly dire situation, straightforward climate denialism is becoming increasingly untenable as a talking point. Not only are respected scientific bodies continuing to issue highly credible, hair-on-fire reports about our careening path toward the worst-case scenario, but also extreme weather events and calamitous wildfires are bearing out those reports all over the nation's front pages. Polls show that the majority of Republican voters make the connection. In the face of such overwhelming evidence, outright denial is looking sillier than ever. 

Hence the new GOP "pivot" on climate change. Some Republican politicians are now admitting that climate change is real and that something needs to be done about it. What is that "something"? The answer, for many is "innovate." Here is Wyoming senator John Barrasso, for example, in _The New York Times, _arguing that we need to "Cut Carbon Through Innovation, Not Regulation." (As an example, Barrasso cites a speculative carbon-sequestration process called enhanced oil recovery: "By injecting carbon dioxide into an otherwise unproductive well, oil can be economically extracted. This is good for the environment and the economy—producing more American energy and sequestering carbon dioxide underground.")

Then there's Thom Tillis, senator from North Carolina, who called for "an innovative, market-driven strategy to combat the impacts of climate change." Marco Rubio of Florida said, "To the extent that we want to truly limit carbon emissions, technology can get us there." And on Fox News, Ben Sasse of Nebraska said, "You can't legislate or regulate your way into the [pre-warming] past. We have to innovate our way into the future." 

This innovative messaging shift recalls an earlier pivot 16 years ago, when Republican messaging guru Frank Luntz told the party in a confidential memo that they had "lost the environmental communications battle," particularly on the subject of global warming. Luntz advised GOP officeholders to play up the notion of scientific uncertainty, to say "climate change" instead of the scarier "global warming," and to play up the "unfairness" of the United States being asked to do more than China or India. There's also this: 

Global warming alarmists use American superiority in technology and innovation quite effectively in responding to accusations that international agreements such as the Kyoto accord [the predecessor to the Paris climate accord] could cost the United States billions. . . . This should be our argument. *We *need to emphasize how *voluntary *innovation and experimentation are preferable to bureaucratic or international intervention and regulation.

So—pretty much the same playbook as today.

Very few Republican leaders have dared to go beyond these lip service appeals to support the kinds of governmental policies that might actually lead to serious innovation. After the release of the National Climate Assessment, Republican senator Susan Collins of Maine ventured the heretical opinion that "we should reconsider some regulatory steps that the president has been eager to overturn." Last year, Carlos Curbelo, a GOP representative from Florida, went so far as to introduce legislation to institute a carbon tax of $24 per ton. But the bill never came up for a vote and died with the last Congress. Curbelo says that he hopes it will be reintroduced this year—but unfortunately he isn't in a position to do so himself, having lost in November to Democrat Debbie Mucarsel-Powell. 

The GOP’s “Modified Limited Hangout” on Climate Change


----------



## Meister

sealybobo said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> No matter what you say.....just follow the money and see where it goes.  Lol!
> The UN is a joke, I needed to mention that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I do follow the money.  Corporations pay lobbyists and scientists millions of dollars to say global warming isn't real.
> 
> The rest of the world isn't lying.  Scientists from all over the world aren't lying.
> 
> It only seems to be right wingers, the GOP and Corporations who are denying global warming.
> 
> Just remember we went through this 2 times before in my lifetime.  They said cigarettes don't cause cancer and they said lead was safe.  They were lying but it took decades to end the fight because they were able to get half of our government to go along.  The GOP who side with corporations denied and lied for decades.
> 
> And now they are doing it again on global warming.  We even see the progression.  Its no longer a hoax.  Now they have different arguments.  It's now real but not that big of a deal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Good grief, get off the meds that they gave you.  They can't even get their models to work right without a twist here and a jerk there.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So you are denying global warming is man made.  Got it flat earther.
Click to expand...

I'm saying that it's much more cyclical than man made.  I laugh at people like you who thinks
it's all man made.   You can't tell me how much of a temperature change has been the result of man.
Yet you're willing to spend trillions of the US economy to try and stop it.
Again...I laugh at you.


----------



## Unkotare

Can anyone guess how many people were alive on earth during the largest (perhaps) extinction events in the history of the earth?

Anyone?

Maybe we pulled an Avengers and went back in time 250 million years or so to cause all those extinctions before humans existed.


----------



## Slyhunter

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> The coasts might be over-populated but we have plenty of empty space in the center of the country. We just have too many selfish self-centered idiots around.
> 
> 
> 
> Plenty more room to pack more sardines in
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The United States of America is one of the least populous countries in the world for its size. We have lots and lots of room.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It really is scary that a dummy like you teaches children.  Ok so you need more evidence we are overpopulated?
> 
> *Shocking New Report On Loss Of Nature Paints A Terrifying Picture For The Future Of Humanity*
> Up to 1 million species are at risk of extinction.
> 
> Planet Earth has been put on red alert by hundreds of leading scientists who have warned that humanity faces an existential threat within decades if the steep decline of nature is not reversed.
> 
> The conclusions of the greatest-ever stock-taking of the living world, published on Monday, show that ecosystems and wild populations are shrinking, deteriorating or vanishing completely, and up to 1 million species of land and marine life could be made extinct by humans’ actions if present trends continue.
> 
> 
> CHECK MATE BITCH!!!!
> 
> Food, pollination, clean water and a stable climate all depend on a thriving plant and animal population. But forests and wetlands are being erased worldwide and oceans are under growing stress, says the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), the United Nations’ expert nature panel, in the landmark global assessment report. The three-year study, compiled by nearly 500 scientists, analyzed around 15,000 academic studies that focused on everything from plankton and fish to bees, coral, forests, frogs and insects, as well as drawing on indigenous knowledge.
> 
> If we continue to pollute the planet and waste natural resources as we have been doing, it won’t just affect people’s quality of life but will lead to a further deterioration of earth’s planetary systems, said the IPBES scientists.
Click to expand...

Do you not understand Evolution? The old die to make room for the new.


----------



## Slyhunter

sealybobo said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> No matter what you say.....just follow the money and see where it goes.  Lol!
> The UN is a joke, I needed to mention that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I do follow the money.  Corporations pay lobbyists and scientists millions of dollars to say global warming isn't real.
> 
> The rest of the world isn't lying.  Scientists from all over the world aren't lying.
> 
> It only seems to be right wingers, the GOP and Corporations who are denying global warming.
> 
> Just remember we went through this 2 times before in my lifetime.  They said cigarettes don't cause cancer and they said lead was safe.  They were lying but it took decades to end the fight because they were able to get half of our government to go along.  The GOP who side with corporations denied and lied for decades.
> 
> And now they are doing it again on global warming.  We even see the progression.  Its no longer a hoax.  Now they have different arguments.  It's now real but not that big of a deal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Good grief, get off the meds that they gave you.  They can't even get their models to work right without a twist here and a jerk there.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So you are denying global warming is man made.  Got it flat earther.
Click to expand...

So you are denying that global warming and cooling are natural side effects of nature and solar activity. You are the neanderthal.


----------



## Flopper

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?


Population of the earth or the US? The average *global birth rate* is 18.5 births per 1,000 total population in 2016. The death rate is 7.8 per 1,000 per year. So, yes population is still growing.  However, when you look at individual countries, the picture is quite different.  Some ethnic groups will essentially be extinct in a hundred years.  Other will dominate the planet.


----------



## Flopper

Unkotare said:


> You know the other time in history when the  climate was changing and many species were becoming extinct? Answer: every single period of history, all the damn time.


That is true but there is a difference now. The global rate of species extinction is already tens to a hundred times higher than it has been, on average, over the last 10 million years.   The fast disappearance of the rain forest is responsible for most of the rapid extinction.  That's because there are so many species there that exist no where else and it's disappearing so rapidly.  78 million acres are lost every year! More than 20 percent of the Amazon rain forest is already gone.


----------



## Slyhunter

Flopper said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> You know the other time in history when the  climate was changing and many species were becoming extinct? Answer: every single period of history, all the damn time.
> 
> 
> 
> That is true but there is difference now. The global rate of species extinction is already tens to a hundred times higher than it has been, on average, over the last 10 million years.
Click to expand...

So what. It's called Evolution.


----------



## Flopper

Slyhunter said:


> Flopper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> You know the other time in history when the  climate was changing and many species were becoming extinct? Answer: every single period of history, all the damn time.
> 
> 
> 
> That is true but there is difference now. The global rate of species extinction is already tens to a hundred times higher than it has been, on average, over the last 10 million years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So what. It's called Evolution.
Click to expand...

No, it's called Extinction.


----------



## Slyhunter

Flopper said:


> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Flopper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> You know the other time in history when the  climate was changing and many species were becoming extinct? Answer: every single period of history, all the damn time.
> 
> 
> 
> That is true but there is difference now. The global rate of species extinction is already tens to a hundred times higher than it has been, on average, over the last 10 million years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So what. It's called Evolution.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, it's called Extinction.
Click to expand...

Evolution the old die so the new can thrive.


----------



## sealybobo

Slyhunter said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> No matter what you say.....just follow the money and see where it goes.  Lol!
> The UN is a joke, I needed to mention that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I do follow the money.  Corporations pay lobbyists and scientists millions of dollars to say global warming isn't real.
> 
> The rest of the world isn't lying.  Scientists from all over the world aren't lying.
> 
> It only seems to be right wingers, the GOP and Corporations who are denying global warming.
> 
> Just remember we went through this 2 times before in my lifetime.  They said cigarettes don't cause cancer and they said lead was safe.  They were lying but it took decades to end the fight because they were able to get half of our government to go along.  The GOP who side with corporations denied and lied for decades.
> 
> And now they are doing it again on global warming.  We even see the progression.  Its no longer a hoax.  Now they have different arguments.  It's now real but not that big of a deal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Good grief, get off the meds that they gave you.  They can't even get their models to work right without a twist here and a jerk there.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So you are denying global warming is man made.  Got it flat earther.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So you are denying that global warming and cooling are natural side effects of nature and solar activity. You are the neanderthal.
Click to expand...


No I'm not denying that the planet warms and cools without man made climate change adding to what already occurs naturally.

By the way, every day I post more evidence that there are too many humans on this planet.

Microplastics Have Invaded Some Of The Planet’s Most Remote Places | HuffPost

Plastic trash is everywhere. And it’s not going away.

We need to cut the population in half.  I did my part.  I didn't have any kids.  Breeders should be taxed not encouraged to have more children.

Now you can argue with the scientists but most of us will take their word for it not yours.  Not the GOP's and not the corporate polluters and their lobbyists.

How Do We Know that Humans Are the Major Cause of Global Warming?

*Direct evidence of human contribution to atmospheric CO2*

*Natural and human factors that influence the climate (known as “climate drivers”)*

*Natural drivers + human drivers best match reality*

*Solutions within our reach*
*We are the cause, we are the solution.*

*Knowing that human activities are the main driver of global warming helps us understand how and why our climate is changing, and it clearly defines the problem as one that is within our power to address.*

*We cannot avoid some level of warming caused by the heat-trapping emissions already present in the atmosphere, some of which (such as carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide) last for 100 years or more. But, with aggressive measures to reduce emissions and adapt to those changes we cannot avoid, we have a small window to avoid truly dangerous warming and provide future generations with a sustainable world.*

*The Paris Agreement of 2015 calls for a reduction in emissions worldwide enough to keep global warming under the dangerous threshold of 2°C. We can reach that goal through immediate and sustained action to reduce our heat-trapping emissions like adopting technologies that increase energy efficiency, expanding our use of renewable energy, and slowing deforestation (among other solutions).*


----------



## Unkotare

Maybe the dumbass democrat animals are just trying to justify their love of abortions by harping on this false crisis.


----------



## Meister

sealybobo said:


> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> No matter what you say.....just follow the money and see where it goes.  Lol!
> The UN is a joke, I needed to mention that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I do follow the money.  Corporations pay lobbyists and scientists millions of dollars to say global warming isn't real.
> 
> The rest of the world isn't lying.  Scientists from all over the world aren't lying.
> 
> It only seems to be right wingers, the GOP and Corporations who are denying global warming.
> 
> Just remember we went through this 2 times before in my lifetime.  They said cigarettes don't cause cancer and they said lead was safe.  They were lying but it took decades to end the fight because they were able to get half of our government to go along.  The GOP who side with corporations denied and lied for decades.
> 
> And now they are doing it again on global warming.  We even see the progression.  Its no longer a hoax.  Now they have different arguments.  It's now real but not that big of a deal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Good grief, get off the meds that they gave you.  They can't even get their models to work right without a twist here and a jerk there.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So you are denying global warming is man made.  Got it flat earther.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So you are denying that global warming and cooling are natural side effects of nature and solar activity. You are the neanderthal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No I'm not denying that the planet warms and cools without man made climate change adding to what already occurs naturally.
> 
> By the way, every day I post more evidence that there are too many humans on this planet.
> 
> Microplastics Have Invaded Some Of The Planet’s Most Remote Places | HuffPost
> 
> Plastic trash is everywhere. And it’s not going away.
> 
> We need to cut the population in half.  I did my part.  I didn't have any kids.  Breeders should be taxed not encouraged to have more children.
> 
> Now you can argue with the scientists but most of us will take their word for it not yours.  Not the GOP's and not the corporate polluters and their lobbyists.
> 
> How Do We Know that Humans Are the Major Cause of Global Warming?
> 
> *Direct evidence of human contribution to atmospheric CO2*
> 
> *Natural and human factors that influence the climate (known as “climate drivers”)*
> 
> *Natural drivers + human drivers best match reality*
> 
> *Solutions within our reach*
> *We are the cause, we are the solution.*
> 
> *Knowing that human activities are the main driver of global warming helps us understand how and why our climate is changing, and it clearly defines the problem as one that is within our power to address.*
> 
> *We cannot avoid some level of warming caused by the heat-trapping emissions already present in the atmosphere, some of which (such as carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide) last for 100 years or more. But, with aggressive measures to reduce emissions and adapt to those changes we cannot avoid, we have a small window to avoid truly dangerous warming and provide future generations with a sustainable world.*
> 
> *The Paris Agreement of 2015 calls for a reduction in emissions worldwide enough to keep global warming under the dangerous threshold of 2°C. We can reach that goal through immediate and sustained action to reduce our heat-trapping emissions like adopting technologies that increase energy efficiency, expanding our use of renewable energy, and slowing deforestation (among other solutions).*
Click to expand...

I just need to say that I too, have had no children.  But, I never have referred to those who
did as, "breeders".  Were you brought up in a kennel, Dawg?

You have failed to answer my question......What temperature increase has your science
attributed to man and how much to the natural cycle?
Should be easy to find in all those studies you parrot.


----------



## Likkmee

Grant asylum AFTER spay/neuter has been performed


----------



## sealybobo

Meister said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> I do follow the money.  Corporations pay lobbyists and scientists millions of dollars to say global warming isn't real.
> 
> The rest of the world isn't lying.  Scientists from all over the world aren't lying.
> 
> It only seems to be right wingers, the GOP and Corporations who are denying global warming.
> 
> Just remember we went through this 2 times before in my lifetime.  They said cigarettes don't cause cancer and they said lead was safe.  They were lying but it took decades to end the fight because they were able to get half of our government to go along.  The GOP who side with corporations denied and lied for decades.
> 
> And now they are doing it again on global warming.  We even see the progression.  Its no longer a hoax.  Now they have different arguments.  It's now real but not that big of a deal.
> 
> 
> 
> Good grief, get off the meds that they gave you.  They can't even get their models to work right without a twist here and a jerk there.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So you are denying global warming is man made.  Got it flat earther.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So you are denying that global warming and cooling are natural side effects of nature and solar activity. You are the neanderthal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No I'm not denying that the planet warms and cools without man made climate change adding to what already occurs naturally.
> 
> By the way, every day I post more evidence that there are too many humans on this planet.
> 
> Microplastics Have Invaded Some Of The Planet’s Most Remote Places | HuffPost
> 
> Plastic trash is everywhere. And it’s not going away.
> 
> We need to cut the population in half.  I did my part.  I didn't have any kids.  Breeders should be taxed not encouraged to have more children.
> 
> Now you can argue with the scientists but most of us will take their word for it not yours.  Not the GOP's and not the corporate polluters and their lobbyists.
> 
> How Do We Know that Humans Are the Major Cause of Global Warming?
> 
> *Direct evidence of human contribution to atmospheric CO2*
> 
> *Natural and human factors that influence the climate (known as “climate drivers”)*
> 
> *Natural drivers + human drivers best match reality*
> 
> *Solutions within our reach*
> *We are the cause, we are the solution.*
> 
> *Knowing that human activities are the main driver of global warming helps us understand how and why our climate is changing, and it clearly defines the problem as one that is within our power to address.*
> 
> *We cannot avoid some level of warming caused by the heat-trapping emissions already present in the atmosphere, some of which (such as carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide) last for 100 years or more. But, with aggressive measures to reduce emissions and adapt to those changes we cannot avoid, we have a small window to avoid truly dangerous warming and provide future generations with a sustainable world.*
> 
> *The Paris Agreement of 2015 calls for a reduction in emissions worldwide enough to keep global warming under the dangerous threshold of 2°C. We can reach that goal through immediate and sustained action to reduce our heat-trapping emissions like adopting technologies that increase energy efficiency, expanding our use of renewable energy, and slowing deforestation (among other solutions).*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I just need to say that I too, have had no children.  But, I never have referred to those who
> did as, "breeders".  Were you brought up in a kennel, Dawg?
> 
> You have failed to answer my question......What temperature increase has your science
> attributed to man and how much to the natural cycle?
> Should be easy to find in all those studies you parrot.
Click to expand...


Then find them.  Don't make me do your work for you.  I'm already mad that I wasted the time posting what I already posted to you.  And I knew it wouldn't make a bit of difference.  I knew you would come back with a question that doesn't prove anything.  

How about all of it?  Because if it weren't for man made global warming, we would be in a cooling down period.  But we aren't.  Instead we are heating up.  So the planet should be going into an ice age.

And I'm not a scientist.  Scientists say you are wrong.  ALL scientists say you are wrong.  At least the ones who specialize in this stuff.  The ones that disagree are paid lobbyists.

It's not the world scientists who are all in collusion with each other and lying to us so they can keep their funding.  That's a conspiracy theory on the grandest of scales.  Imagine how many people would have to be in on it.

But we know the GOP are lying and we know who they are lying for.  We listen to their carefully crafted words as their arguments change.  Today they say they aren't denying man made global warming, but then in the next breath they do deny it.  So they are not being intellectually honest and you are still swallowing the deniers arguments even though the GOP aren't even denying it anymore.  THey are but they are being careful not to call it a hoax because they know it is not.  

Now they are saying things like, 

1.  How much is man responsible?
2. Is there anything that we can do about it?
3. Why does the USA have to when other countries don't?
4.  Who's going to pay for it?

*In a Switch, Some Republicans Start Citing Climate Change as Driving Their Policies*

*John Barrasso, a Republican Senator from uranium-rich Wyoming, with President Trump in 2017. Mr. Barrasso has introduced a bill to promote nuclear power that he frames as a climate solution.*

*When John Barrasso, a Republican from oil and uranium-rich Wyoming who has spent years blocking climate change legislation, introduced a bill this year to promote nuclear energy, he added a twist: a desire to tackle global warming.

Mr. Barrasso’s remarks — “If we are serious about climate change, we must be serious about expanding our use of nuclear energy” — were hardly a clarion call to action. Still they were highly unusual for the lawmaker who, despite decades of support for nuclear power and other policies that would reduce planet-warming emissions, has until recently avoided talking about them in the context of climate change.

The comments represent an important shift among Republicans in Congress. Driven by polls showing that voters in both parties — particularly younger Americans — are increasingly concerned about a warming planet, and prodded by the new Democratic majority in the House shining a spotlight on the issue, a growing number of Republicans are now openly discussing climate change and proposing what they call conservative solutions.

“Denying the basic existence of climate change is no longer a credible position,” said Whit Ayers, a Republican political consultant, pointing out the growing climate concern among millennials as well as centrist voters — two groups the G.O.P. will need in the future.


*


----------



## sealybobo

Every question Republicans ask about global warming are designed to distract from solving the problem.  They are obstructionists on this issue because corporations don't want to pay to go green.  It's so obvious.

*Let's be honest: real sustainability may not make business sense.  T**here can be a number of disadvantages to going green for corporations.

Going green can help protect the earth's natural systems, but for businesses, it often means bearing extra costs that can be difficult to absorb.

Some companies have made an effort to become more environmentally friendly, also known as “going green.” Reasons for going green can include achieving better public relations, tapping into the growing green market or even because the company may simply feel it is the right thing to do to help protect the environment. Greening a company can involve changes to lessen greenhouse gas emissions, use safer, non-toxic chemicals in products, protect ecosystems, or all of the above. However, there can be a number of disadvantages to going green for corporations.*




*

Going green can help protect the earth's natural systems, but for businesses, it often means bearing extra costs that can be difficult to absorb.
*
*The Switch Can Be Expense
It can be costly for a corporation to go green initially. For example, the switch to solar power will create the need to install solar panels at business facilities. The cost reductions in energy savings gained by going green are not always enough to offset the initial upfront conversion costs. In some locations, however, tax benefits are provided that can help companies offset the costs of making the switch.

Even switching energy suppliers – purchasing wind-power electricity, say, rather than conventional electricity from a petrochemical-fueled power plant – can mean paying a premium price for the green energy source.

Pushes Up the Price of Products
In some cases, the switch to using green materials can lead to higher costs in your production process or elsewhere in your facility. A furniture manufacturer who switches suppliers to buy only sustainably harvested wood will likely have to pay a premium price for his lumber. The larger costs either have to be passed along to customers in terms of higher prices or have to come at the company's expense in terms of a smaller profit margin on its products.


*


----------



## Meister

sealybobo said:


> Every question Republicans ask about global warming are designed to distract from solving the problem.  They are obstructionists on this issue because corporations don't want to pay to go green.  It's so obvious.
> 
> *Let's be honest: real sustainability may not make business sense.  T**here can be a number of disadvantages to going green for corporations.
> 
> Going green can help protect the earth's natural systems, but for businesses, it often means bearing extra costs that can be difficult to absorb.
> 
> Some companies have made an effort to become more environmentally friendly, also known as “going green.” Reasons for going green can include achieving better public relations, tapping into the growing green market or even because the company may simply feel it is the right thing to do to help protect the environment. Greening a company can involve changes to lessen greenhouse gas emissions, use safer, non-toxic chemicals in products, protect ecosystems, or all of the above. However, there can be a number of disadvantages to going green for corporations.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> 
> Going green can help protect the earth's natural systems, but for businesses, it often means bearing extra costs that can be difficult to absorb.
> *
> *The Switch Can Be Expense
> It can be costly for a corporation to go green initially. For example, the switch to solar power will create the need to install solar panels at business facilities. The cost reductions in energy savings gained by going green are not always enough to offset the initial upfront conversion costs. In some locations, however, tax benefits are provided that can help companies offset the costs of making the switch.
> 
> Even switching energy suppliers – purchasing wind-power electricity, say, rather than conventional electricity from a petrochemical-fueled power plant – can mean paying a premium price for the green energy source.
> 
> Pushes Up the Price of Products
> In some cases, the switch to using green materials can lead to higher costs in your production process or elsewhere in your facility. A furniture manufacturer who switches suppliers to buy only sustainably harvested wood will likely have to pay a premium price for his lumber. The larger costs either have to be passed along to customers in terms of higher prices or have to come at the company's expense in terms of a smaller profit margin on its products.
> 
> 
> *


That's what I thought.....even with the big bold font you couldn't answer the questions.
Your science isn't that good, Sillybooboo.


----------



## sealybobo

Meister said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Every question Republicans ask about global warming are designed to distract from solving the problem.  They are obstructionists on this issue because corporations don't want to pay to go green.  It's so obvious.
> 
> *Let's be honest: real sustainability may not make business sense.  T**here can be a number of disadvantages to going green for corporations.
> 
> Going green can help protect the earth's natural systems, but for businesses, it often means bearing extra costs that can be difficult to absorb.
> 
> Some companies have made an effort to become more environmentally friendly, also known as “going green.” Reasons for going green can include achieving better public relations, tapping into the growing green market or even because the company may simply feel it is the right thing to do to help protect the environment. Greening a company can involve changes to lessen greenhouse gas emissions, use safer, non-toxic chemicals in products, protect ecosystems, or all of the above. However, there can be a number of disadvantages to going green for corporations.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> 
> Going green can help protect the earth's natural systems, but for businesses, it often means bearing extra costs that can be difficult to absorb.
> *
> *The Switch Can Be Expense
> It can be costly for a corporation to go green initially. For example, the switch to solar power will create the need to install solar panels at business facilities. The cost reductions in energy savings gained by going green are not always enough to offset the initial upfront conversion costs. In some locations, however, tax benefits are provided that can help companies offset the costs of making the switch.
> 
> Even switching energy suppliers – purchasing wind-power electricity, say, rather than conventional electricity from a petrochemical-fueled power plant – can mean paying a premium price for the green energy source.
> 
> Pushes Up the Price of Products
> In some cases, the switch to using green materials can lead to higher costs in your production process or elsewhere in your facility. A furniture manufacturer who switches suppliers to buy only sustainably harvested wood will likely have to pay a premium price for his lumber. The larger costs either have to be passed along to customers in terms of higher prices or have to come at the company's expense in terms of a smaller profit margin on its products.
> 
> 
> *
> 
> 
> 
> That's what I thought.....even with the big bold font you couldn't answer the questions.
> Your science isn't that good, Sillybooboo.
Click to expand...

Better than yours. That’s why your side lies and misleads. Confuses, distracts, denies facts, avoid facts, 

But your side is slowly coming around


----------



## Meister

sealybobo said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Every question Republicans ask about global warming are designed to distract from solving the problem.  They are obstructionists on this issue because corporations don't want to pay to go green.  It's so obvious.
> 
> *Let's be honest: real sustainability may not make business sense.  T**here can be a number of disadvantages to going green for corporations.
> 
> Going green can help protect the earth's natural systems, but for businesses, it often means bearing extra costs that can be difficult to absorb.
> 
> Some companies have made an effort to become more environmentally friendly, also known as “going green.” Reasons for going green can include achieving better public relations, tapping into the growing green market or even because the company may simply feel it is the right thing to do to help protect the environment. Greening a company can involve changes to lessen greenhouse gas emissions, use safer, non-toxic chemicals in products, protect ecosystems, or all of the above. However, there can be a number of disadvantages to going green for corporations.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> 
> Going green can help protect the earth's natural systems, but for businesses, it often means bearing extra costs that can be difficult to absorb.
> *
> *The Switch Can Be Expense
> It can be costly for a corporation to go green initially. For example, the switch to solar power will create the need to install solar panels at business facilities. The cost reductions in energy savings gained by going green are not always enough to offset the initial upfront conversion costs. In some locations, however, tax benefits are provided that can help companies offset the costs of making the switch.
> 
> Even switching energy suppliers – purchasing wind-power electricity, say, rather than conventional electricity from a petrochemical-fueled power plant – can mean paying a premium price for the green energy source.
> 
> Pushes Up the Price of Products
> In some cases, the switch to using green materials can lead to higher costs in your production process or elsewhere in your facility. A furniture manufacturer who switches suppliers to buy only sustainably harvested wood will likely have to pay a premium price for his lumber. The larger costs either have to be passed along to customers in terms of higher prices or have to come at the company's expense in terms of a smaller profit margin on its products.
> 
> 
> *
> 
> 
> 
> That's what I thought.....even with the big bold font you couldn't answer the questions.
> Your science isn't that good, Sillybooboo.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Better than yours. That’s why your side lies and misleads. Confuses, distracts, denies facts, avoid facts,
> 
> But your side is slowly coming around
Click to expand...

It's just weird that with all the science, they haven't figured out the most important 'fact'.
How much does Man contribute to Global Warming compared to the Natural Cycle?
Now, why don't you use some big font to make yourself more relevant, Einstein.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good grief, get off the meds that they gave you.  They can't even get their models to work right without a twist here and a jerk there.
> 
> 
> 
> So you are denying global warming is man made.  Got it flat earther.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So you are denying that global warming and cooling are natural side effects of nature and solar activity. You are the neanderthal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No I'm not denying that the planet warms and cools without man made climate change adding to what already occurs naturally.
> 
> By the way, every day I post more evidence that there are too many humans on this planet.
> 
> Microplastics Have Invaded Some Of The Planet’s Most Remote Places | HuffPost
> 
> Plastic trash is everywhere. And it’s not going away.
> 
> We need to cut the population in half.  I did my part.  I didn't have any kids.  Breeders should be taxed not encouraged to have more children.
> 
> Now you can argue with the scientists but most of us will take their word for it not yours.  Not the GOP's and not the corporate polluters and their lobbyists.
> 
> How Do We Know that Humans Are the Major Cause of Global Warming?
> 
> *Direct evidence of human contribution to atmospheric CO2*
> 
> *Natural and human factors that influence the climate (known as “climate drivers”)*
> 
> *Natural drivers + human drivers best match reality*
> 
> *Solutions within our reach*
> *We are the cause, we are the solution.*
> 
> *Knowing that human activities are the main driver of global warming helps us understand how and why our climate is changing, and it clearly defines the problem as one that is within our power to address.*
> 
> *We cannot avoid some level of warming caused by the heat-trapping emissions already present in the atmosphere, some of which (such as carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide) last for 100 years or more. But, with aggressive measures to reduce emissions and adapt to those changes we cannot avoid, we have a small window to avoid truly dangerous warming and provide future generations with a sustainable world.*
> 
> *The Paris Agreement of 2015 calls for a reduction in emissions worldwide enough to keep global warming under the dangerous threshold of 2°C. We can reach that goal through immediate and sustained action to reduce our heat-trapping emissions like adopting technologies that increase energy efficiency, expanding our use of renewable energy, and slowing deforestation (among other solutions).*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I just need to say that I too, have had no children.  But, I never have referred to those who
> did as, "breeders".  Were you brought up in a kennel, Dawg?
> 
> ........
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It’s generally only angry homosexuals who use terms like that.
Click to expand...

I’m the exception to the rule. Just like you the conservative republican public school union worker with a pension us citizens have to pay


----------



## dannyboys

sealybobo said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> I helped over populate the Earth, so I have done my duty...
> 
> 
> 
> Because of this issue I have become a liberal Republican. I believe we are overpopulated and I believe their policies will discourage people who can't afford kids from having them.
Click to expand...

Just like Miss Karma 'Mother Nature' is never wrong.
Put enough rats in a confined place and eventually they will begin literally eating eachother.
Take my advice.
Do NOT EVER eat ANY type of meat in China in fifty years.


----------



## sealybobo

Meister said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Every question Republicans ask about global warming are designed to distract from solving the problem.  They are obstructionists on this issue because corporations don't want to pay to go green.  It's so obvious.
> 
> *Let's be honest: real sustainability may not make business sense.  T**here can be a number of disadvantages to going green for corporations.
> 
> Going green can help protect the earth's natural systems, but for businesses, it often means bearing extra costs that can be difficult to absorb.
> 
> Some companies have made an effort to become more environmentally friendly, also known as “going green.” Reasons for going green can include achieving better public relations, tapping into the growing green market or even because the company may simply feel it is the right thing to do to help protect the environment. Greening a company can involve changes to lessen greenhouse gas emissions, use safer, non-toxic chemicals in products, protect ecosystems, or all of the above. However, there can be a number of disadvantages to going green for corporations.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> 
> Going green can help protect the earth's natural systems, but for businesses, it often means bearing extra costs that can be difficult to absorb.
> *
> *The Switch Can Be Expense
> It can be costly for a corporation to go green initially. For example, the switch to solar power will create the need to install solar panels at business facilities. The cost reductions in energy savings gained by going green are not always enough to offset the initial upfront conversion costs. In some locations, however, tax benefits are provided that can help companies offset the costs of making the switch.
> 
> Even switching energy suppliers – purchasing wind-power electricity, say, rather than conventional electricity from a petrochemical-fueled power plant – can mean paying a premium price for the green energy source.
> 
> Pushes Up the Price of Products
> In some cases, the switch to using green materials can lead to higher costs in your production process or elsewhere in your facility. A furniture manufacturer who switches suppliers to buy only sustainably harvested wood will likely have to pay a premium price for his lumber. The larger costs either have to be passed along to customers in terms of higher prices or have to come at the company's expense in terms of a smaller profit margin on its products.
> 
> 
> *
> 
> 
> 
> That's what I thought.....even with the big bold font you couldn't answer the questions.
> Your science isn't that good, Sillybooboo.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Better than yours. That’s why your side lies and misleads. Confuses, distracts, denies facts, avoid facts,
> 
> But your side is slowly coming around
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's just weird that with all the science, they haven't figured out the most important 'fact'.
> How much does Man contribute to Global Warming compared to the Natural Cycle?
> Now, why don't you use some big font to make yourself more relevant, Einstein.
Click to expand...


The climate change debate has been a part of politics in Washington for decades now, but polling from 2018 shows that there may be a consensus emerging from the American public. A range of surveys show more people believe it is happening and more people believe humans are responsible.

If you expect those changing views to lead to action in Washington, however, think again. In the places where it counts, where laws and regulations are made, the feelings concerning what should be done about climate change are much more divided.

Why?  Corporate lobbyists and Republicans.  Conservatives protecting corporate profits.  And they have duped their loyal followers, usually religious people, into going along with whatever they say on any subject.  That's why the numbers aren't higher.  I work with one of these guys.  He's the most die hard Republican and of course the most adamant that global warming is a hoax.  Wonder where he got that idea from?  

The data showed 70 percent of Americans believe “global warming is happening” and 57 percent believe “global warming is being caused mostly by human activities.” In a nation as divided as the United States is right now, those are remarkable numbers.

Two-thirds of those surveyed say they believe climate change is a serious problem and the nation needs to take action. That number is up 15 percentage points from 1999. At the same time, only 30 percent say we don’t know enough yet or that we don’t need to be concerned. That figure is down 13 points from 1999. That’s real movement.


----------



## sealybobo

dannyboys said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> I helped over populate the Earth, so I have done my duty...
> 
> 
> 
> Because of this issue I have become a liberal Republican. I believe we are overpopulated and I believe their policies will discourage people who can't afford kids from having them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Just like Miss Karma 'Mother Nature' is never wrong.
> Put enough rats in a confined place and eventually they will begin literally eating eachother.
> Take my advice.
> Do NOT EVER eat ANY type of meat in China in fifty years.
Click to expand...


Even when Republicans are shown the facts they don't care because they don't trust the source.  If Rush or Fox or Don didn't say it it's not true.

Even Trump is careful not to outright say Global warming is a hoax.

*Trump’s 60 Minutes interview with Lesley Stahl shows a lot about who the president thinks is worth believing and when.*

*President Donald Trump likes to keep an open mind when it comes to a number of matters — sexual misconduct allegations, Vladimir Putin’s election meddling denials, the Saudi government’s insistence it knows nothing about the disappearance and possible murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. But there’s one group of people he’s not so keen on believing: climate scientists.*


----------



## sealybobo

The president has previously declared climate change a “hoax.” Stahl asks what he thinks now.

Trump walked back the “hoax” line a bit. But he still expressed skepticism about whether climate change is permanent and suggested it might not be manmade.

“Look, I think something’s happening. Something’s changing, and it’ll change back again,” Trump said. “I don’t think it’s a hoax, I think there’s probably a difference, but I don’t think it’s manmade.”

Stahl pointed to the example of Greenland, where “huge chunks of ice” are falling into the ocean, causing sea levels to rise. She also pointed out that climate scientists — including those who work for Trump — say climate change is a problem, and that it’s being caused by people.

“You’d have to show me the scientists, because they have a very big political agenda, Lesley,” Trump said.

For Trump, who to believe — and who not to believe — appears to be a matter of convenience, whether it’s political, economic, or personal. On worrying about climate change, Trump said acting on it could mean “trillions and trillions of dollars” and “millions and millions of jobs.” He added, “I don’t want to be put at a disadvantage.”


----------



## Unkotare

dannyboys said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> I helped over populate the Earth, so I have done my duty...
> 
> 
> 
> Because of this issue I have become a liberal Republican. I believe we are overpopulated and I believe their policies will discourage people who can't afford kids from having them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ....
> Take my advice.
> Do NOT EVER eat ANY type of meat in China in fifty years.
Click to expand...



What a load of nonsense. That’s not advice, it’s idiocy.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> dannyboys said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> I helped over populate the Earth, so I have done my duty...
> 
> 
> 
> Because of this issue I have become a liberal Republican. I believe we are overpopulated and I believe their policies will discourage people who can't afford kids from having them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ....
> Take my advice.
> Do NOT EVER eat ANY type of meat in China in fifty years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> What a load of nonsense. That’s not advice, it’s idiocy.
Click to expand...


The national report by Trump’s own administration “concluded that humans caused at least 93 percent of the warming that scientists measured from 1951 to 2010.

My personal favorite from you right wingers: Climate change is a concept cooked up by money-grubbing scientists who, as Trump put it in the CBS interview, “have a very big political agenda.” I love how climate deniers seem to believe that scientific research grants are so much more lucrative than the record-setting profits made by the big oil and gas companies that contribute generously to Republican campaigns.

https://thebulletin.org/2018/10/trumps-evolving-but-still-totally-wrong-take-on-global-warming/


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> So you are denying global warming is man made.  Got it flat earther.
> 
> 
> 
> So you are denying that global warming and cooling are natural side effects of nature and solar activity. You are the neanderthal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No I'm not denying that the planet warms and cools without man made climate change adding to what already occurs naturally.
> 
> By the way, every day I post more evidence that there are too many humans on this planet.
> 
> Microplastics Have Invaded Some Of The Planet’s Most Remote Places | HuffPost
> 
> Plastic trash is everywhere. And it’s not going away.
> 
> We need to cut the population in half.  I did my part.  I didn't have any kids.  Breeders should be taxed not encouraged to have more children.
> 
> Now you can argue with the scientists but most of us will take their word for it not yours.  Not the GOP's and not the corporate polluters and their lobbyists.
> 
> How Do We Know that Humans Are the Major Cause of Global Warming?
> 
> *Direct evidence of human contribution to atmospheric CO2*
> 
> *Natural and human factors that influence the climate (known as “climate drivers”)*
> 
> *Natural drivers + human drivers best match reality*
> 
> *Solutions within our reach*
> *We are the cause, we are the solution.*
> 
> *Knowing that human activities are the main driver of global warming helps us understand how and why our climate is changing, and it clearly defines the problem as one that is within our power to address.*
> 
> *We cannot avoid some level of warming caused by the heat-trapping emissions already present in the atmosphere, some of which (such as carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide) last for 100 years or more. But, with aggressive measures to reduce emissions and adapt to those changes we cannot avoid, we have a small window to avoid truly dangerous warming and provide future generations with a sustainable world.*
> 
> *The Paris Agreement of 2015 calls for a reduction in emissions worldwide enough to keep global warming under the dangerous threshold of 2°C. We can reach that goal through immediate and sustained action to reduce our heat-trapping emissions like adopting technologies that increase energy efficiency, expanding our use of renewable energy, and slowing deforestation (among other solutions).*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I just need to say that I too, have had no children.  But, I never have referred to those who
> did as, "breeders".  Were you brought up in a kennel, Dawg?
> 
> ........
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It’s generally only angry homosexuals who use terms like that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I’m the exception to the rule. ...
Click to expand...



Yeah, sure, everyone believes that....


.....


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> No I'm not denying that the planet warms and cools without man made climate change adding to what already occurs naturally.
> 
> By the way, every day I post more evidence that there are too many humans on this planet.
> 
> Microplastics Have Invaded Some Of The Planet’s Most Remote Places | HuffPost
> 
> Plastic trash is everywhere. And it’s not going away.
> 
> We need to cut the population in half.  I did my part.  I didn't have any kids.  Breeders should be taxed not encouraged to have more children.
> 
> Now you can argue with the scientists but most of us will take their word for it not yours.  Not the GOP's and not the corporate polluters and their lobbyists.
> 
> How Do We Know that Humans Are the Major Cause of Global Warming?
> 
> *Direct evidence of human contribution to atmospheric CO2*
> 
> *Natural and human factors that influence the climate (known as “climate drivers”)*
> 
> *Natural drivers + human drivers best match reality*
> 
> *Solutions within our reach*
> *We are the cause, we are the solution.*
> 
> *Knowing that human activities are the main driver of global warming helps us understand how and why our climate is changing, and it clearly defines the problem as one that is within our power to address.*
> 
> *We cannot avoid some level of warming caused by the heat-trapping emissions already present in the atmosphere, some of which (such as carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide) last for 100 years or more. But, with aggressive measures to reduce emissions and adapt to those changes we cannot avoid, we have a small window to avoid truly dangerous warming and provide future generations with a sustainable world.*
> 
> *The Paris Agreement of 2015 calls for a reduction in emissions worldwide enough to keep global warming under the dangerous threshold of 2°C. We can reach that goal through immediate and sustained action to reduce our heat-trapping emissions like adopting technologies that increase energy efficiency, expanding our use of renewable energy, and slowing deforestation (among other solutions).*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just need to say that I too, have had no children.  But, I never have referred to those who
> did as, "breeders".  Were you brought up in a kennel, Dawg?
> 
> ........
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It’s generally only angry homosexuals who use terms like that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I’m the exception to the rule. ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, sure, everyone believes that....
> 
> 
> .....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't care if everyone believes it.  ....
Click to expand...



...as he protests too much...

Do you care that in the not so distant future the global population is going to contract, rendering all this false panic moot?


----------



## Slyhunter

Even if environmentalist are correct that there is Man made Global Warming the fact that it counters an Ice Age is a good thing not a bad thing. 

We shouldn't waste resources trying to change something we can't prove is happening and if happening we can't prove is necessarily bad for us.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> I just need to say that I too, have had no children.  But, I never have referred to those who
> did as, "breeders".  Were you brought up in a kennel, Dawg?
> 
> ........
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It’s generally only angry homosexuals who use terms like that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I’m the exception to the rule. ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, sure, everyone believes that....
> 
> 
> .....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't care if everyone believes it.  ....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> ...as he protests too much...
> 
> Do you care that in the not so distant future the global population is going to contract, rendering all this false panic moot?
Click to expand...

They say it will but are you so sure? Funny you cherry pick what experts say. So you believe it’s going to contract. Explain why you are sure. Why/how does this contraction happen?

And no I don’t care because we are already overpopulated. Look at the oceans, deforestation, local warming.

When is this contraction going to start? When global warming starts causing problems? Too late then.


----------



## Slyhunter

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> It’s generally only angry homosexuals who use terms like that.
> 
> 
> 
> I’m the exception to the rule. ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, sure, everyone believes that....
> 
> 
> .....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't care if everyone believes it.  ....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> ...as he protests too much...
> 
> Do you care that in the not so distant future the global population is going to contract, rendering all this false panic moot?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They say it will but are you so sure? Funny you cherry pick what experts say. So you believe it’s going to contract. Explain why you are sure. Why/how does this contraction happen?
> 
> And no I don’t care because we are already overpopulated. Look at the oceans, deforestation, local warming.
> 
> When is this contraction going to start? When global warming starts causing problems? Too late then.
Click to expand...

We are not overpopulated, we have plenty of woods in the center of the country.


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> It’s generally only angry homosexuals who use terms like that.
> 
> 
> 
> I’m the exception to the rule. ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, sure, everyone believes that....
> 
> 
> .....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't care if everyone believes it.  ....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> ...as he protests too much...
> 
> Do you care that in the not so distant future the global population is going to contract, rendering all this false panic moot?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They say it will but are you so sure? .....
Click to expand...



Yup, because I understand demographics. Brainless partisan drones may want it to be political, but it’s not.


----------



## Unkotare

Slyhunter said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> I’m the exception to the rule. ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, sure, everyone believes that....
> 
> 
> .....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't care if everyone believes it.  ....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> ...as he protests too much...
> 
> Do you care that in the not so distant future the global population is going to contract, rendering all this false panic moot?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They say it will but are you so sure? Funny you cherry pick what experts say. So you believe it’s going to contract. Explain why you are sure. Why/how does this contraction happen?
> 
> And no I don’t care because we are already overpopulated. Look at the oceans, deforestation, local warming.
> 
> When is this contraction going to start? When global warming starts causing problems? Too late then.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We are not overpopulated.....
Click to expand...



No we are not. Some sorry, stupid SOBs just can’t let go of a fairy tale they were told as children.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, sure, everyone believes that....
> 
> 
> .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't care if everyone believes it.  ....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> ...as he protests too much...
> 
> Do you care that in the not so distant future the global population is going to contract, rendering all this false panic moot?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They say it will but are you so sure? Funny you cherry pick what experts say. So you believe it’s going to contract. Explain why you are sure. Why/how does this contraction happen?
> 
> And no I don’t care because we are already overpopulated. Look at the oceans, deforestation, local warming.
> 
> When is this contraction going to start? When global warming starts causing problems? Too late then.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We are not overpopulated.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No we are not. Some sorry, stupid SOBs just can’t let go of a fairy tale they were told as children.
Click to expand...


Regarding human numbers going down.  Can you explain how and why this will happen?  

The United Nations forecasts that our population will grow from 7 billion to 11 billion in this century before leveling off after 2100. But an increasing number of demographers around the world believe the UN estimates are far too high.  They say the planet’s population will peak at around 9 billion sometime between 2040 and 2060 and then start to decline. By the end of this century, we could be back to where we are right now and steadily growing fewer.

This decline hasn't even happened yet.  How are you so sure it's going to happen?  Can you explain the science behind this?

So from what I'm reading it's because a more educated woman has fewer kids.  Is that what you are relying on?

Once a woman receives enough information and autonomy to make an informed and self-directed choice about when to have children and how many to have, she immediately has fewer of them and has them later. “Once a woman is socialized to have an education and a career, she is socialized to have a smaller family,” he explains. 

So basically what they are saying is that when women wise up they'll do what I've been suggesting all along?


----------



## Unkotare

I have neither the time or inclination to teach a hopeless idiot about demographics and economics.


----------



## Deplorable Yankee

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?



by illegal aliens to late and yes


----------



## Flopper

sealybobo said:


> Every question Republicans ask about global warming are designed to distract from solving the problem.  They are obstructionists on this issue because corporations don't want to pay to go green.  It's so obvious.
> 
> *Let's be honest: real sustainability may not make business sense.  T**here can be a number of disadvantages to going green for corporations.
> 
> Going green can help protect the earth's natural systems, but for businesses, it often means bearing extra costs that can be difficult to absorb.
> 
> Some companies have made an effort to become more environmentally friendly, also known as “going green.” Reasons for going green can include achieving better public relations, tapping into the growing green market or even because the company may simply feel it is the right thing to do to help protect the environment. Greening a company can involve changes to lessen greenhouse gas emissions, use safer, non-toxic chemicals in products, protect ecosystems, or all of the above. However, there can be a number of disadvantages to going green for corporations.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> 
> Going green can help protect the earth's natural systems, but for businesses, it often means bearing extra costs that can be difficult to absorb.
> *
> *The Switch Can Be Expense
> It can be costly for a corporation to go green initially. For example, the switch to solar power will create the need to install solar panels at business facilities. The cost reductions in energy savings gained by going green are not always enough to offset the initial upfront conversion costs. In some locations, however, tax benefits are provided that can help companies offset the costs of making the switch.
> 
> Even switching energy suppliers – purchasing wind-power electricity, say, rather than conventional electricity from a petrochemical-fueled power plant – can mean paying a premium price for the green energy source.
> 
> Pushes Up the Price of Products
> In some cases, the switch to using green materials can lead to higher costs in your production process or elsewhere in your facility. A furniture manufacturer who switches suppliers to buy only sustainably harvested wood will likely have to pay a premium price for his lumber. The larger costs either have to be passed along to customers in terms of higher prices or have to come at the company's expense in terms of a smaller profit margin on its products.*


When it comes to business going green and saving the planet, I'm a bit pessimistic.  Saving the planet is a long game. Humans in general are not good at making sacrifices today to save tomorrow and business is absolutely terrible.  Business today is about profits today.  Most of the people that own them today will not in 10 or 15 years.  For a business, 30 years is an eternity.

The only way people are going to make any significant sacrifices is when they see disaster that is going to effect them personally over next 3 to 5 years.  By then it may well be too late.  If humans do not respond, then nature will.  A 70% to 90% reduction in humans will probably do it.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> I just need to say that I too, have had no children.  But, I never have referred to those who
> did as, "breeders".  Were you brought up in a kennel, Dawg?
> 
> ........
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It’s generally only angry homosexuals who use terms like that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I’m the exception to the rule. ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, sure, everyone believes that....
> 
> 
> .....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't care if everyone believes it.  ....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> ...as he protests too much...
> 
> Do you care that in the not so distant future the global population is going to contract, rendering all this false panic moot?
Click to expand...


Why is it going to contract?  Probably because it went to the brink of having way too many people.  

I'd rather we do it naturally than have to go through a catastrophe.

Here is another example of how there are way too many people on this planet and how less would be better

ou can’t see them, but small particles of plastic are all around you ― in the air you breathe, the water you drink, even the foods you eat.

A new paper that compiles data from previous studies estimates that each year, the average American consumes over 70,000 minuscule pieces of plastic that make their way into our food through packaging, manufacturing and being swept up in the food chain. That’s more than 200 pieces a day.

39,000 to 52,000 microplastic particles a year come from these foods

Those figures climbed to over 70,000 once the researchers factored in data on how much plastic we inhale as we breathe.

Drinking bottled water instead of tap water accounted for an additional 90,000 more pieces of plastic a year, the research found.

But the study noted that these numbers probably vastly underestimate the amount of plastic we unwittingly ingest day to day. The foods in the research account for only 15% of the American diet. The data did not include things like snack foods, which come packaged in plastic and ready to eat ― meaning we might be consuming far more plastics than what the research shows.

As plastics age, they shed tiny particles, called microplastics, which can linger in the environment for decades or more. These particles are smaller than a fifth of an inch in size and can be microscopic. Scientists have found microplastics in some of the planet’s most remote places, including uninhabited islands, Arctic sea ice and the deepest parts of the ocean. 

At this point, contact with plastic seems pretty unavoidable. But there are steps we can take to try to reduce the amount of plastic we use once and throw away: Avoid buying items wrapped in plastic, bring a reusable water bottle or coffee mug with you on the road, and keep metal cutlery at your desk at work, for starters. They may seem like insignificant steps, but it all adds up. 

“Removing single-use plastic from your life and supporting companies that are moving away from plastic packaging is going to have a non-trivial impact,”


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> It’s generally only angry homosexuals who use terms like that.
> 
> 
> 
> I’m the exception to the rule. ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, sure, everyone believes that....
> 
> 
> .....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't care if everyone believes it.  ....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> ...as he protests too much...
> 
> Do you care that in the not so distant future the global population is going to contract, rendering all this false panic moot?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why is it going to contract?  ....”
Click to expand...





Economic development and greater career opportunities for women.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> I’m the exception to the rule. ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, sure, everyone believes that....
> 
> 
> .....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't care if everyone believes it.  ....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> ...as he protests too much...
> 
> Do you care that in the not so distant future the global population is going to contract, rendering all this false panic moot?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why is it going to contract?  ....”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Economic development and greater career opportunities for women.
Click to expand...

In other words poor women wise up.  Exactly what I've been saying they should do and you call me racist for it.

Middle class people stop having kids after they have 1-3 because they know any more will put them in the lower middle class or even poverty.  Poor people don't care because they are already poor.  It's just two more scoops of oatmeal or 1 more order of Wendy Chicken nuggets.


----------



## OldLady

What I want to know, if any of you understand population dynamics, is why Afghanistan has one of the highest rates of population growth in the world?  With all that's been going on over there, you'd think it would be going down, or at least not growing.


----------



## sealybobo

OldLady said:


> What I want to know, if any of you understand population dynamics, is why Afghanistan has one of the highest rates of population growth in the world?  With all that's been going on over there, you'd think it would be going down, or at least not growing.



When you are that poor there is only one thing to do.  Fuck.  Same thing goes for Africa.


----------



## OldLady

sealybobo said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> What I want to know, if any of you understand population dynamics, is why Afghanistan has one of the highest rates of population growth in the world?  With all that's been going on over there, you'd think it would be going down, or at least not growing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When you are that poor there is only one thing to do.  Fuck.  Same thing goes for Africa.
Click to expand...

Any other suggestions, folks?


----------



## Unkotare

OldLady said:


> What I want to know, if any of you understand population dynamics, is why Afghanistan has one of the highest rates of population growth in the world?  With all that's been going on over there, you'd think it would be going down, or at least not growing.




Quite the contrary. Where mortality is high, there is an instinctive drive to produce more offspring to increase the odds of genes being passed on. We’re still animals after all. The imperatives of various religions reflect, rather than drive, this natural phenomenon.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> What I want to know, if any of you understand population dynamics, is why Afghanistan has one of the highest rates of population growth in the world?  With all that's been going on over there, you'd think it would be going down, or at least not growing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quite the contrary. Where mortality is high, there is an instinctive drive to produce more offspring to increase the odds of genes being passed on. We’re still animals after all. The imperatives of various religions reflect, rather than drive, this natural phenomenon.
Click to expand...


I found this and thought of you

The study finds that denser counties tend to have less happy residents, even when controlling for factors like greater crime and poverty. While these variables do weaken the relationship between density and unhappiness, the effect remains negative and significant. This leads the authors to conclude that size and density—what they call “the defining features of cities”—are associated with greater unhappiness. Even if cities were to reduce their levels of crime, poverty, or unemployment, urban residents would still be less happy than those living elsewhere. In this way, the study notes, “cities act like a magnifying glass, bringing out the best and the worst in us.”

In his second study, published in the journal _Cities_, Okulicz-Kozaryn explores this subject further by determining the tipping point at which a city’s size becomes too big and its residents become unhappy. In this case, the study defines happiness in terms of “subjective wellbeing,” a common definition of happiness, which includes both life satisfaction and one’s mood. 

Using data from the 1972-2012 U.S. General Social Survey, the study again finds that larger cities are far less happy than smaller ones. As the figure below shows, happiness gradually increases as population size declines. 

Do you want people to be happy or do you want to double the population?

In the U.S., the Biggest Cities Are the Least Happy  - CityLab


----------



## Unkotare

Population density and overpopulation are not the same thing, dumbass.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> Population density and overpopulation are not the same thing, dumbass.


Point was less people equals happier people


----------



## Meister

*Stay on the topic going forward*


----------



## sealybobo

Meister said:


> *Stay on the topic going forward*



It's a thread on if you THINK we are overpopulated or not.  I pointed out that people in less populated places are happier.  To me that suggests we are overpopulated.  At least we are in the cities.  And do people in rural areas want us to spread out and come to them?  I doubt it.  Then they'd be less happy.   

Millennials are on the cusp of surpassing Baby Boomers as the nation’s largest living adult generation, according to population projections from the U.S. Census Bureau. As of July 1, 2016 Millennials, whom we define as ages 20 to 35 numbered 71 million, and Boomers (ages 52 to 70) numbered 74 million. Millennials are expected to overtake Boomers in population in 2019 as their numbers swell to 73 million and Boomers decline to 72 million. Generation X (ages 36 to 51 in 2016) is projected to pass the Boomers in population by 2028.

Hopefully Millennials have less kids

14 Reasons Millennials are Having Fewer Babies


*


*


----------



## Unkotare

The bottom line is that the world is not overpopulated, and there is no need to panic about the future. Good news!


----------



## Unkotare

More good news is that in the United States we have plenty of space and we have a plethora of natural resources. Some people might not know that even in countries thought of as very crowded there are still rural areas a great deal of undeveloped land and lots of places where you will not find many people at all. The most populated countries tend to have very big and  densely populated cities. These are places that generate a great deal of economic activity, and there are lots and lots of very happy people there as well.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> The bottom line is that the world is not overpopulated, and there is no need to panic about the future. Good news!



Then how do you explain this?

Humans have used a year’s worth of Earth’s resources in just seven months

Humans are using up the planet’s resources so quickly that people have used a year’s worth in just seven months, experts are warning.

And the rate at which we are consuming the Earth’s natural resources is still speeding up.

This year the annual date when people have caused a year’s worth of ecological damage – Earth Overshoot Day – comes two days earlier than last year.

Please don't tell me an inner city public school teacher like you is smarter than the experts.  PLEASE!


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> More good news is that in the United States we have plenty of space and we have a plethora of natural resources. Some people might not know that even in countries thought of as very crowded there are still rural areas a great deal of undeveloped land and lots of places where you will not find many people at all. The most populated countries tend to have very big and  densely populated cities. These are places that generate a great deal of economic activity, and there are lots and lots of very happy people there as well.


Sure if we want to pack them in but then there will be no more rural places.  

People are 8 times happier in rural areas where population is low not high.


----------



## Unkotare

We couldn’t “pack in” all the rural spaces in the US if we tried. And of course we’re NOT trying. The US fell below replacement level fertility decades ago. Again, no need to panic over what was always a false crisis.


----------



## Unkotare

It’s funny that some yahoo can presume to declare what constitutes “a year’s worth” of natural resources and then shriek in terror when their own arbitrary limit is exceeded.


Of course those most likely to cling to a false crisis are unlikely to think things through.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> It’s funny that some yahoo can presume to declare what constitutes “a year’s worth” of natural resources and then shriek in terror when their own arbitrary limit is exceeded.


Experts aka not you


----------



## Likkmee

Your pop reduction will be over 100 million.


----------



## Slyhunter

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> The bottom line is that the world is not overpopulated, and there is no need to panic about the future. Good news!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then how do you explain this?
> 
> Humans have used a year’s worth of Earth’s resources in just seven months
> 
> Humans are using up the planet’s resources so quickly that people have used a year’s worth in just seven months, experts are warning.
> 
> And the rate at which we are consuming the Earth’s natural resources is still speeding up.
> 
> This year the annual date when people have caused a year’s worth of ecological damage – Earth Overshoot Day – comes two days earlier than last year.
> 
> Please don't tell me an inner city public school teacher like you is smarter than the experts.  PLEASE!
Click to expand...

bullshit liberal propaganda.


----------



## sealybobo

Slyhunter said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> The bottom line is that the world is not overpopulated, and there is no need to panic about the future. Good news!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then how do you explain this?
> 
> Humans have used a year’s worth of Earth’s resources in just seven months
> 
> Humans are using up the planet’s resources so quickly that people have used a year’s worth in just seven months, experts are warning.
> 
> And the rate at which we are consuming the Earth’s natural resources is still speeding up.
> 
> This year the annual date when people have caused a year’s worth of ecological damage – Earth Overshoot Day – comes two days earlier than last year.
> 
> Please don't tell me an inner city public school teacher like you is smarter than the experts.  PLEASE!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> bullshit liberal propaganda.
Click to expand...

Prove what you just said is true


----------



## sealybobo

Likkmee said:


> Your pop reduction will be over 100 million.


I hope so. I’d like to cut th population in half.

1. Abstinence 
2. Abortion
3. War
4. People having fewer kids.

We no longer need 1 person to have ten kids. We need on couple to raise one engineer and on pe nurse who knows how to deal with old people with demintia


----------



## Slyhunter

sealybobo said:


> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> The bottom line is that the world is not overpopulated, and there is no need to panic about the future. Good news!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then how do you explain this?
> 
> Humans have used a year’s worth of Earth’s resources in just seven months
> 
> Humans are using up the planet’s resources so quickly that people have used a year’s worth in just seven months, experts are warning.
> 
> And the rate at which we are consuming the Earth’s natural resources is still speeding up.
> 
> This year the annual date when people have caused a year’s worth of ecological damage – Earth Overshoot Day – comes two days earlier than last year.
> 
> Please don't tell me an inner city public school teacher like you is smarter than the experts.  PLEASE!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> bullshit liberal propaganda.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Prove what you just said is true
Click to expand...

You first. You made the claim prove it's true. Otherwise it's bullshit.


----------



## sealybobo

Slyhunter said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> The bottom line is that the world is not overpopulated, and there is no need to panic about the future. Good news!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then how do you explain this?
> 
> Humans have used a year’s worth of Earth’s resources in just seven months
> 
> Humans are using up the planet’s resources so quickly that people have used a year’s worth in just seven months, experts are warning.
> 
> And the rate at which we are consuming the Earth’s natural resources is still speeding up.
> 
> This year the annual date when people have caused a year’s worth of ecological damage – Earth Overshoot Day – comes two days earlier than last year.
> 
> Please don't tell me an inner city public school teacher like you is smarter than the experts.  PLEASE!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> bullshit liberal propaganda.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Prove what you just said is true
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You first. You made the claim prove it's true. Otherwise it's bullshit.
Click to expand...

I thought so


----------



## sealybobo

Slyhunter said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> The bottom line is that the world is not overpopulated, and there is no need to panic about the future. Good news!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then how do you explain this?
> 
> Humans have used a year’s worth of Earth’s resources in just seven months
> 
> Humans are using up the planet’s resources so quickly that people have used a year’s worth in just seven months, experts are warning.
> 
> And the rate at which we are consuming the Earth’s natural resources is still speeding up.
> 
> This year the annual date when people have caused a year’s worth of ecological damage – Earth Overshoot Day – comes two days earlier than last year.
> 
> Please don't tell me an inner city public school teacher like you is smarter than the experts.  PLEASE!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> bullshit liberal propaganda.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Prove what you just said is true
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You first. You made the claim prove it's true. Otherwise it's bullshit.
Click to expand...


*Earth Overshoot Day Shows We’re Tearing Through Resources Faster Than Ever*
July 29 marks the point at which we start to consume more than the Earth can replenish. And this date is getting earlier each year.

Happy Overshoot Day unkotare.  Last year I posted this on July 31st.  This year Overshoot day falls 2 days sooner.  

the point each year at which humanity starts to consume the world’s natural resources faster than they can be replenished. 

It’s taken us only 209 days to burn through a year’s worth of resources — everything from food and timber to land and carbon. We are using up nature 1.75 times faster than it can be replenished. To do this sustainably, we would need the resources of 1.75 Earths.

These latest figures come from Global Footprint Network, an international nonprofit that calculates our annual ecological budget and the date at which we exceed it. Once we bust through this budget, we start devouring resources at an unsustainable rate.

“It’s a pyramid scheme,” said Mathis Wackernagel, CEO and founder of Global Footprint Network. “It depends on using more and more from the future to pay for the present.” 

It’s like being in financial debt, only much harder to recover. “There’s nothing to kickstart the economy if we overuse our resources,” he said, “because every economic activity depends on natural capital, and without that, it’s not going to work.”

The burden of this ecological debt is getting heavier. We started overconsuming resources back in the 1970s, and since then it’s gotten progressively worse. Over the last 20 years, Earth Overshoot Day has crept forward by more than two months. And this year, it falls on the earliest date yet.

Forests are being felled at an alarming rate to provide timber and clear land for agriculture — two football fields’ worth of Amazon rainforest were cleared every minute in May. We are overexploiting water resources for industry and agriculture, and to provide drinking water for ever-expanding cities. And our addiction to fossil fuels means we are producing carbon emissions at levels that will push us further into dangerous temperature rises.

As with financial debt, we can only avoid the consequences for so long. The impact is already becoming frighteningly clear. Wildfires are becoming more frequent and more destructive. Cities around the world, from Cape Town to Chennai, are running out of water supplies, and a landmark U.N. biodiversity report published in May said up to 1 million species could go extinct thanks to human actions.

While the consequences are likely to affect poorer nations more starkly, it’s the populations of richer nations that live further beyond their means, according to the Global Footprint Network. If everyone lived like people in the United States, for example, we would need five Earths. If we all consumed resources at the same rate as people in India, we would only need seven-tenths of a planet to meet our demands.

Earth Overshoot Day Shows We're Tearing Through Resources Faster Than Ever | HuffPost

Now, you prove it.


----------



## sealybobo

Slyhunter said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> The bottom line is that the world is not overpopulated, and there is no need to panic about the future. Good news!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then how do you explain this?
> 
> Humans have used a year’s worth of Earth’s resources in just seven months
> 
> Humans are using up the planet’s resources so quickly that people have used a year’s worth in just seven months, experts are warning.
> 
> And the rate at which we are consuming the Earth’s natural resources is still speeding up.
> 
> This year the annual date when people have caused a year’s worth of ecological damage – Earth Overshoot Day – comes two days earlier than last year.
> 
> Please don't tell me an inner city public school teacher like you is smarter than the experts.  PLEASE!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> bullshit liberal propaganda.
Click to expand...

Ha!


----------



## Papageorgio

Ohh know!! We're gonna die! We're gonna die!!


----------



## MarathonMike

I doubt anyone can accurately determine what a year's worth of Earth resources are. But I do believe human population growth in 3rd world countries is a massive problem. I also believe humanitarian relief to 3rd world countries should always be tied to voluntary sterilization services.


----------



## Unkotare

By the End of This Century, the Global Population Will Start to Shrink


"We do not face the challenge of a population bomb, so rampant in the popular imagination, but of a population bust..."


----------



## Unkotare

Fertility Rates Keep Dropping, and It’s Going to Hit the Economy Hard


----------



## MarathonMike

Unkotare said:


> Fertility Rates Keep Dropping, and It’s Going to Hit the Economy Hard


Birth rates are dropping in First World countries, but the Third World is reproducing like rabbits.


----------



## Unkotare

MarathonMike said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fertility Rates Keep Dropping, and It’s Going to Hit the Economy Hard
> 
> 
> 
> Birth rates are dropping in First World countries, but the Third World is reproducing like rabbits.
Click to expand...



incorrect


----------



## MarathonMike

Unkotare said:


> MarathonMike said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fertility Rates Keep Dropping, and It’s Going to Hit the Economy Hard
> 
> 
> 
> Birth rates are dropping in First World countries, but the Third World is reproducing like rabbits.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> incorrect
Click to expand...

Read your own link. It supports what I said. They make a weak statement about Third world women beginning to get access to birth control but the birth rates are sky high as is evidenced by the women with 3 or 4 bloated belly kids in tow showing up for food relief.


----------



## bripat9643

sealybobo said:


> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> The bottom line is that the world is not overpopulated, and there is no need to panic about the future. Good news!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then how do you explain this?
> 
> Humans have used a year’s worth of Earth’s resources in just seven months
> 
> Humans are using up the planet’s resources so quickly that people have used a year’s worth in just seven months, experts are warning.
> 
> And the rate at which we are consuming the Earth’s natural resources is still speeding up.
> 
> This year the annual date when people have caused a year’s worth of ecological damage – Earth Overshoot Day – comes two days earlier than last year.
> 
> Please don't tell me an inner city public school teacher like you is smarter than the experts.  PLEASE!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> bullshit liberal propaganda.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Prove what you just said is true
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You first. You made the claim prove it's true. Otherwise it's bullshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Earth Overshoot Day Shows We’re Tearing Through Resources Faster Than Ever*
> July 29 marks the point at which we start to consume more than the Earth can replenish. And this date is getting earlier each year.
> 
> Happy Overshoot Day unkotare.  Last year I posted this on July 31st.  This year Overshoot day falls 2 days sooner.
> 
> the point each year at which humanity starts to consume the world’s natural resources faster than they can be replenished.
> 
> It’s taken us only 209 days to burn through a year’s worth of resources — everything from food and timber to land and carbon. We are using up nature 1.75 times faster than it can be replenished. To do this sustainably, we would need the resources of 1.75 Earths.
> 
> These latest figures come from Global Footprint Network, an international nonprofit that calculates our annual ecological budget and the date at which we exceed it. Once we bust through this budget, we start devouring resources at an unsustainable rate.
> 
> “It’s a pyramid scheme,” said Mathis Wackernagel, CEO and founder of Global Footprint Network. “It depends on using more and more from the future to pay for the present.”
> 
> It’s like being in financial debt, only much harder to recover. “There’s nothing to kickstart the economy if we overuse our resources,” he said, “because every economic activity depends on natural capital, and without that, it’s not going to work.”
> 
> The burden of this ecological debt is getting heavier. We started overconsuming resources back in the 1970s, and since then it’s gotten progressively worse. Over the last 20 years, Earth Overshoot Day has crept forward by more than two months. And this year, it falls on the earliest date yet.
> 
> Forests are being felled at an alarming rate to provide timber and clear land for agriculture — two football fields’ worth of Amazon rainforest were cleared every minute in May. We are overexploiting water resources for industry and agriculture, and to provide drinking water for ever-expanding cities. And our addiction to fossil fuels means we are producing carbon emissions at levels that will push us further into dangerous temperature rises.
> 
> As with financial debt, we can only avoid the consequences for so long. The impact is already becoming frighteningly clear. Wildfires are becoming more frequent and more destructive. Cities around the world, from Cape Town to Chennai, are running out of water supplies, and a landmark U.N. biodiversity report published in May said up to 1 million species could go extinct thanks to human actions.
> 
> While the consequences are likely to affect poorer nations more starkly, it’s the populations of richer nations that live further beyond their means, according to the Global Footprint Network. If everyone lived like people in the United States, for example, we would need five Earths. If we all consumed resources at the same rate as people in India, we would only need seven-tenths of a planet to meet our demands.
> 
> Earth Overshoot Day Shows We're Tearing Through Resources Faster Than Ever | HuffPost
> 
> Now, you prove it.
Click to expand...

What the hell is "a year's worth of Earth's resources?"  How was that unit determined?"  You do realize that technology increases the sum total of Earth's resources, don't you?  If we were still using copper wires to make telephone calls over, copper would have been used up 20 years ago.  Now we use fiber optic which is made from silica.  The supply of silica is virtually infinite. 


Your post is pure propaganda.


----------



## bripat9643

Unkotare said:


> By the End of This Century, the Global Population Will Start to Shrink
> 
> 
> "We do not face the challenge of a population bomb, so rampant in the popular imagination, but of a population bust..."


I've read it will max out in 2050 at about 11 billion.  Still way too many people, however.


----------



## sealybobo

bripat9643 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then how do you explain this?
> 
> Humans have used a year’s worth of Earth’s resources in just seven months
> 
> Humans are using up the planet’s resources so quickly that people have used a year’s worth in just seven months, experts are warning.
> 
> And the rate at which we are consuming the Earth’s natural resources is still speeding up.
> 
> This year the annual date when people have caused a year’s worth of ecological damage – Earth Overshoot Day – comes two days earlier than last year.
> 
> Please don't tell me an inner city public school teacher like you is smarter than the experts.  PLEASE!
> 
> 
> 
> bullshit liberal propaganda.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Prove what you just said is true
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You first. You made the claim prove it's true. Otherwise it's bullshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Earth Overshoot Day Shows We’re Tearing Through Resources Faster Than Ever*
> July 29 marks the point at which we start to consume more than the Earth can replenish. And this date is getting earlier each year.
> 
> Happy Overshoot Day unkotare.  Last year I posted this on July 31st.  This year Overshoot day falls 2 days sooner.
> 
> the point each year at which humanity starts to consume the world’s natural resources faster than they can be replenished.
> 
> It’s taken us only 209 days to burn through a year’s worth of resources — everything from food and timber to land and carbon. We are using up nature 1.75 times faster than it can be replenished. To do this sustainably, we would need the resources of 1.75 Earths.
> 
> These latest figures come from Global Footprint Network, an international nonprofit that calculates our annual ecological budget and the date at which we exceed it. Once we bust through this budget, we start devouring resources at an unsustainable rate.
> 
> “It’s a pyramid scheme,” said Mathis Wackernagel, CEO and founder of Global Footprint Network. “It depends on using more and more from the future to pay for the present.”
> 
> It’s like being in financial debt, only much harder to recover. “There’s nothing to kickstart the economy if we overuse our resources,” he said, “because every economic activity depends on natural capital, and without that, it’s not going to work.”
> 
> The burden of this ecological debt is getting heavier. We started overconsuming resources back in the 1970s, and since then it’s gotten progressively worse. Over the last 20 years, Earth Overshoot Day has crept forward by more than two months. And this year, it falls on the earliest date yet.
> 
> Forests are being felled at an alarming rate to provide timber and clear land for agriculture — two football fields’ worth of Amazon rainforest were cleared every minute in May. We are overexploiting water resources for industry and agriculture, and to provide drinking water for ever-expanding cities. And our addiction to fossil fuels means we are producing carbon emissions at levels that will push us further into dangerous temperature rises.
> 
> As with financial debt, we can only avoid the consequences for so long. The impact is already becoming frighteningly clear. Wildfires are becoming more frequent and more destructive. Cities around the world, from Cape Town to Chennai, are running out of water supplies, and a landmark U.N. biodiversity report published in May said up to 1 million species could go extinct thanks to human actions.
> 
> While the consequences are likely to affect poorer nations more starkly, it’s the populations of richer nations that live further beyond their means, according to the Global Footprint Network. If everyone lived like people in the United States, for example, we would need five Earths. If we all consumed resources at the same rate as people in India, we would only need seven-tenths of a planet to meet our demands.
> 
> Earth Overshoot Day Shows We're Tearing Through Resources Faster Than Ever | HuffPost
> 
> Now, you prove it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What the hell is "a year's worth of Earth's resources?"  How was that unit determined?"  You do realize that technology increases the sum total of Earth's resources, don't you?  If we were still using copper wires to make telephone calls over, copper would have been used up 20 years ago.  Now we use fiber optic which is made from silica.  The supply of silica is virtually infinite.
> 
> 
> Your post is pure propaganda.
Click to expand...


You get it.  I see your next post.  You understand overpopulation is real.  Especially in cities like Baltimore.


----------



## sealybobo

bripat9643 said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> By the End of This Century, the Global Population Will Start to Shrink
> 
> 
> "We do not face the challenge of a population bomb, so rampant in the popular imagination, but of a population bust..."
> 
> 
> 
> I've read it will max out in 2050 at about 11 billion.  Still way too many people, however.
Click to expand...

At least we agree on this.


----------



## Indeependent

sealybobo said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> bullshit liberal propaganda.
> 
> 
> 
> Prove what you just said is true
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You first. You made the claim prove it's true. Otherwise it's bullshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Earth Overshoot Day Shows We’re Tearing Through Resources Faster Than Ever*
> July 29 marks the point at which we start to consume more than the Earth can replenish. And this date is getting earlier each year.
> 
> Happy Overshoot Day unkotare.  Last year I posted this on July 31st.  This year Overshoot day falls 2 days sooner.
> 
> the point each year at which humanity starts to consume the world’s natural resources faster than they can be replenished.
> 
> It’s taken us only 209 days to burn through a year’s worth of resources — everything from food and timber to land and carbon. We are using up nature 1.75 times faster than it can be replenished. To do this sustainably, we would need the resources of 1.75 Earths.
> 
> These latest figures come from Global Footprint Network, an international nonprofit that calculates our annual ecological budget and the date at which we exceed it. Once we bust through this budget, we start devouring resources at an unsustainable rate.
> 
> “It’s a pyramid scheme,” said Mathis Wackernagel, CEO and founder of Global Footprint Network. “It depends on using more and more from the future to pay for the present.”
> 
> It’s like being in financial debt, only much harder to recover. “There’s nothing to kickstart the economy if we overuse our resources,” he said, “because every economic activity depends on natural capital, and without that, it’s not going to work.”
> 
> The burden of this ecological debt is getting heavier. We started overconsuming resources back in the 1970s, and since then it’s gotten progressively worse. Over the last 20 years, Earth Overshoot Day has crept forward by more than two months. And this year, it falls on the earliest date yet.
> 
> Forests are being felled at an alarming rate to provide timber and clear land for agriculture — two football fields’ worth of Amazon rainforest were cleared every minute in May. We are overexploiting water resources for industry and agriculture, and to provide drinking water for ever-expanding cities. And our addiction to fossil fuels means we are producing carbon emissions at levels that will push us further into dangerous temperature rises.
> 
> As with financial debt, we can only avoid the consequences for so long. The impact is already becoming frighteningly clear. Wildfires are becoming more frequent and more destructive. Cities around the world, from Cape Town to Chennai, are running out of water supplies, and a landmark U.N. biodiversity report published in May said up to 1 million species could go extinct thanks to human actions.
> 
> While the consequences are likely to affect poorer nations more starkly, it’s the populations of richer nations that live further beyond their means, according to the Global Footprint Network. If everyone lived like people in the United States, for example, we would need five Earths. If we all consumed resources at the same rate as people in India, we would only need seven-tenths of a planet to meet our demands.
> 
> Earth Overshoot Day Shows We're Tearing Through Resources Faster Than Ever | HuffPost
> 
> Now, you prove it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What the hell is "a year's worth of Earth's resources?"  How was that unit determined?"  You do realize that technology increases the sum total of Earth's resources, don't you?  If we were still using copper wires to make telephone calls over, copper would have been used up 20 years ago.  Now we use fiber optic which is made from silica.  The supply of silica is virtually infinite.
> 
> 
> Your post is pure propaganda.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are you so stupid that you can't grasp this?  They even explained it in the article.  Who determines this?  Scientists do.  They look how fast we are consuming and what is a sustainable rate and.....you know what?  It's over your pea brain head.
> 
> I love it when you righties show you are anti science.  Ignorant fuckers.
Click to expand...

My wife’s Cousin, an ecological engineer, with over 30 years experience designing and constructing municipal infrastructure, disagrees with you.


----------



## bripat9643

sealybobo said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> bullshit liberal propaganda.
> 
> 
> 
> Prove what you just said is true
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You first. You made the claim prove it's true. Otherwise it's bullshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Earth Overshoot Day Shows We’re Tearing Through Resources Faster Than Ever*
> July 29 marks the point at which we start to consume more than the Earth can replenish. And this date is getting earlier each year.
> 
> Happy Overshoot Day unkotare.  Last year I posted this on July 31st.  This year Overshoot day falls 2 days sooner.
> 
> the point each year at which humanity starts to consume the world’s natural resources faster than they can be replenished.
> 
> It’s taken us only 209 days to burn through a year’s worth of resources — everything from food and timber to land and carbon. We are using up nature 1.75 times faster than it can be replenished. To do this sustainably, we would need the resources of 1.75 Earths.
> 
> These latest figures come from Global Footprint Network, an international nonprofit that calculates our annual ecological budget and the date at which we exceed it. Once we bust through this budget, we start devouring resources at an unsustainable rate.
> 
> “It’s a pyramid scheme,” said Mathis Wackernagel, CEO and founder of Global Footprint Network. “It depends on using more and more from the future to pay for the present.”
> 
> It’s like being in financial debt, only much harder to recover. “There’s nothing to kickstart the economy if we overuse our resources,” he said, “because every economic activity depends on natural capital, and without that, it’s not going to work.”
> 
> The burden of this ecological debt is getting heavier. We started overconsuming resources back in the 1970s, and since then it’s gotten progressively worse. Over the last 20 years, Earth Overshoot Day has crept forward by more than two months. And this year, it falls on the earliest date yet.
> 
> Forests are being felled at an alarming rate to provide timber and clear land for agriculture — two football fields’ worth of Amazon rainforest were cleared every minute in May. We are overexploiting water resources for industry and agriculture, and to provide drinking water for ever-expanding cities. And our addiction to fossil fuels means we are producing carbon emissions at levels that will push us further into dangerous temperature rises.
> 
> As with financial debt, we can only avoid the consequences for so long. The impact is already becoming frighteningly clear. Wildfires are becoming more frequent and more destructive. Cities around the world, from Cape Town to Chennai, are running out of water supplies, and a landmark U.N. biodiversity report published in May said up to 1 million species could go extinct thanks to human actions.
> 
> While the consequences are likely to affect poorer nations more starkly, it’s the populations of richer nations that live further beyond their means, according to the Global Footprint Network. If everyone lived like people in the United States, for example, we would need five Earths. If we all consumed resources at the same rate as people in India, we would only need seven-tenths of a planet to meet our demands.
> 
> Earth Overshoot Day Shows We're Tearing Through Resources Faster Than Ever | HuffPost
> 
> Now, you prove it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What the hell is "a year's worth of Earth's resources?"  How was that unit determined?"  You do realize that technology increases the sum total of Earth's resources, don't you?  If we were still using copper wires to make telephone calls over, copper would have been used up 20 years ago.  Now we use fiber optic which is made from silica.  The supply of silica is virtually infinite.
> 
> 
> Your post is pure propaganda.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You get it.  I see your next post.  You understand overpopulation is real.  Especially in cities like Baltimore.
Click to expand...

Overpopulation is a problem, but not because we are running out of resources.  Overpopulation impacts other species living on the planet, and 11 billion people on this planet is just plain too many.  A reasonable number would be 2.5 billion.


----------



## sealybobo

bripat9643 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Prove what you just said is true
> 
> 
> 
> You first. You made the claim prove it's true. Otherwise it's bullshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Earth Overshoot Day Shows We’re Tearing Through Resources Faster Than Ever*
> July 29 marks the point at which we start to consume more than the Earth can replenish. And this date is getting earlier each year.
> 
> Happy Overshoot Day unkotare.  Last year I posted this on July 31st.  This year Overshoot day falls 2 days sooner.
> 
> the point each year at which humanity starts to consume the world’s natural resources faster than they can be replenished.
> 
> It’s taken us only 209 days to burn through a year’s worth of resources — everything from food and timber to land and carbon. We are using up nature 1.75 times faster than it can be replenished. To do this sustainably, we would need the resources of 1.75 Earths.
> 
> These latest figures come from Global Footprint Network, an international nonprofit that calculates our annual ecological budget and the date at which we exceed it. Once we bust through this budget, we start devouring resources at an unsustainable rate.
> 
> “It’s a pyramid scheme,” said Mathis Wackernagel, CEO and founder of Global Footprint Network. “It depends on using more and more from the future to pay for the present.”
> 
> It’s like being in financial debt, only much harder to recover. “There’s nothing to kickstart the economy if we overuse our resources,” he said, “because every economic activity depends on natural capital, and without that, it’s not going to work.”
> 
> The burden of this ecological debt is getting heavier. We started overconsuming resources back in the 1970s, and since then it’s gotten progressively worse. Over the last 20 years, Earth Overshoot Day has crept forward by more than two months. And this year, it falls on the earliest date yet.
> 
> Forests are being felled at an alarming rate to provide timber and clear land for agriculture — two football fields’ worth of Amazon rainforest were cleared every minute in May. We are overexploiting water resources for industry and agriculture, and to provide drinking water for ever-expanding cities. And our addiction to fossil fuels means we are producing carbon emissions at levels that will push us further into dangerous temperature rises.
> 
> As with financial debt, we can only avoid the consequences for so long. The impact is already becoming frighteningly clear. Wildfires are becoming more frequent and more destructive. Cities around the world, from Cape Town to Chennai, are running out of water supplies, and a landmark U.N. biodiversity report published in May said up to 1 million species could go extinct thanks to human actions.
> 
> While the consequences are likely to affect poorer nations more starkly, it’s the populations of richer nations that live further beyond their means, according to the Global Footprint Network. If everyone lived like people in the United States, for example, we would need five Earths. If we all consumed resources at the same rate as people in India, we would only need seven-tenths of a planet to meet our demands.
> 
> Earth Overshoot Day Shows We're Tearing Through Resources Faster Than Ever | HuffPost
> 
> Now, you prove it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What the hell is "a year's worth of Earth's resources?"  How was that unit determined?"  You do realize that technology increases the sum total of Earth's resources, don't you?  If we were still using copper wires to make telephone calls over, copper would have been used up 20 years ago.  Now we use fiber optic which is made from silica.  The supply of silica is virtually infinite.
> 
> 
> Your post is pure propaganda.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You get it.  I see your next post.  You understand overpopulation is real.  Especially in cities like Baltimore.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Overpopulation is a problem, but not because we are running out of resources.  Overpopulation impacts other species living on the planet, and 11 billion people on this planet is just plain too many.  A reasonable number would be 2.5 billion.
Click to expand...


But aren't we running out of resources because we are overpopulated?


----------



## Indeependent

sealybobo said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> You first. You made the claim prove it's true. Otherwise it's bullshit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Earth Overshoot Day Shows We’re Tearing Through Resources Faster Than Ever*
> July 29 marks the point at which we start to consume more than the Earth can replenish. And this date is getting earlier each year.
> 
> Happy Overshoot Day unkotare.  Last year I posted this on July 31st.  This year Overshoot day falls 2 days sooner.
> 
> the point each year at which humanity starts to consume the world’s natural resources faster than they can be replenished.
> 
> It’s taken us only 209 days to burn through a year’s worth of resources — everything from food and timber to land and carbon. We are using up nature 1.75 times faster than it can be replenished. To do this sustainably, we would need the resources of 1.75 Earths.
> 
> These latest figures come from Global Footprint Network, an international nonprofit that calculates our annual ecological budget and the date at which we exceed it. Once we bust through this budget, we start devouring resources at an unsustainable rate.
> 
> “It’s a pyramid scheme,” said Mathis Wackernagel, CEO and founder of Global Footprint Network. “It depends on using more and more from the future to pay for the present.”
> 
> It’s like being in financial debt, only much harder to recover. “There’s nothing to kickstart the economy if we overuse our resources,” he said, “because every economic activity depends on natural capital, and without that, it’s not going to work.”
> 
> The burden of this ecological debt is getting heavier. We started overconsuming resources back in the 1970s, and since then it’s gotten progressively worse. Over the last 20 years, Earth Overshoot Day has crept forward by more than two months. And this year, it falls on the earliest date yet.
> 
> Forests are being felled at an alarming rate to provide timber and clear land for agriculture — two football fields’ worth of Amazon rainforest were cleared every minute in May. We are overexploiting water resources for industry and agriculture, and to provide drinking water for ever-expanding cities. And our addiction to fossil fuels means we are producing carbon emissions at levels that will push us further into dangerous temperature rises.
> 
> As with financial debt, we can only avoid the consequences for so long. The impact is already becoming frighteningly clear. Wildfires are becoming more frequent and more destructive. Cities around the world, from Cape Town to Chennai, are running out of water supplies, and a landmark U.N. biodiversity report published in May said up to 1 million species could go extinct thanks to human actions.
> 
> While the consequences are likely to affect poorer nations more starkly, it’s the populations of richer nations that live further beyond their means, according to the Global Footprint Network. If everyone lived like people in the United States, for example, we would need five Earths. If we all consumed resources at the same rate as people in India, we would only need seven-tenths of a planet to meet our demands.
> 
> Earth Overshoot Day Shows We're Tearing Through Resources Faster Than Ever | HuffPost
> 
> Now, you prove it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What the hell is "a year's worth of Earth's resources?"  How was that unit determined?"  You do realize that technology increases the sum total of Earth's resources, don't you?  If we were still using copper wires to make telephone calls over, copper would have been used up 20 years ago.  Now we use fiber optic which is made from silica.  The supply of silica is virtually infinite.
> 
> 
> Your post is pure propaganda.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You get it.  I see your next post.  You understand overpopulation is real.  Especially in cities like Baltimore.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Overpopulation is a problem, but not because we are running out of resources.  Overpopulation impacts other species living on the planet, and 11 billion people on this planet is just plain too many.  A reasonable number would be 2.5 billion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But aren't we running out of resources because we are overpopulated?
Click to expand...

How many land masses are run by dictators who won’t allow their resources to be properly maintained?


----------



## sealybobo

Indeependent said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Earth Overshoot Day Shows We’re Tearing Through Resources Faster Than Ever*
> July 29 marks the point at which we start to consume more than the Earth can replenish. And this date is getting earlier each year.
> 
> Happy Overshoot Day unkotare.  Last year I posted this on July 31st.  This year Overshoot day falls 2 days sooner.
> 
> the point each year at which humanity starts to consume the world’s natural resources faster than they can be replenished.
> 
> It’s taken us only 209 days to burn through a year’s worth of resources — everything from food and timber to land and carbon. We are using up nature 1.75 times faster than it can be replenished. To do this sustainably, we would need the resources of 1.75 Earths.
> 
> These latest figures come from Global Footprint Network, an international nonprofit that calculates our annual ecological budget and the date at which we exceed it. Once we bust through this budget, we start devouring resources at an unsustainable rate.
> 
> “It’s a pyramid scheme,” said Mathis Wackernagel, CEO and founder of Global Footprint Network. “It depends on using more and more from the future to pay for the present.”
> 
> It’s like being in financial debt, only much harder to recover. “There’s nothing to kickstart the economy if we overuse our resources,” he said, “because every economic activity depends on natural capital, and without that, it’s not going to work.”
> 
> The burden of this ecological debt is getting heavier. We started overconsuming resources back in the 1970s, and since then it’s gotten progressively worse. Over the last 20 years, Earth Overshoot Day has crept forward by more than two months. And this year, it falls on the earliest date yet.
> 
> Forests are being felled at an alarming rate to provide timber and clear land for agriculture — two football fields’ worth of Amazon rainforest were cleared every minute in May. We are overexploiting water resources for industry and agriculture, and to provide drinking water for ever-expanding cities. And our addiction to fossil fuels means we are producing carbon emissions at levels that will push us further into dangerous temperature rises.
> 
> As with financial debt, we can only avoid the consequences for so long. The impact is already becoming frighteningly clear. Wildfires are becoming more frequent and more destructive. Cities around the world, from Cape Town to Chennai, are running out of water supplies, and a landmark U.N. biodiversity report published in May said up to 1 million species could go extinct thanks to human actions.
> 
> While the consequences are likely to affect poorer nations more starkly, it’s the populations of richer nations that live further beyond their means, according to the Global Footprint Network. If everyone lived like people in the United States, for example, we would need five Earths. If we all consumed resources at the same rate as people in India, we would only need seven-tenths of a planet to meet our demands.
> 
> Earth Overshoot Day Shows We're Tearing Through Resources Faster Than Ever | HuffPost
> 
> Now, you prove it.
> 
> 
> 
> What the hell is "a year's worth of Earth's resources?"  How was that unit determined?"  You do realize that technology increases the sum total of Earth's resources, don't you?  If we were still using copper wires to make telephone calls over, copper would have been used up 20 years ago.  Now we use fiber optic which is made from silica.  The supply of silica is virtually infinite.
> 
> 
> Your post is pure propaganda.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You get it.  I see your next post.  You understand overpopulation is real.  Especially in cities like Baltimore.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Overpopulation is a problem, but not because we are running out of resources.  Overpopulation impacts other species living on the planet, and 11 billion people on this planet is just plain too many.  A reasonable number would be 2.5 billion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But aren't we running out of resources because we are overpopulated?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How many land masses are run by dictators who won’t allow their resources to be properly maintained?
Click to expand...

I don't know how many?


----------



## bripat9643

sealybobo said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> You first. You made the claim prove it's true. Otherwise it's bullshit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Earth Overshoot Day Shows We’re Tearing Through Resources Faster Than Ever*
> July 29 marks the point at which we start to consume more than the Earth can replenish. And this date is getting earlier each year.
> 
> Happy Overshoot Day unkotare.  Last year I posted this on July 31st.  This year Overshoot day falls 2 days sooner.
> 
> the point each year at which humanity starts to consume the world’s natural resources faster than they can be replenished.
> 
> It’s taken us only 209 days to burn through a year’s worth of resources — everything from food and timber to land and carbon. We are using up nature 1.75 times faster than it can be replenished. To do this sustainably, we would need the resources of 1.75 Earths.
> 
> These latest figures come from Global Footprint Network, an international nonprofit that calculates our annual ecological budget and the date at which we exceed it. Once we bust through this budget, we start devouring resources at an unsustainable rate.
> 
> “It’s a pyramid scheme,” said Mathis Wackernagel, CEO and founder of Global Footprint Network. “It depends on using more and more from the future to pay for the present.”
> 
> It’s like being in financial debt, only much harder to recover. “There’s nothing to kickstart the economy if we overuse our resources,” he said, “because every economic activity depends on natural capital, and without that, it’s not going to work.”
> 
> The burden of this ecological debt is getting heavier. We started overconsuming resources back in the 1970s, and since then it’s gotten progressively worse. Over the last 20 years, Earth Overshoot Day has crept forward by more than two months. And this year, it falls on the earliest date yet.
> 
> Forests are being felled at an alarming rate to provide timber and clear land for agriculture — two football fields’ worth of Amazon rainforest were cleared every minute in May. We are overexploiting water resources for industry and agriculture, and to provide drinking water for ever-expanding cities. And our addiction to fossil fuels means we are producing carbon emissions at levels that will push us further into dangerous temperature rises.
> 
> As with financial debt, we can only avoid the consequences for so long. The impact is already becoming frighteningly clear. Wildfires are becoming more frequent and more destructive. Cities around the world, from Cape Town to Chennai, are running out of water supplies, and a landmark U.N. biodiversity report published in May said up to 1 million species could go extinct thanks to human actions.
> 
> While the consequences are likely to affect poorer nations more starkly, it’s the populations of richer nations that live further beyond their means, according to the Global Footprint Network. If everyone lived like people in the United States, for example, we would need five Earths. If we all consumed resources at the same rate as people in India, we would only need seven-tenths of a planet to meet our demands.
> 
> Earth Overshoot Day Shows We're Tearing Through Resources Faster Than Ever | HuffPost
> 
> Now, you prove it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What the hell is "a year's worth of Earth's resources?"  How was that unit determined?"  You do realize that technology increases the sum total of Earth's resources, don't you?  If we were still using copper wires to make telephone calls over, copper would have been used up 20 years ago.  Now we use fiber optic which is made from silica.  The supply of silica is virtually infinite.
> 
> 
> Your post is pure propaganda.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You get it.  I see your next post.  You understand overpopulation is real.  Especially in cities like Baltimore.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Overpopulation is a problem, but not because we are running out of resources.  Overpopulation impacts other species living on the planet, and 11 billion people on this planet is just plain too many.  A reasonable number would be 2.5 billion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But aren't we running out of resources because we are overpopulated?
Click to expand...

No.  New technology expands our resources many fold.  I already gave you the example of fiber optic replacing copper in phone lines.  Eventually we will start mining asteroids and the moon, and then our resources will become virtually infinite


----------



## Indeependent

sealybobo said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> What the hell is "a year's worth of Earth's resources?"  How was that unit determined?"  You do realize that technology increases the sum total of Earth's resources, don't you?  If we were still using copper wires to make telephone calls over, copper would have been used up 20 years ago.  Now we use fiber optic which is made from silica.  The supply of silica is virtually infinite.
> 
> 
> Your post is pure propaganda.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You get it.  I see your next post.  You understand overpopulation is real.  Especially in cities like Baltimore.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Overpopulation is a problem, but not because we are running out of resources.  Overpopulation impacts other species living on the planet, and 11 billion people on this planet is just plain too many.  A reasonable number would be 2.5 billion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But aren't we running out of resources because we are overpopulated?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How many land masses are run by dictators who won’t allow their resources to be properly maintained?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don't know how many?
Click to expand...

South of the border, most Muslim nations, most of the African continent, Pakistan, India, most of China.
That’s billions of people currently starving due to Totalitarian leadership, constant wars, drug lords and tyrannical Mullahs.


----------



## sealybobo

Indeependent said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> You get it.  I see your next post.  You understand overpopulation is real.  Especially in cities like Baltimore.
> 
> 
> 
> Overpopulation is a problem, but not because we are running out of resources.  Overpopulation impacts other species living on the planet, and 11 billion people on this planet is just plain too many.  A reasonable number would be 2.5 billion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But aren't we running out of resources because we are overpopulated?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How many land masses are run by dictators who won’t allow their resources to be properly maintained?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don't know how many?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> South of the border, most Muslim nations, most of the African continent, Pakistan, India, most of China.
> That’s billions of people currently starving due to Totalitarian leadership, constant wars, drug lords and tyrannical Mullahs.
Click to expand...

I can't find the article right now but in it they explained how actually the USA uses up the most natural resources and if all those under developed countries were using theirs up like we do, we'd be in deep trouble.


----------



## danielpalos

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?


No.  Malthus was discredited last millennium.


----------



## Unkotare

MarathonMike said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MarathonMike said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fertility Rates Keep Dropping, and It’s Going to Hit the Economy Hard
> 
> 
> 
> Birth rates are dropping in First World countries, but the Third World is reproducing like rabbits.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> incorrect
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Read your own link. It supports what I said. They make a weak statement about Third world women beginning to get access to birth control but the birth rates are sky high as is evidenced by the women with 3 or 4 bloated belly kids in tow showing up for food relief.
Click to expand...



https://lac.unfpa.org/sites/default...idad en ALC (jun 2018) version web inglés.pdf


----------



## Unkotare

bripat9643 said:


> ...
> Overpopulation is a problem,....



It was never anything but a false crisis.


----------



## Death Angel

Poor brown and black people should stop reproducing.


----------



## 2aguy

sealybobo said:


> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> The bottom line is that the world is not overpopulated, and there is no need to panic about the future. Good news!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then how do you explain this?
> 
> Humans have used a year’s worth of Earth’s resources in just seven months
> 
> Humans are using up the planet’s resources so quickly that people have used a year’s worth in just seven months, experts are warning.
> 
> And the rate at which we are consuming the Earth’s natural resources is still speeding up.
> 
> This year the annual date when people have caused a year’s worth of ecological damage – Earth Overshoot Day – comes two days earlier than last year.
> 
> Please don't tell me an inner city public school teacher like you is smarter than the experts.  PLEASE!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> bullshit liberal propaganda.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Prove what you just said is true
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You first. You made the claim prove it's true. Otherwise it's bullshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Earth Overshoot Day Shows We’re Tearing Through Resources Faster Than Ever*
> July 29 marks the point at which we start to consume more than the Earth can replenish. And this date is getting earlier each year.
> 
> Happy Overshoot Day unkotare.  Last year I posted this on July 31st.  This year Overshoot day falls 2 days sooner.
> 
> the point each year at which humanity starts to consume the world’s natural resources faster than they can be replenished.
> 
> It’s taken us only 209 days to burn through a year’s worth of resources — everything from food and timber to land and carbon. We are using up nature 1.75 times faster than it can be replenished. To do this sustainably, we would need the resources of 1.75 Earths.
> 
> These latest figures come from Global Footprint Network, an international nonprofit that calculates our annual ecological budget and the date at which we exceed it. Once we bust through this budget, we start devouring resources at an unsustainable rate.
> 
> “It’s a pyramid scheme,” said Mathis Wackernagel, CEO and founder of Global Footprint Network. “It depends on using more and more from the future to pay for the present.”
> 
> It’s like being in financial debt, only much harder to recover. “There’s nothing to kickstart the economy if we overuse our resources,” he said, “because every economic activity depends on natural capital, and without that, it’s not going to work.”
> 
> The burden of this ecological debt is getting heavier. We started overconsuming resources back in the 1970s, and since then it’s gotten progressively worse. Over the last 20 years, Earth Overshoot Day has crept forward by more than two months. And this year, it falls on the earliest date yet.
> 
> Forests are being felled at an alarming rate to provide timber and clear land for agriculture — two football fields’ worth of Amazon rainforest were cleared every minute in May. We are overexploiting water resources for industry and agriculture, and to provide drinking water for ever-expanding cities. And our addiction to fossil fuels means we are producing carbon emissions at levels that will push us further into dangerous temperature rises.
> 
> As with financial debt, we can only avoid the consequences for so long. The impact is already becoming frighteningly clear. Wildfires are becoming more frequent and more destructive. Cities around the world, from Cape Town to Chennai, are running out of water supplies, and a landmark U.N. biodiversity report published in May said up to 1 million species could go extinct thanks to human actions.
> 
> While the consequences are likely to affect poorer nations more starkly, it’s the populations of richer nations that live further beyond their means, according to the Global Footprint Network. If everyone lived like people in the United States, for example, we would need five Earths. If we all consumed resources at the same rate as people in India, we would only need seven-tenths of a planet to meet our demands.
> 
> Earth Overshoot Day Shows We're Tearing Through Resources Faster Than Ever | HuffPost
> 
> Now, you prove it.
Click to expand...


Yes....that is what they said about food.....we were supposed to run out of food in what,  1984.....

The Population Bomb - Wikipedia

Ehrlich argues that as the existing population was not being fed adequately, and as it was growing rapidly, it was unreasonable to expect sufficient improvements in food production to feed everyone.
-----

In _The Population Bomb_'s opening lines the authors state that nothing can prevent famines in which hundreds of millions of people will die during the 1970s (amended to 1970s and 1980s in later editions), and that there would be "a substantial increase in the world death rate."
------
 However, in reality the global death rate has continued to decline substantially since then, from 13/1000 in 1965–74 to 10/1000 from 1985–1990.
---

Famine has not been eliminated, but its root cause has been political instability, not global food shortage.[21] The Indian economist and Nobel Prize winner, Amartya Sen, has argued that nations with democracy and a free press have virtually never suffered from extended famines.[22] And while a 2010 UN report stated that 925 million of the world's population of nearly seven billion people were in a constant state of hunger,[23] it also notes that the percentage of the world's population who qualify as "undernourished" has fallen by more than half, from 33 percent to about 16 percent, since Ehrlich published _The Population Bomb._[24]
---

Ehrlich writes: "I don't see how India could possibly feed two hundred million more people by 1980."[6] This view was widely held at the time, as another statement of his, later in the book: "I have yet to meet anyone familiar with the situation who thinks that India will be self-sufficient in food by 1971." In the book's 1971 edition, the latter prediction was removed, as the food situation in India suddenly improved.
-----

As of 2010, India had almost 1.2 billion people, having nearly tripled its population from around 400 million in 1960, with a total fertility rate in 2008 of 2.6.[25] While the absolute numbers of malnourished children in India is high,[26] the rates of malnutrition and poverty in India have declined from approximately 90% at the time of India's independence, to less than 40% today. 


We now grow more food, per acre than ever before....

Dittos Oil.....we were supposed to be out of oil too......until new technology came along....

You guys.....you are the ones who are really afraid, and silly in your fear...


----------



## 2aguy

Death Angel said:


> Poor brown and black people should stop reproducing.



Well.....if they don't, the left wing social justice warriors didn't know how to dig mass graves for nothing.......since their solutions always end up with the murder of inconvenient innocent people...


----------



## Slyhunter

sealybobo said:


> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> The bottom line is that the world is not overpopulated, and there is no need to panic about the future. Good news!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then how do you explain this?
> 
> Humans have used a year’s worth of Earth’s resources in just seven months
> 
> Humans are using up the planet’s resources so quickly that people have used a year’s worth in just seven months, experts are warning.
> 
> And the rate at which we are consuming the Earth’s natural resources is still speeding up.
> 
> This year the annual date when people have caused a year’s worth of ecological damage – Earth Overshoot Day – comes two days earlier than last year.
> 
> Please don't tell me an inner city public school teacher like you is smarter than the experts.  PLEASE!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> bullshit liberal propaganda.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ha!
Click to expand...

Nobody measures a years worth of worlds resources.  
MarathonMike answered this best.


----------



## Slyhunter

Taz said:


> Pass an IQ test or you’re sterilized.


No, prove you can support yourself and a family or your sterilized. Plumbers, and Brick Layers should have kids too long as they pay their bills.


----------



## Taz

Slyhunter said:


> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Pass an IQ test or you’re sterilized.
> 
> 
> 
> No, prove you can support yourself and a family or your sterilized. Plumbers, and Brick Layers should have kids too long as they pay their bills.
Click to expand...

You could still cull the bottom quarter.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

Slyhunter said:


> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Pass an IQ test or you’re sterilized.
> 
> 
> 
> No, prove you can support yourself and a family or your sterilized. Plumbers, and Brick Layers should have kids too long as they pay their bills.
Click to expand...


You butchered that sentence.  I suggest trying again.  

That is unless you are concerned that plumbers and brick layers kids are too long.


----------



## Blackrook

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?


No, the problem is now the opposite, all the Western nations are depopulating.  The only reason the United States isn't depopulating is immigration.


----------



## Slyhunter

Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Pass an IQ test or you’re sterilized.
> 
> 
> 
> No, prove you can support yourself and a family or your sterilized. Plumbers, and Brick Layers should have kids too long as they pay their bills.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You butchered that sentence.  I suggest trying again.
> 
> That is unless you are concerned that plumbers and brick layers kids are too long.
Click to expand...

so long. Grammar police.


----------



## Crixus

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?




No. I'm just a guy.


----------



## Mr Natural

A couple of hundred gorillas.

A couple of hundred tigers.

A couple of hundred rhinos.

Seven billion humans.

No problem.


----------



## Unkotare

Mr Clean said:


> A couple of hundred gorillas.
> 
> A couple of hundred tigers.
> 
> A couple of hundred rhinos.
> 
> Seven billion humans.
> 
> No problem.




You're welcome to give up your spot to a rhino. Not sure your clothes will fit, but it's worth a shot.


----------



## Crixus

Mr Clean said:


> A couple of hundred gorillas.
> 
> A couple of hundred tigers.
> 
> A couple of hundred rhinos.
> 
> Seven billion humans.
> 
> No problem.




If one was dedicated and not just talking out their ass, and really believed that shit they would just blow out the pilot light on all four burners and crank them to "HI" and do their part. I notice none of the "over population " people talk a ton of shit, but none do their part and remove their carbon footprint.


----------



## charwin95

bripat9643 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Prove what you just said is true
> 
> 
> 
> You first. You made the claim prove it's true. Otherwise it's bullshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Earth Overshoot Day Shows We’re Tearing Through Resources Faster Than Ever*
> July 29 marks the point at which we start to consume more than the Earth can replenish. And this date is getting earlier each year.
> 
> Happy Overshoot Day unkotare.  Last year I posted this on July 31st.  This year Overshoot day falls 2 days sooner.
> 
> the point each year at which humanity starts to consume the world’s natural resources faster than they can be replenished.
> 
> It’s taken us only 209 days to burn through a year’s worth of resources — everything from food and timber to land and carbon. We are using up nature 1.75 times faster than it can be replenished. To do this sustainably, we would need the resources of 1.75 Earths.
> 
> These latest figures come from Global Footprint Network, an international nonprofit that calculates our annual ecological budget and the date at which we exceed it. Once we bust through this budget, we start devouring resources at an unsustainable rate.
> 
> “It’s a pyramid scheme,” said Mathis Wackernagel, CEO and founder of Global Footprint Network. “It depends on using more and more from the future to pay for the present.”
> 
> It’s like being in financial debt, only much harder to recover. “There’s nothing to kickstart the economy if we overuse our resources,” he said, “because every economic activity depends on natural capital, and without that, it’s not going to work.”
> 
> The burden of this ecological debt is getting heavier. We started overconsuming resources back in the 1970s, and since then it’s gotten progressively worse. Over the last 20 years, Earth Overshoot Day has crept forward by more than two months. And this year, it falls on the earliest date yet.
> 
> Forests are being felled at an alarming rate to provide timber and clear land for agriculture — two football fields’ worth of Amazon rainforest were cleared every minute in May. We are overexploiting water resources for industry and agriculture, and to provide drinking water for ever-expanding cities. And our addiction to fossil fuels means we are producing carbon emissions at levels that will push us further into dangerous temperature rises.
> 
> As with financial debt, we can only avoid the consequences for so long. The impact is already becoming frighteningly clear. Wildfires are becoming more frequent and more destructive. Cities around the world, from Cape Town to Chennai, are running out of water supplies, and a landmark U.N. biodiversity report published in May said up to 1 million species could go extinct thanks to human actions.
> 
> While the consequences are likely to affect poorer nations more starkly, it’s the populations of richer nations that live further beyond their means, according to the Global Footprint Network. If everyone lived like people in the United States, for example, we would need five Earths. If we all consumed resources at the same rate as people in India, we would only need seven-tenths of a planet to meet our demands.
> 
> Earth Overshoot Day Shows We're Tearing Through Resources Faster Than Ever | HuffPost
> 
> Now, you prove it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What the hell is "a year's worth of Earth's resources?"  How was that unit determined?"  You do realize that technology increases the sum total of Earth's resources, don't you?  If we were still using copper wires to make telephone calls over, copper would have been used up 20 years ago.  Now we use fiber optic which is made from silica.  The supply of silica is virtually infinite.
> 
> 
> Your post is pure propaganda.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You get it.  I see your next post.  You understand overpopulation is real.  Especially in cities like Baltimore.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Overpopulation is a problem, but not because we are running out of resources.  Overpopulation impacts other species living on the planet, and 11 billion people on this planet is just plain too many.  A reasonable number would be 2.5 billion.
Click to expand...


This is where your brother Adolf come handy.


----------



## bripat9643

charwin95 said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> You first. You made the claim prove it's true. Otherwise it's bullshit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Earth Overshoot Day Shows We’re Tearing Through Resources Faster Than Ever*
> July 29 marks the point at which we start to consume more than the Earth can replenish. And this date is getting earlier each year.
> 
> Happy Overshoot Day unkotare.  Last year I posted this on July 31st.  This year Overshoot day falls 2 days sooner.
> 
> the point each year at which humanity starts to consume the world’s natural resources faster than they can be replenished.
> 
> It’s taken us only 209 days to burn through a year’s worth of resources — everything from food and timber to land and carbon. We are using up nature 1.75 times faster than it can be replenished. To do this sustainably, we would need the resources of 1.75 Earths.
> 
> These latest figures come from Global Footprint Network, an international nonprofit that calculates our annual ecological budget and the date at which we exceed it. Once we bust through this budget, we start devouring resources at an unsustainable rate.
> 
> “It’s a pyramid scheme,” said Mathis Wackernagel, CEO and founder of Global Footprint Network. “It depends on using more and more from the future to pay for the present.”
> 
> It’s like being in financial debt, only much harder to recover. “There’s nothing to kickstart the economy if we overuse our resources,” he said, “because every economic activity depends on natural capital, and without that, it’s not going to work.”
> 
> The burden of this ecological debt is getting heavier. We started overconsuming resources back in the 1970s, and since then it’s gotten progressively worse. Over the last 20 years, Earth Overshoot Day has crept forward by more than two months. And this year, it falls on the earliest date yet.
> 
> Forests are being felled at an alarming rate to provide timber and clear land for agriculture — two football fields’ worth of Amazon rainforest were cleared every minute in May. We are overexploiting water resources for industry and agriculture, and to provide drinking water for ever-expanding cities. And our addiction to fossil fuels means we are producing carbon emissions at levels that will push us further into dangerous temperature rises.
> 
> As with financial debt, we can only avoid the consequences for so long. The impact is already becoming frighteningly clear. Wildfires are becoming more frequent and more destructive. Cities around the world, from Cape Town to Chennai, are running out of water supplies, and a landmark U.N. biodiversity report published in May said up to 1 million species could go extinct thanks to human actions.
> 
> While the consequences are likely to affect poorer nations more starkly, it’s the populations of richer nations that live further beyond their means, according to the Global Footprint Network. If everyone lived like people in the United States, for example, we would need five Earths. If we all consumed resources at the same rate as people in India, we would only need seven-tenths of a planet to meet our demands.
> 
> Earth Overshoot Day Shows We're Tearing Through Resources Faster Than Ever | HuffPost
> 
> Now, you prove it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What the hell is "a year's worth of Earth's resources?"  How was that unit determined?"  You do realize that technology increases the sum total of Earth's resources, don't you?  If we were still using copper wires to make telephone calls over, copper would have been used up 20 years ago.  Now we use fiber optic which is made from silica.  The supply of silica is virtually infinite.
> 
> 
> Your post is pure propaganda.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You get it.  I see your next post.  You understand overpopulation is real.  Especially in cities like Baltimore.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Overpopulation is a problem, but not because we are running out of resources.  Overpopulation impacts other species living on the planet, and 11 billion people on this planet is just plain too many.  A reasonable number would be 2.5 billion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is where your brother Adolf come handy.
Click to expand...

"My brother Adolph?"  How does noting that the world is over populated make you a Nazi?

You are a special kind of douchebag.


----------



## charwin95

bripat9643 said:


> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Earth Overshoot Day Shows We’re Tearing Through Resources Faster Than Ever*
> July 29 marks the point at which we start to consume more than the Earth can replenish. And this date is getting earlier each year.
> 
> Happy Overshoot Day unkotare.  Last year I posted this on July 31st.  This year Overshoot day falls 2 days sooner.
> 
> the point each year at which humanity starts to consume the world’s natural resources faster than they can be replenished.
> 
> It’s taken us only 209 days to burn through a year’s worth of resources — everything from food and timber to land and carbon. We are using up nature 1.75 times faster than it can be replenished. To do this sustainably, we would need the resources of 1.75 Earths.
> 
> These latest figures come from Global Footprint Network, an international nonprofit that calculates our annual ecological budget and the date at which we exceed it. Once we bust through this budget, we start devouring resources at an unsustainable rate.
> 
> “It’s a pyramid scheme,” said Mathis Wackernagel, CEO and founder of Global Footprint Network. “It depends on using more and more from the future to pay for the present.”
> 
> It’s like being in financial debt, only much harder to recover. “There’s nothing to kickstart the economy if we overuse our resources,” he said, “because every economic activity depends on natural capital, and without that, it’s not going to work.”
> 
> The burden of this ecological debt is getting heavier. We started overconsuming resources back in the 1970s, and since then it’s gotten progressively worse. Over the last 20 years, Earth Overshoot Day has crept forward by more than two months. And this year, it falls on the earliest date yet.
> 
> Forests are being felled at an alarming rate to provide timber and clear land for agriculture — two football fields’ worth of Amazon rainforest were cleared every minute in May. We are overexploiting water resources for industry and agriculture, and to provide drinking water for ever-expanding cities. And our addiction to fossil fuels means we are producing carbon emissions at levels that will push us further into dangerous temperature rises.
> 
> As with financial debt, we can only avoid the consequences for so long. The impact is already becoming frighteningly clear. Wildfires are becoming more frequent and more destructive. Cities around the world, from Cape Town to Chennai, are running out of water supplies, and a landmark U.N. biodiversity report published in May said up to 1 million species could go extinct thanks to human actions.
> 
> While the consequences are likely to affect poorer nations more starkly, it’s the populations of richer nations that live further beyond their means, according to the Global Footprint Network. If everyone lived like people in the United States, for example, we would need five Earths. If we all consumed resources at the same rate as people in India, we would only need seven-tenths of a planet to meet our demands.
> 
> Earth Overshoot Day Shows We're Tearing Through Resources Faster Than Ever | HuffPost
> 
> Now, you prove it.
> 
> 
> 
> What the hell is "a year's worth of Earth's resources?"  How was that unit determined?"  You do realize that technology increases the sum total of Earth's resources, don't you?  If we were still using copper wires to make telephone calls over, copper would have been used up 20 years ago.  Now we use fiber optic which is made from silica.  The supply of silica is virtually infinite.
> 
> 
> Your post is pure propaganda.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You get it.  I see your next post.  You understand overpopulation is real.  Especially in cities like Baltimore.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Overpopulation is a problem, but not because we are running out of resources.  Overpopulation impacts other species living on the planet, and 11 billion people on this planet is just plain too many.  A reasonable number would be 2.5 billion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is where your brother Adolf come handy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "My brother Adolph?"  How does noting that the world is over populated make you a Nazi?
> 
> You are a special kind of douchebag.
Click to expand...


Truth hurts?


----------



## westwall

Mr Clean said:


> A couple of hundred gorillas.
> 
> A couple of hundred tigers.
> 
> A couple of hundred rhinos.
> 
> Seven billion humans.
> 
> No problem.







Correct.  It truly is no problem.  The carrying capacity of the planet is quite high.  Far higher than the biomass it is currently supporting.


----------



## bripat9643

charwin95 said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> What the hell is "a year's worth of Earth's resources?"  How was that unit determined?"  You do realize that technology increases the sum total of Earth's resources, don't you?  If we were still using copper wires to make telephone calls over, copper would have been used up 20 years ago.  Now we use fiber optic which is made from silica.  The supply of silica is virtually infinite.
> 
> 
> Your post is pure propaganda.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You get it.  I see your next post.  You understand overpopulation is real.  Especially in cities like Baltimore.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Overpopulation is a problem, but not because we are running out of resources.  Overpopulation impacts other species living on the planet, and 11 billion people on this planet is just plain too many.  A reasonable number would be 2.5 billion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is where your brother Adolf come handy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "My brother Adolph?"  How does noting that the world is over populated make you a Nazi?
> 
> You are a special kind of douchebag.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Truth hurts?
Click to expand...

You don't know, do you?


----------



## sealybobo

charwin95 said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> What the hell is "a year's worth of Earth's resources?"  How was that unit determined?"  You do realize that technology increases the sum total of Earth's resources, don't you?  If we were still using copper wires to make telephone calls over, copper would have been used up 20 years ago.  Now we use fiber optic which is made from silica.  The supply of silica is virtually infinite.
> 
> 
> Your post is pure propaganda.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You get it.  I see your next post.  You understand overpopulation is real.  Especially in cities like Baltimore.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Overpopulation is a problem, but not because we are running out of resources.  Overpopulation impacts other species living on the planet, and 11 billion people on this planet is just plain too many.  A reasonable number would be 2.5 billion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is where your brother Adolf come handy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "My brother Adolph?"  How does noting that the world is over populated make you a Nazi?
> 
> You are a special kind of douchebag.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Truth hurts?
Click to expand...


But it's not the truth.

So, are you saying that you want the status quo to continue?  You want poor uneducated people to keep having 4 or 5 kids?  So what do you want to do about it?  If you are like me and bripat9643, all we want to do is cut them off foodstamps, welfare, school lunches and Obamacare.  In other words all the things that make it possible for a poor person to have 4 or 5 kids.  We should be discouraging not encouraging them to have more kids.

The only thing Hitlerish in my plan is that I would tell a woman who wants foodstamps for her 2nd mistake that she has to get fixed or she will not get any additional funds for that second mistake.  If she gets fixed she can have the 2nd child and get the foodstamps and Obamacare.

And if she chooses not to get fixed that's ok with us because we aren't paying for the 2nd mistake.  Have as many kids as you want as long as you aren't asking for financial help raising them.


----------



## bripat9643

westwall said:


> Mr Clean said:
> 
> 
> 
> A couple of hundred gorillas.
> 
> A couple of hundred tigers.
> 
> A couple of hundred rhinos.
> 
> Seven billion humans.
> 
> No problem.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Correct.  It truly is no problem.  The carrying capacity of the planet is quite high.  Far higher than the biomass it is currently supporting.
Click to expand...

We don't want the population to get anywhere near the carrying capacity.  That would be a human hell.


----------



## sealybobo

westwall said:


> Mr Clean said:
> 
> 
> 
> A couple of hundred gorillas.
> 
> A couple of hundred tigers.
> 
> A couple of hundred rhinos.
> 
> Seven billion humans.
> 
> No problem.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Correct.  It truly is no problem.  The carrying capacity of the planet is quite high.  Far higher than the biomass it is currently supporting.
Click to expand...


Incorrect.

*As of July 29th humans have used more resources than Planet Earth can regenerate in a year*

If Earth's resources were a bank account, today would mark the date we'd officially be in the red.

As of July 29, humanity has officially used up more ecological resources this year than the Earth can regenerate by the end of the year. The occasion even has a name: Earth Overshoot Day.
The Global Footprint Network, a sustainability organization which calculates the day, says humanity is currently consuming nature 1.75 times faster than the planet can regenerate.
That means we're overspending our natural capital, compromising resources in the future as a result and leading to things like deforestation and carbon dioxide buildup in the atmosphere.


And more carbon dioxide brings ever increasing climate change, the network says.
It's getting worse, too.
The date has moved up two months over the past 20 years, and July 29 marks the earliest the date has ever landed.
"We have only got one Earth -- this is the ultimately defining context for human existence. We can't use 1.75 without destructive consequences," said Mathis Wackernagel, founder of Global Footprint Network, in a statement.
*The data comes months after a grim UN report*
The United States is one of the worst culprits.


----------



## westwall

sealybobo said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mr Clean said:
> 
> 
> 
> A couple of hundred gorillas.
> 
> A couple of hundred tigers.
> 
> A couple of hundred rhinos.
> 
> Seven billion humans.
> 
> No problem.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Correct.  It truly is no problem.  The carrying capacity of the planet is quite high.  Far higher than the biomass it is currently supporting.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Incorrect.
> 
> *As of July 29th humans have used more resources than Planet Earth can regenerate in a year*
> 
> If Earth's resources were a bank account, today would mark the date we'd officially be in the red.
> 
> As of July 29, humanity has officially used up more ecological resources this year than the Earth can regenerate by the end of the year. The occasion even has a name: Earth Overshoot Day.
> The Global Footprint Network, a sustainability organization which calculates the day, says humanity is currently consuming nature 1.75 times faster than the planet can regenerate.
> That means we're overspending our natural capital, compromising resources in the future as a result and leading to things like deforestation and carbon dioxide buildup in the atmosphere.
> 
> 
> And more carbon dioxide brings ever increasing climate change, the network says.
> It's getting worse, too.
> The date has moved up two months over the past 20 years, and July 29 marks the earliest the date has ever landed.
> "We have only got one Earth -- this is the ultimately defining context for human existence. We can't use 1.75 without destructive consequences," said Mathis Wackernagel, founder of Global Footprint Network, in a statement.
> *The data comes months after a grim UN report*
> The United States is one of the worst culprits.
Click to expand...






This is a completely laughable assertion promulgated by a anti science group pushing for dictatorial rule of the globe.  The carrying capacity of the planet as it sits now, is 12 billion people.  With proper usage of resources, and no waste it go's up to 15 billion.  Theoretically, with perfect management, and just a little more technological improvement the capacity increases to 40 billion.  

However, it doesn't matter.  The human population is already leveling off.  Demographers now estimate the population to top out at 9 billion, and then drop back to between 6 and 7 billion as the economic situation of the worlds poor improves.


----------



## charwin95

sealybobo said:


> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> You get it.  I see your next post.  You understand overpopulation is real.  Especially in cities like Baltimore.
> 
> 
> 
> Overpopulation is a problem, but not because we are running out of resources.  Overpopulation impacts other species living on the planet, and 11 billion people on this planet is just plain too many.  A reasonable number would be 2.5 billion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is where your brother Adolf come handy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "My brother Adolph?"  How does noting that the world is over populated make you a Nazi?
> 
> You are a special kind of douchebag.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Truth hurts?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But it's not the truth.
> 
> So, are you saying that you want the status quo to continue?  You want poor uneducated people to keep having 4 or 5 kids?  So what do you want to do about it?  If you are like me and bripat9643, all we want to do is cut them off foodstamps, welfare, school lunches and Obamacare.  In other words all the things that make it possible for a poor person to have 4 or 5 kids.  We should be discouraging not encouraging them to have more kids.
> 
> The only thing Hitlerish in my plan is that I would tell a woman who wants foodstamps for her 2nd mistake that she has to get fixed or she will not get any additional funds for that second mistake.  If she gets fixed she can have the 2nd child and get the foodstamps and Obamacare.
> 
> And if she chooses not to get fixed that's ok with us because we aren't paying for the 2nd mistake.  Have as many kids as you want as long as you aren't asking for financial help raising them.
Click to expand...


Bullshit. Where did I say I support any of that? 

The only reason I’m telling your girl friend here Bri ...... Truth Hurts is how he denied Trump is not a racist.


----------



## charwin95

sealybobo said:


> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> You get it.  I see your next post.  You understand overpopulation is real.  Especially in cities like Baltimore.
> 
> 
> 
> Overpopulation is a problem, but not because we are running out of resources.  Overpopulation impacts other species living on the planet, and 11 billion people on this planet is just plain too many.  A reasonable number would be 2.5 billion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is where your brother Adolf come handy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "My brother Adolph?"  How does noting that the world is over populated make you a Nazi?
> 
> You are a special kind of douchebag.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Truth hurts?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But it's not the truth.
> 
> 1. So, are you saying that you want the status quo to continue?  You want poor uneducated people to keep having 4 or 5 kids?  So what do you want to do about it?  If you are like me and bripat9643, all we want to do is cut them off foodstamps, welfare, school lunches and Obamacare.  In other words all the things that make it possible for a poor person to have 4 or 5 kids.  We should be discouraging not encouraging them to have more kids.
> 
> 2. The only thing Hitlerish in my plan is that I would tell a woman who wants foodstamps for her 2nd mistake that she has to get fixed or she will not get any additional funds for that second mistake.  If she gets fixed she can have the 2nd child and get the foodstamps and Obamacare.
> 
> And if she chooses not to get fixed that's ok with us because we aren't paying for the 2nd mistake.  Have as many kids as you want as long as you aren't asking for financial help raising them.
Click to expand...


1. Explain to me. What is your proposal to solve this problem? Except rounding these poor people and force them to do what you want. 
If this is so easy. Don’t you think we could have fixed this a long time ago? Even Bri himself could have fixed this. 

You want to cut off food stamps and welfare because they have 4 or 5 kids? Really? Where do you think they will end up? We already have homeless crisis. You want to add more to the problem? Or you are part of the problem? 

So Please explain to me how are you going to fix this very simple problem. 

2. There’s no 2nd mistakes with Hitler. They just eliminate the minorities. With inhumane cruelties like some of the people i know here.


----------



## bripat9643

westwall said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mr Clean said:
> 
> 
> 
> A couple of hundred gorillas.
> 
> A couple of hundred tigers.
> 
> A couple of hundred rhinos.
> 
> Seven billion humans.
> 
> No problem.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Correct.  It truly is no problem.  The carrying capacity of the planet is quite high.  Far higher than the biomass it is currently supporting.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Incorrect.
> 
> *As of July 29th humans have used more resources than Planet Earth can regenerate in a year*
> 
> If Earth's resources were a bank account, today would mark the date we'd officially be in the red.
> 
> As of July 29, humanity has officially used up more ecological resources this year than the Earth can regenerate by the end of the year. The occasion even has a name: Earth Overshoot Day.
> The Global Footprint Network, a sustainability organization which calculates the day, says humanity is currently consuming nature 1.75 times faster than the planet can regenerate.
> That means we're overspending our natural capital, compromising resources in the future as a result and leading to things like deforestation and carbon dioxide buildup in the atmosphere.
> 
> 
> And more carbon dioxide brings ever increasing climate change, the network says.
> It's getting worse, too.
> The date has moved up two months over the past 20 years, and July 29 marks the earliest the date has ever landed.
> "We have only got one Earth -- this is the ultimately defining context for human existence. We can't use 1.75 without destructive consequences," said Mathis Wackernagel, founder of Global Footprint Network, in a statement.
> *The data comes months after a grim UN report*
> The United States is one of the worst culprits.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is a completely laughable assertion promulgated by a anti science group pushing for dictatorial rule of the globe.  The carrying capacity of the planet as it sits now, is 12 billion people.  With proper usage of resources, and no waste it go's up to 15 billion.  Theoretically, with perfect management, and just a little more technological improvement the capacity increases to 40 billion.
> 
> However, it doesn't matter.  The human population is already leveling off.  Demographers now estimate the population to top out at 9 billion, and then drop back to between 6 and 7 billion as the economic situation of the worlds poor improves.
Click to expand...

I sure hope so.  The Earth is already too crowded.


----------



## westwall

bripat9643 said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mr Clean said:
> 
> 
> 
> A couple of hundred gorillas.
> 
> A couple of hundred tigers.
> 
> A couple of hundred rhinos.
> 
> Seven billion humans.
> 
> No problem.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Correct.  It truly is no problem.  The carrying capacity of the planet is quite high.  Far higher than the biomass it is currently supporting.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Incorrect.
> 
> *As of July 29th humans have used more resources than Planet Earth can regenerate in a year*
> 
> If Earth's resources were a bank account, today would mark the date we'd officially be in the red.
> 
> As of July 29, humanity has officially used up more ecological resources this year than the Earth can regenerate by the end of the year. The occasion even has a name: Earth Overshoot Day.
> The Global Footprint Network, a sustainability organization which calculates the day, says humanity is currently consuming nature 1.75 times faster than the planet can regenerate.
> That means we're overspending our natural capital, compromising resources in the future as a result and leading to things like deforestation and carbon dioxide buildup in the atmosphere.
> 
> 
> And more carbon dioxide brings ever increasing climate change, the network says.
> It's getting worse, too.
> The date has moved up two months over the past 20 years, and July 29 marks the earliest the date has ever landed.
> "We have only got one Earth -- this is the ultimately defining context for human existence. We can't use 1.75 without destructive consequences," said Mathis Wackernagel, founder of Global Footprint Network, in a statement.
> *The data comes months after a grim UN report*
> The United States is one of the worst culprits.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is a completely laughable assertion promulgated by a anti science group pushing for dictatorial rule of the globe.  The carrying capacity of the planet as it sits now, is 12 billion people.  With proper usage of resources, and no waste it go's up to 15 billion.  Theoretically, with perfect management, and just a little more technological improvement the capacity increases to 40 billion.
> 
> However, it doesn't matter.  The human population is already leveling off.  Demographers now estimate the population to top out at 9 billion, and then drop back to between 6 and 7 billion as the economic situation of the worlds poor improves.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I sure hope so.  The Earth is already too crowded.
Click to expand...






It's really not.  Every person in the world would fit into Rhode Island.


----------



## Unkotare

bripat9643 said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mr Clean said:
> 
> 
> 
> A couple of hundred gorillas.
> 
> A couple of hundred tigers.
> 
> A couple of hundred rhinos.
> 
> Seven billion humans.
> 
> No problem.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Correct.  It truly is no problem.  The carrying capacity of the planet is quite high.  Far higher than the biomass it is currently supporting.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Incorrect.
> 
> *As of July 29th humans have used more resources than Planet Earth can regenerate in a year*
> 
> If Earth's resources were a bank account, today would mark the date we'd officially be in the red.
> 
> As of July 29, humanity has officially used up more ecological resources this year than the Earth can regenerate by the end of the year. The occasion even has a name: Earth Overshoot Day.
> The Global Footprint Network, a sustainability organization which calculates the day, says humanity is currently consuming nature 1.75 times faster than the planet can regenerate.
> That means we're overspending our natural capital, compromising resources in the future as a result and leading to things like deforestation and carbon dioxide buildup in the atmosphere.
> 
> 
> And more carbon dioxide brings ever increasing climate change, the network says.
> It's getting worse, too.
> The date has moved up two months over the past 20 years, and July 29 marks the earliest the date has ever landed.
> "We have only got one Earth -- this is the ultimately defining context for human existence. We can't use 1.75 without destructive consequences," said Mathis Wackernagel, founder of Global Footprint Network, in a statement.
> *The data comes months after a grim UN report*
> The United States is one of the worst culprits.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is a completely laughable assertion promulgated by a anti science group pushing for dictatorial rule of the globe.  The carrying capacity of the planet as it sits now, is 12 billion people.  With proper usage of resources, and no waste it go's up to 15 billion.  Theoretically, with perfect management, and just a little more technological improvement the capacity increases to 40 billion.
> 
> However, it doesn't matter.  The human population is already leveling off.  Demographers now estimate the population to top out at 9 billion, and then drop back to between 6 and 7 billion as the economic situation of the worlds poor improves.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I sure hope so.  The Earth is already too crowded.
Click to expand...



Not even close, but you are welcome to make room for one more if you have the courage of your convictions.


----------



## bripat9643

Unkotare said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mr Clean said:
> 
> 
> 
> A couple of hundred gorillas.
> 
> A couple of hundred tigers.
> 
> A couple of hundred rhinos.
> 
> Seven billion humans.
> 
> No problem.
> 
> 
> 
> Correct.  It truly is no problem.  The carrying capacity of the planet is quite high.  Far higher than the biomass it is currently supporting.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Incorrect.
> 
> *As of July 29th humans have used more resources than Planet Earth can regenerate in a year*
> 
> If Earth's resources were a bank account, today would mark the date we'd officially be in the red.
> 
> As of July 29, humanity has officially used up more ecological resources this year than the Earth can regenerate by the end of the year. The occasion even has a name: Earth Overshoot Day.
> The Global Footprint Network, a sustainability organization which calculates the day, says humanity is currently consuming nature 1.75 times faster than the planet can regenerate.
> That means we're overspending our natural capital, compromising resources in the future as a result and leading to things like deforestation and carbon dioxide buildup in the atmosphere.
> 
> 
> And more carbon dioxide brings ever increasing climate change, the network says.
> It's getting worse, too.
> The date has moved up two months over the past 20 years, and July 29 marks the earliest the date has ever landed.
> "We have only got one Earth -- this is the ultimately defining context for human existence. We can't use 1.75 without destructive consequences," said Mathis Wackernagel, founder of Global Footprint Network, in a statement.
> *The data comes months after a grim UN report*
> The United States is one of the worst culprits.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is a completely laughable assertion promulgated by a anti science group pushing for dictatorial rule of the globe.  The carrying capacity of the planet as it sits now, is 12 billion people.  With proper usage of resources, and no waste it go's up to 15 billion.  Theoretically, with perfect management, and just a little more technological improvement the capacity increases to 40 billion.
> 
> However, it doesn't matter.  The human population is already leveling off.  Demographers now estimate the population to top out at 9 billion, and then drop back to between 6 and 7 billion as the economic situation of the worlds poor improves.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I sure hope so.  The Earth is already too crowded.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Not even close, but you are welcome to make room for one more if you have the courage of your convictions.
Click to expand...


My convictions don't require me to commit suicide. That just require the public to use birth control.


----------



## Unkotare

bripat9643 said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> Correct.  It truly is no problem.  The carrying capacity of the planet is quite high.  Far higher than the biomass it is currently supporting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Incorrect.
> 
> *As of July 29th humans have used more resources than Planet Earth can regenerate in a year*
> 
> If Earth's resources were a bank account, today would mark the date we'd officially be in the red.
> 
> As of July 29, humanity has officially used up more ecological resources this year than the Earth can regenerate by the end of the year. The occasion even has a name: Earth Overshoot Day.
> The Global Footprint Network, a sustainability organization which calculates the day, says humanity is currently consuming nature 1.75 times faster than the planet can regenerate.
> That means we're overspending our natural capital, compromising resources in the future as a result and leading to things like deforestation and carbon dioxide buildup in the atmosphere.
> 
> 
> And more carbon dioxide brings ever increasing climate change, the network says.
> It's getting worse, too.
> The date has moved up two months over the past 20 years, and July 29 marks the earliest the date has ever landed.
> "We have only got one Earth -- this is the ultimately defining context for human existence. We can't use 1.75 without destructive consequences," said Mathis Wackernagel, founder of Global Footprint Network, in a statement.
> *The data comes months after a grim UN report*
> The United States is one of the worst culprits.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is a completely laughable assertion promulgated by a anti science group pushing for dictatorial rule of the globe.  The carrying capacity of the planet as it sits now, is 12 billion people.  With proper usage of resources, and no waste it go's up to 15 billion.  Theoretically, with perfect management, and just a little more technological improvement the capacity increases to 40 billion.
> 
> However, it doesn't matter.  The human population is already leveling off.  Demographers now estimate the population to top out at 9 billion, and then drop back to between 6 and 7 billion as the economic situation of the worlds poor improves.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I sure hope so.  The Earth is already too crowded.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Not even close, but you are welcome to make room for one more if you have the courage of your convictions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> My convictions don't require me to commit suicide. That just require the public to use birth control.
Click to expand...




Start with yourself.


----------



## bripat9643

Unkotare said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Incorrect.
> 
> *As of July 29th humans have used more resources than Planet Earth can regenerate in a year*
> 
> If Earth's resources were a bank account, today would mark the date we'd officially be in the red.
> 
> As of July 29, humanity has officially used up more ecological resources this year than the Earth can regenerate by the end of the year. The occasion even has a name: Earth Overshoot Day.
> The Global Footprint Network, a sustainability organization which calculates the day, says humanity is currently consuming nature 1.75 times faster than the planet can regenerate.
> That means we're overspending our natural capital, compromising resources in the future as a result and leading to things like deforestation and carbon dioxide buildup in the atmosphere.
> 
> 
> And more carbon dioxide brings ever increasing climate change, the network says.
> It's getting worse, too.
> The date has moved up two months over the past 20 years, and July 29 marks the earliest the date has ever landed.
> "We have only got one Earth -- this is the ultimately defining context for human existence. We can't use 1.75 without destructive consequences," said Mathis Wackernagel, founder of Global Footprint Network, in a statement.
> *The data comes months after a grim UN report*
> The United States is one of the worst culprits.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is a completely laughable assertion promulgated by a anti science group pushing for dictatorial rule of the globe.  The carrying capacity of the planet as it sits now, is 12 billion people.  With proper usage of resources, and no waste it go's up to 15 billion.  Theoretically, with perfect management, and just a little more technological improvement the capacity increases to 40 billion.
> 
> However, it doesn't matter.  The human population is already leveling off.  Demographers now estimate the population to top out at 9 billion, and then drop back to between 6 and 7 billion as the economic situation of the worlds poor improves.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I sure hope so.  The Earth is already too crowded.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Not even close, but you are welcome to make room for one more if you have the courage of your convictions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> My convictions don't require me to commit suicide. That just require the public to use birth control.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Start with yourself.
Click to expand...

Start using birth control?  I always have.


----------



## Unkotare

bripat9643 said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is a completely laughable assertion promulgated by a anti science group pushing for dictatorial rule of the globe.  The carrying capacity of the planet as it sits now, is 12 billion people.  With proper usage of resources, and no waste it go's up to 15 billion.  Theoretically, with perfect management, and just a little more technological improvement the capacity increases to 40 billion.
> 
> However, it doesn't matter.  The human population is already leveling off.  Demographers now estimate the population to top out at 9 billion, and then drop back to between 6 and 7 billion as the economic situation of the worlds poor improves.
> 
> 
> 
> I sure hope so.  The Earth is already too crowded.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Not even close, but you are welcome to make room for one more if you have the courage of your convictions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> My convictions don't require me to commit suicide. That just require the public to use birth control.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Start with yourself.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Start using birth control?  I always have.
Click to expand...


----------



## sealybobo

westwall said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mr Clean said:
> 
> 
> 
> A couple of hundred gorillas.
> 
> A couple of hundred tigers.
> 
> A couple of hundred rhinos.
> 
> Seven billion humans.
> 
> No problem.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Correct.  It truly is no problem.  The carrying capacity of the planet is quite high.  Far higher than the biomass it is currently supporting.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Incorrect.
> 
> *As of July 29th humans have used more resources than Planet Earth can regenerate in a year*
> 
> If Earth's resources were a bank account, today would mark the date we'd officially be in the red.
> 
> As of July 29, humanity has officially used up more ecological resources this year than the Earth can regenerate by the end of the year. The occasion even has a name: Earth Overshoot Day.
> The Global Footprint Network, a sustainability organization which calculates the day, says humanity is currently consuming nature 1.75 times faster than the planet can regenerate.
> That means we're overspending our natural capital, compromising resources in the future as a result and leading to things like deforestation and carbon dioxide buildup in the atmosphere.
> 
> 
> And more carbon dioxide brings ever increasing climate change, the network says.
> It's getting worse, too.
> The date has moved up two months over the past 20 years, and July 29 marks the earliest the date has ever landed.
> "We have only got one Earth -- this is the ultimately defining context for human existence. We can't use 1.75 without destructive consequences," said Mathis Wackernagel, founder of Global Footprint Network, in a statement.
> *The data comes months after a grim UN report*
> The United States is one of the worst culprits.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is a completely laughable assertion promulgated by a anti science group pushing for dictatorial rule of the globe.  The carrying capacity of the planet as it sits now, is 12 billion people.  With proper usage of resources, and no waste it go's up to 15 billion.  Theoretically, with perfect management, and just a little more technological improvement the capacity increases to 40 billion.
> 
> However, it doesn't matter.  The human population is already leveling off.  Demographers now estimate the population to top out at 9 billion, and then drop back to between 6 and 7 billion as the economic situation of the worlds poor improves.
Click to expand...


Good!  I don't believe it but GOOD!


----------



## sealybobo

charwin95 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Overpopulation is a problem, but not because we are running out of resources.  Overpopulation impacts other species living on the planet, and 11 billion people on this planet is just plain too many.  A reasonable number would be 2.5 billion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is where your brother Adolf come handy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "My brother Adolph?"  How does noting that the world is over populated make you a Nazi?
> 
> You are a special kind of douchebag.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Truth hurts?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But it's not the truth.
> 
> 1. So, are you saying that you want the status quo to continue?  You want poor uneducated people to keep having 4 or 5 kids?  So what do you want to do about it?  If you are like me and bripat9643, all we want to do is cut them off foodstamps, welfare, school lunches and Obamacare.  In other words all the things that make it possible for a poor person to have 4 or 5 kids.  We should be discouraging not encouraging them to have more kids.
> 
> 2. The only thing Hitlerish in my plan is that I would tell a woman who wants foodstamps for her 2nd mistake that she has to get fixed or she will not get any additional funds for that second mistake.  If she gets fixed she can have the 2nd child and get the foodstamps and Obamacare.
> 
> And if she chooses not to get fixed that's ok with us because we aren't paying for the 2nd mistake.  Have as many kids as you want as long as you aren't asking for financial help raising them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1. Explain to me. What is your proposal to solve this problem? Except rounding these poor people and force them to do what you want.
> If this is so easy. Don’t you think we could have fixed this a long time ago? Even Bri himself could have fixed this.
> 
> You want to cut off food stamps and welfare because they have 4 or 5 kids? Really? Where do you think they will end up? We already have homeless crisis. You want to add more to the problem? Or you are part of the problem?
> 
> So Please explain to me how are you going to fix this very simple problem.
> 
> 2. There’s no 2nd mistakes with Hitler. They just eliminate the minorities. With inhumane cruelties like some of the people i know here.
Click to expand...


Simple solution.  If you have one kid you can't afford, come get your food stamps.  If you have a second mistake and want double the food stamps ok, but first you have to fix yourself so we know you won't have a 3rd mistake.  If you don't fix yourself then you will continue to only get food stamps for 1 kid.

We already see Republican policies where they cut down on how much you get in food stamps is working to lower the number of "mistakes" poor women have.  If they aren't going to get more money for their 2nd and 3rd mistake, guess what they do?  They don't have the 2nd and 3rd mistake.  

I like the idea of just giving them staples.  Bread, peanut butter, eggs, milk, spagetti.  No more giving them a charge card where they can go to the store and buy steaks and lobster.  Fuck that.  Here is some shit so you won't starve but I'll be damned if you are going to buy twinkees with your food stamp money.  

In other words, food stamps and welfare benefits make poor women not worry about making those mistakes.  

You think they'll starve and be homeless if we don't give them food stamps?  They won't.  

I say they won't make the mistakes if they don't have the social safety nets under them.  

The one thing I love that Republicans want to do is make food stamp recipients work 10 hours a week for those benefits.  Most of the women won't do the work and will figure it out on their own, rather than work the 10 hours.  But right now, all they have to do is go in and fill out a form and they get it.  With no plan of how they're going to get off of it.  They have no plan to get off of it.  So, we have an entire generation of people who are taking advantage.


----------



## sealybobo

westwall said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mr Clean said:
> 
> 
> 
> A couple of hundred gorillas.
> 
> A couple of hundred tigers.
> 
> A couple of hundred rhinos.
> 
> Seven billion humans.
> 
> No problem.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Correct.  It truly is no problem.  The carrying capacity of the planet is quite high.  Far higher than the biomass it is currently supporting.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Incorrect.
> 
> *As of July 29th humans have used more resources than Planet Earth can regenerate in a year*
> 
> If Earth's resources were a bank account, today would mark the date we'd officially be in the red.
> 
> As of July 29, humanity has officially used up more ecological resources this year than the Earth can regenerate by the end of the year. The occasion even has a name: Earth Overshoot Day.
> The Global Footprint Network, a sustainability organization which calculates the day, says humanity is currently consuming nature 1.75 times faster than the planet can regenerate.
> That means we're overspending our natural capital, compromising resources in the future as a result and leading to things like deforestation and carbon dioxide buildup in the atmosphere.
> 
> 
> And more carbon dioxide brings ever increasing climate change, the network says.
> It's getting worse, too.
> The date has moved up two months over the past 20 years, and July 29 marks the earliest the date has ever landed.
> "We have only got one Earth -- this is the ultimately defining context for human existence. We can't use 1.75 without destructive consequences," said Mathis Wackernagel, founder of Global Footprint Network, in a statement.
> *The data comes months after a grim UN report*
> The United States is one of the worst culprits.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is a completely laughable assertion promulgated by a anti science group pushing for dictatorial rule of the globe.  The carrying capacity of the planet as it sits now, is 12 billion people.  With proper usage of resources, and no waste it go's up to 15 billion.  Theoretically, with perfect management, and just a little more technological improvement the capacity increases to 40 billion.
> 
> However, it doesn't matter.  The human population is already leveling off.  Demographers now estimate the population to top out at 9 billion, and then drop back to between 6 and 7 billion as the economic situation of the worlds poor improves.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I sure hope so.  The Earth is already too crowded.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's really not.  Every person in the world would fit into Rhode Island.
Click to expand...


*Humans just 0.01% of all life but have destroyed 83% of wild mammals – study*
 This article is more than *1 year old*
Groundbreaking assessment of all life on Earth reveals humanity’s surprisingly tiny part in it as well as our disproportionate impact


The world’s 7.6 billion people represent just 0.01% of all living things, according to the study. Yet since the dawn of civilisation, humanity has caused the loss of 83% of all wild mammals and half of plants, while livestock kept by humans abounds.

The new work is the first comprehensive estimate of the weight of every class of living creature and overturns some long-held assumptions. Bacteria are indeed a major life form – 13% of everything – but plants overshadow everything, representing 82% of all living matter. All other creatures, from insects to fungi, to fish and animals, make up just 5% of the world’s biomass.

The transformation of the planet by human activity has led scientists to the brink of declaring a new geological era – the Anthropocene. One suggested marker for this change are the bones of the domestic chicken, now ubiquitous across the globe.

The new work reveals that farmed poultry today makes up 70% of all birds on the planet, with just 30% being wild. The picture is even more stark for mammals – 60% of all mammals on Earth are livestock, mostly cattle and pigs, 36% are human and just 4% are wild animals.

The destruction of wild habitat for farming, logging and development has resulted in the start of what many scientists consider the sixth mass extinction of life to occur in the Earth’s four billion year history. About half the Earth’s animals are thought to have been lost in the last 50 years.

But comparison of the new estimates with those for the time before humans became farmers and the industrial revolution began reveal the full extent of the huge decline. Just one-sixth of wild mammals, from mice to elephants, remain, surprising even the scientists. In the oceans, three centuries of whaling has left just a fifth of marine mammals in the oceans.

Anyone who doesn't think we are overpopulated is stupid, blind and ignorant.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I sure hope so.  The Earth is already too crowded.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not even close, but you are welcome to make room for one more if you have the courage of your convictions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> My convictions don't require me to commit suicide. That just require the public to use birth control.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Start with yourself.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Start using birth control?  I always have.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Your birth control is that no one will fuck you. 

Last night I met another girl on my boat.  Actually she owns the dog grooming place I take my dog.  

Man that boat is a chick magnet.  I was with 3 women I used to work with and she comes out asking how I have three hotties on my boat.  I tell her that they are just friends and suddenly she's flirting with me and flat out said, "How come we don't hang out more?"

So next week I will be taking her out on the boat.  Luckily I only hang out with my 27 year old girlfriend 1-3 times a week.  I can easily juggle the two.


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> ....
> Last night I met another girl on my boat.  Actually she owns the dog grooming place I take my dog.
> 
> Man that boat is a chick magnet. ....




What a sad closet case...


----------



## percysunshine

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?



Overpopulation is not a belief system. Either there is enough food to feed everyone, or there is not.


----------



## Unkotare

percysunshine said:


> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Overpopulation is not a belief system. Either there is enough food to feed everyone, or there is not.
Click to expand...



There is.


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> ......
> 
> Anyone who doesn't think we are overpopulated ........




Understands numbers and demographics.


----------



## percysunshine

Unkotare said:


> percysunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Overpopulation is not a belief system. Either there is enough food to feed everyone, or there is not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> There is.
Click to expand...


John Deere tractors are awesome.


----------



## sealybobo

percysunshine said:


> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Overpopulation is not a belief system. Either there is enough food to feed everyone, or there is not.
Click to expand...


There's so much more to it than that.  For example,

*Humans just 0.01% of all life but have destroyed 83% of wild mammals *

Groundbreaking assessment of all life on Earth reveals humanity’s surprisingly tiny part in it as well as our disproportionate impact


The world’s 7.6 billion people represent just 0.01% of all living things, according to the study. Yet since the dawn of civilization, humanity has caused the loss of 83% of all wild mammals and half of plants, while livestock kept by humans abounds.

So we do have enough food to eat.  That doesn't mean we aren't overpopulated.


----------



## sealybobo

The livestock sector is a major environmental polluter, the authors said, noting that much of the world's pastureland has been degraded by grazing or feed production, and that many forests have been clear-cut to make way for additional farmland. Feed production also requires intensive use of water, fertilizer, pesticides and fossil fuels


----------



## percysunshine

sealybobo said:


> percysunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Overpopulation is not a belief system. Either there is enough food to feed everyone, or there is not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There's so much more to it than that.  For example,
> 
> *Humans just 0.01% of all life but have destroyed 83% of wild mammals *
> 
> Groundbreaking assessment of all life on Earth reveals humanity’s surprisingly tiny part in it as well as our disproportionate impact
> 
> 
> The world’s 7.6 billion people represent just 0.01% of all living things, according to the study. Yet since the dawn of civilization, humanity has caused the loss of 83% of all wild mammals and half of plants, while livestock kept by humans abounds.
> 
> So we do have enough food to eat.  That doesn't mean we aren't overpopulated.
Click to expand...


Typical redefinition of a common word in usage for ages.

Oh, your statistics look invented.


----------



## danielpalos

Right wing fantasy is good for practice and sometimes for fun; but the reality is, we could fit the entire US population into Texas while we, "remodel" the rest of the Republic.


----------



## sealybobo

percysunshine said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> percysunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Overpopulation is not a belief system. Either there is enough food to feed everyone, or there is not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There's so much more to it than that.  For example,
> 
> *Humans just 0.01% of all life but have destroyed 83% of wild mammals *
> 
> Groundbreaking assessment of all life on Earth reveals humanity’s surprisingly tiny part in it as well as our disproportionate impact
> 
> 
> The world’s 7.6 billion people represent just 0.01% of all living things, according to the study. Yet since the dawn of civilization, humanity has caused the loss of 83% of all wild mammals and half of plants, while livestock kept by humans abounds.
> 
> So we do have enough food to eat.  That doesn't mean we aren't overpopulated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Typical redefinition of a common word in usage for ages.
> 
> Oh, your statistics look invented.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry if facts and reality get in the way of your rosie outlook.


----------



## westwall

sealybobo said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> Correct.  It truly is no problem.  The carrying capacity of the planet is quite high.  Far higher than the biomass it is currently supporting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Incorrect.
> 
> *As of July 29th humans have used more resources than Planet Earth can regenerate in a year*
> 
> If Earth's resources were a bank account, today would mark the date we'd officially be in the red.
> 
> As of July 29, humanity has officially used up more ecological resources this year than the Earth can regenerate by the end of the year. The occasion even has a name: Earth Overshoot Day.
> The Global Footprint Network, a sustainability organization which calculates the day, says humanity is currently consuming nature 1.75 times faster than the planet can regenerate.
> That means we're overspending our natural capital, compromising resources in the future as a result and leading to things like deforestation and carbon dioxide buildup in the atmosphere.
> 
> 
> And more carbon dioxide brings ever increasing climate change, the network says.
> It's getting worse, too.
> The date has moved up two months over the past 20 years, and July 29 marks the earliest the date has ever landed.
> "We have only got one Earth -- this is the ultimately defining context for human existence. We can't use 1.75 without destructive consequences," said Mathis Wackernagel, founder of Global Footprint Network, in a statement.
> *The data comes months after a grim UN report*
> The United States is one of the worst culprits.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is a completely laughable assertion promulgated by a anti science group pushing for dictatorial rule of the globe.  The carrying capacity of the planet as it sits now, is 12 billion people.  With proper usage of resources, and no waste it go's up to 15 billion.  Theoretically, with perfect management, and just a little more technological improvement the capacity increases to 40 billion.
> 
> However, it doesn't matter.  The human population is already leveling off.  Demographers now estimate the population to top out at 9 billion, and then drop back to between 6 and 7 billion as the economic situation of the worlds poor improves.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I sure hope so.  The Earth is already too crowded.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's really not.  Every person in the world would fit into Rhode Island.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Humans just 0.01% of all life but have destroyed 83% of wild mammals – study*
> This article is more than *1 year old*
> Groundbreaking assessment of all life on Earth reveals humanity’s surprisingly tiny part in it as well as our disproportionate impact
> 
> 
> The world’s 7.6 billion people represent just 0.01% of all living things, according to the study. Yet since the dawn of civilisation, humanity has caused the loss of 83% of all wild mammals and half of plants, while livestock kept by humans abounds.
> 
> The new work is the first comprehensive estimate of the weight of every class of living creature and overturns some long-held assumptions. Bacteria are indeed a major life form – 13% of everything – but plants overshadow everything, representing 82% of all living matter. All other creatures, from insects to fungi, to fish and animals, make up just 5% of the world’s biomass.
> 
> The transformation of the planet by human activity has led scientists to the brink of declaring a new geological era – the Anthropocene. One suggested marker for this change are the bones of the domestic chicken, now ubiquitous across the globe.
> 
> The new work reveals that farmed poultry today makes up 70% of all birds on the planet, with just 30% being wild. The picture is even more stark for mammals – 60% of all mammals on Earth are livestock, mostly cattle and pigs, 36% are human and just 4% are wild animals.
> 
> The destruction of wild habitat for farming, logging and development has resulted in the start of what many scientists consider the sixth mass extinction of life to occur in the Earth’s four billion year history. About half the Earth’s animals are thought to have been lost in the last 50 years.
> 
> But comparison of the new estimates with those for the time before humans became farmers and the industrial revolution began reveal the full extent of the huge decline. Just one-sixth of wild mammals, from mice to elephants, remain, surprising even the scientists. In the oceans, three centuries of whaling has left just a fifth of marine mammals in the oceans.
> 
> Anyone who doesn't think we are overpopulated is stupid, blind and ignorant.
Click to expand...




Yet more hyperbole.   The facts are that more than 99% of all living things that have ever been on the planet have gone extinct.   All without mans help.


----------



## Slyhunter

charwin95 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Overpopulation is a problem, but not because we are running out of resources.  Overpopulation impacts other species living on the planet, and 11 billion people on this planet is just plain too many.  A reasonable number would be 2.5 billion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is where your brother Adolf come handy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "My brother Adolph?"  How does noting that the world is over populated make you a Nazi?
> 
> You are a special kind of douchebag.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Truth hurts?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But it's not the truth.
> 
> 1. So, are you saying that you want the status quo to continue?  You want poor uneducated people to keep having 4 or 5 kids?  So what do you want to do about it?  If you are like me and bripat9643, all we want to do is cut them off foodstamps, welfare, school lunches and Obamacare.  In other words all the things that make it possible for a poor person to have 4 or 5 kids.  We should be discouraging not encouraging them to have more kids.
> 
> 2. The only thing Hitlerish in my plan is that I would tell a woman who wants foodstamps for her 2nd mistake that she has to get fixed or she will not get any additional funds for that second mistake.  If she gets fixed she can have the 2nd child and get the foodstamps and Obamacare.
> 
> And if she chooses not to get fixed that's ok with us because we aren't paying for the 2nd mistake.  Have as many kids as you want as long as you aren't asking for financial help raising them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1. Explain to me. What is your proposal to solve this problem? Except rounding these poor people and force them to do what you want.
> If this is so easy. Don’t you think we could have fixed this a long time ago? Even Bri himself could have fixed this.
> 
> You want to cut off food stamps and welfare because they have 4 or 5 kids? Really? Where do you think they will end up? We already have homeless crisis. You want to add more to the problem? Or you are part of the problem?
> 
> So Please explain to me how are you going to fix this very simple problem.
> 
> 2. There’s no 2nd mistakes with Hitler. They just eliminate the minorities. With inhumane cruelties like some of the people i know here.
Click to expand...

If you throw money at them they'll make more wanting money thrown at them.


----------



## bripat9643

sealybobo said:


> percysunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Overpopulation is not a belief system. Either there is enough food to feed everyone, or there is not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There's so much more to it than that.  For example,
> 
> *Humans just 0.01% of all life but have destroyed 83% of wild mammals *
> 
> Groundbreaking assessment of all life on Earth reveals humanity’s surprisingly tiny part in it as well as our disproportionate impact
> 
> 
> The world’s 7.6 billion people represent just 0.01% of all living things, according to the study. Yet since the dawn of civilization, humanity has caused the loss of 83% of all wild mammals and half of plants, while livestock kept by humans abounds.
> 
> So we do have enough food to eat.  That doesn't mean we aren't overpopulated.
Click to expand...

The situation isn't as grim as your article makes it sound.  They distort the facts by comparing the total mass of animals.  Of course, the total mass of farm animals has increased drastically since the advent of mechanized hog, chicken and cattle warehouses.  Buffalo and herd animals in African have decreased drastically, but most of that occurred in the 19th Century.  

Currently our vast population is putting enormous pressure on ecosystems, which is the main reason it needs to come down.  Hopefully wild animal populations can recover after our population peaks out.  But even if the birth rate went to 2.0 per woman tomorrow, the population would still grow to 8 or 9 billion.


----------



## bripat9643

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not even close, but you are welcome to make room for one more if you have the courage of your convictions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My convictions don't require me to commit suicide. That just require the public to use birth control.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Start with yourself.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Start using birth control?  I always have.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What a life you have.  Posting shit at 4am, then more garbage at 9am and then back on now posting more bullshit.  What a loser you are.  You have nothing better to do because you are broke.
Click to expand...

What I don't get is this mentality that looks at a population of 15 billion is a good thing.  Anyone with a brain has to concede that our population has to have some limit on it.  The only issue up for debate is where that limit should be.  I see no reason to have more than 2.5 billion people on this planet.  What conceivable benefit is there to having more than that?


----------



## sealybobo

bripat9643 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> My convictions don't require me to commit suicide. That just require the public to use birth control.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Start with yourself.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Start using birth control?  I always have.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What a life you have.  Posting shit at 4am, then more garbage at 9am and then back on now posting more bullshit.  What a loser you are.  You have nothing better to do because you are broke.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What I don't get is this mentality that looks at a population of 15 billion is a good thing.  Anyone with a brain has to concede that our population has to have some limit on it.  The only issue up for debate is where that limit should be.  I see no reason to have more than 2.5 billion people on this planet.  What conceivable benefit is there to having more than that?
Click to expand...


If you are a corporation like Ford Motor company you want 15 billion people buying your cars not 2.5 billion.  Other than that, I don't know why anyone would want more people.

Just look at how people in rural towns make fun of big cities with all their problems.  Those people in rural America certainly don't want to see their small towns double in population.  Maybe the mayor and business leaders do but most of the citizens would hate to see that happen.


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> ...
> Currently our vast population is putting enormous pressure on ecosystems, which is the main reason it needs to come down.  ....




It doesn't "need" to come down, but it will anyway, so you can relax.


----------



## Unkotare

bripat9643 said:


> ....  I see no reason to have more than 2.5 billion people on this planet.  What conceivable benefit is there to having more than that?




Ask person # 2.5 billion +1.


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....  I see no reason to have more than 2.5 billion people on this planet.  What conceivable benefit is there to having more than that?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ask person # 2.5 billion +1.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How many kids do you have?  Let's say you have 2.  Could you have had more?  Of course you could have.  So I think it is horrible that you deprived those unborn kids a life.
> 
> You should have 1 kid every other year until you can't have any more.  If you don't, then that's just horrible of you.  Just ask them.  Ask the kids you never had how they feel about you not having them.  Ask them!
Click to expand...


You will _now_ stop talking about my family. Now.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....  I see no reason to have more than 2.5 billion people on this planet.  What conceivable benefit is there to having more than that?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ask person # 2.5 billion +1.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How many kids do you have?  Let's say you have 2.  Could you have had more?  Of course you could have.  So I think it is horrible that you deprived those unborn kids a life.
> 
> You should have 1 kid every other year until you can't have any more.  If you don't, then that's just horrible of you.  Just ask them.  Ask the kids you never had how they feel about you not having them.  Ask them!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You will _now_ stop talking about my family. Now.
Click to expand...


I wasn't talking about your family.  I was talking about all the kids you could have had but didn't.


----------



## Slyhunter

bripat9643 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> My convictions don't require me to commit suicide. That just require the public to use birth control.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Start with yourself.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Start using birth control?  I always have.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What a life you have.  Posting shit at 4am, then more garbage at 9am and then back on now posting more bullshit.  What a loser you are.  You have nothing better to do because you are broke.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What I don't get is this mentality that looks at a population of 15 billion is a good thing.  Anyone with a brain has to concede that our population has to have some limit on it.  The only issue up for debate is where that limit should be.  I see no reason to have more than 2.5 billion people on this planet.  What conceivable benefit is there to having more than that?
Click to expand...

We need to sterilize the poor. If you can't support yourself you shouldn't have kids. All those peace groups giving the measles vaccine should be sterilizing those folks at the same time.


----------



## danielpalos

We can always upgrade infrastructure to put some industries underground to create more greenspace and contain any hazards.


----------



## charwin95

sealybobo said:


> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is where your brother Adolf come handy.
> 
> 
> 
> "My brother Adolph?"  How does noting that the world is over populated make you a Nazi?
> 
> You are a special kind of douchebag.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Truth hurts?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But it's not the truth.
> 
> 1. So, are you saying that you want the status quo to continue?  You want poor uneducated people to keep having 4 or 5 kids?  So what do you want to do about it?  If you are like me and bripat9643, all we want to do is cut them off foodstamps, welfare, school lunches and Obamacare.  In other words all the things that make it possible for a poor person to have 4 or 5 kids.  We should be discouraging not encouraging them to have more kids.
> 
> 2. The only thing Hitlerish in my plan is that I would tell a woman who wants foodstamps for her 2nd mistake that she has to get fixed or she will not get any additional funds for that second mistake.  If she gets fixed she can have the 2nd child and get the foodstamps and Obamacare.
> 
> And if she chooses not to get fixed that's ok with us because we aren't paying for the 2nd mistake.  Have as many kids as you want as long as you aren't asking for financial help raising them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1. Explain to me. What is your proposal to solve this problem? Except rounding these poor people and force them to do what you want.
> If this is so easy. Don’t you think we could have fixed this a long time ago? Even Bri himself could have fixed this.
> 
> You want to cut off food stamps and welfare because they have 4 or 5 kids? Really? Where do you think they will end up? We already have homeless crisis. You want to add more to the problem? Or you are part of the problem?
> 
> So Please explain to me how are you going to fix this very simple problem.
> 
> 2. There’s no 2nd mistakes with Hitler. They just eliminate the minorities. With inhumane cruelties like some of the people i know here.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Simple solution.  If you have one kid you can't afford, come get your food stamps.  If you have a second mistake and want double the food stamps ok, but first you have to fix yourself so we know you won't have a 3rd mistake.  If you don't fix yourself then you will continue to only get food stamps for 1 kid.
> 
> We already see Republican policies where they cut down on how much you get in food stamps is working to lower the number of "mistakes" poor women have.  If they aren't going to get more money for their 2nd and 3rd mistake, guess what they do?  They don't have the 2nd and 3rd mistake.
> 
> I like the idea of just giving them staples.  Bread, peanut butter, eggs, milk, spagetti.  No more giving them a charge card where they can go to the store and buy steaks and lobster.  Fuck that.  Here is some shit so you won't starve but I'll be damned if you are going to buy twinkees with your food stamp money.
> 
> In other words, food stamps and welfare benefits make poor women not worry about making those mistakes.
> 
> You think they'll starve and be homeless if we don't give them food stamps?  They won't.
> 
> I say they won't make the mistakes if they don't have the social safety nets under them.
> 
> The one thing I love that Republicans want to do is make food stamp recipients work 10 hours a week for those benefits.  Most of the women won't do the work and will figure it out on their own, rather than work the 10 hours.  But right now, all they have to do is go in and fill out a form and they get it.  With no plan of how they're going to get off of it.  They have no plan to get off of it.  So, we have an entire generation of people who are taking advantage.
Click to expand...


If you think it’s that simple don’t you think we could have fixed those problems right now?
Since when Americans will even agree to that kind of solutions? It’s like dictatorial. 

Nice try. But come up with something else more realistic.


----------



## sealybobo

charwin95 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> "My brother Adolph?"  How does noting that the world is over populated make you a Nazi?
> 
> You are a special kind of douchebag.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truth hurts?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But it's not the truth.
> 
> 1. So, are you saying that you want the status quo to continue?  You want poor uneducated people to keep having 4 or 5 kids?  So what do you want to do about it?  If you are like me and bripat9643, all we want to do is cut them off foodstamps, welfare, school lunches and Obamacare.  In other words all the things that make it possible for a poor person to have 4 or 5 kids.  We should be discouraging not encouraging them to have more kids.
> 
> 2. The only thing Hitlerish in my plan is that I would tell a woman who wants foodstamps for her 2nd mistake that she has to get fixed or she will not get any additional funds for that second mistake.  If she gets fixed she can have the 2nd child and get the foodstamps and Obamacare.
> 
> And if she chooses not to get fixed that's ok with us because we aren't paying for the 2nd mistake.  Have as many kids as you want as long as you aren't asking for financial help raising them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1. Explain to me. What is your proposal to solve this problem? Except rounding these poor people and force them to do what you want.
> If this is so easy. Don’t you think we could have fixed this a long time ago? Even Bri himself could have fixed this.
> 
> You want to cut off food stamps and welfare because they have 4 or 5 kids? Really? Where do you think they will end up? We already have homeless crisis. You want to add more to the problem? Or you are part of the problem?
> 
> So Please explain to me how are you going to fix this very simple problem.
> 
> 2. There’s no 2nd mistakes with Hitler. They just eliminate the minorities. With inhumane cruelties like some of the people i know here.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Simple solution.  If you have one kid you can't afford, come get your food stamps.  If you have a second mistake and want double the food stamps ok, but first you have to fix yourself so we know you won't have a 3rd mistake.  If you don't fix yourself then you will continue to only get food stamps for 1 kid.
> 
> We already see Republican policies where they cut down on how much you get in food stamps is working to lower the number of "mistakes" poor women have.  If they aren't going to get more money for their 2nd and 3rd mistake, guess what they do?  They don't have the 2nd and 3rd mistake.
> 
> I like the idea of just giving them staples.  Bread, peanut butter, eggs, milk, spagetti.  No more giving them a charge card where they can go to the store and buy steaks and lobster.  Fuck that.  Here is some shit so you won't starve but I'll be damned if you are going to buy twinkees with your food stamp money.
> 
> In other words, food stamps and welfare benefits make poor women not worry about making those mistakes.
> 
> You think they'll starve and be homeless if we don't give them food stamps?  They won't.
> 
> I say they won't make the mistakes if they don't have the social safety nets under them.
> 
> The one thing I love that Republicans want to do is make food stamp recipients work 10 hours a week for those benefits.  Most of the women won't do the work and will figure it out on their own, rather than work the 10 hours.  But right now, all they have to do is go in and fill out a form and they get it.  With no plan of how they're going to get off of it.  They have no plan to get off of it.  So, we have an entire generation of people who are taking advantage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you think it’s that simple don’t you think we could have fixed those problems right now?
> Since when Americans will even agree to that kind of solutions? It’s like dictatorial.
> 
> Nice try. But come up with something else more realistic.
Click to expand...


No because us liberals won't let conservatives implement the tough love most slackers need.

We worry about the 1 or 2 kids that might starve if we cut them all off foodstamps.

Or we say, "how is mom going to find a job if you are making her work for her foodstamps.

You see, us liberals are good at worrying about the "What ifs" but the fact is, most of these women and their kids aren't going to starve if we cut them off foodstamps.  So they don't "need" it but if you are just going to easily and freely give it away, of course they're going to take it.  

And right now there is no hoops you have to jump through to get the help.  Just go fill out the forms and in a month you'll get this credit card and every month it will have $200 so you can go to the grocery store a buy whatever you want.  FUCK THAT.  They need to make the food you can buy on foodstamps the most bland boring tasteless shit.  So the kids won't starve but they also won't be eating twinkees or lobster anymore.  Just oatmeal, bread, cereal, spagetti, milk, etc.  Very limited menu for the poor.  

I know women who got prego in their 20's and their parents have money.  Their parents said, "go get your government assistance".


----------



## Invisibleflash

Sure OP, there is a carrying capacity.


----------



## danielpalos

The homeless should have an actual right to work in Right to Work States.


----------



## bripat9643

sealybobo said:


> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Truth hurts?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But it's not the truth.
> 
> 1. So, are you saying that you want the status quo to continue?  You want poor uneducated people to keep having 4 or 5 kids?  So what do you want to do about it?  If you are like me and bripat9643, all we want to do is cut them off foodstamps, welfare, school lunches and Obamacare.  In other words all the things that make it possible for a poor person to have 4 or 5 kids.  We should be discouraging not encouraging them to have more kids.
> 
> 2. The only thing Hitlerish in my plan is that I would tell a woman who wants foodstamps for her 2nd mistake that she has to get fixed or she will not get any additional funds for that second mistake.  If she gets fixed she can have the 2nd child and get the foodstamps and Obamacare.
> 
> And if she chooses not to get fixed that's ok with us because we aren't paying for the 2nd mistake.  Have as many kids as you want as long as you aren't asking for financial help raising them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1. Explain to me. What is your proposal to solve this problem? Except rounding these poor people and force them to do what you want.
> If this is so easy. Don’t you think we could have fixed this a long time ago? Even Bri himself could have fixed this.
> 
> You want to cut off food stamps and welfare because they have 4 or 5 kids? Really? Where do you think they will end up? We already have homeless crisis. You want to add more to the problem? Or you are part of the problem?
> 
> So Please explain to me how are you going to fix this very simple problem.
> 
> 2. There’s no 2nd mistakes with Hitler. They just eliminate the minorities. With inhumane cruelties like some of the people i know here.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Simple solution.  If you have one kid you can't afford, come get your food stamps.  If you have a second mistake and want double the food stamps ok, but first you have to fix yourself so we know you won't have a 3rd mistake.  If you don't fix yourself then you will continue to only get food stamps for 1 kid.
> 
> We already see Republican policies where they cut down on how much you get in food stamps is working to lower the number of "mistakes" poor women have.  If they aren't going to get more money for their 2nd and 3rd mistake, guess what they do?  They don't have the 2nd and 3rd mistake.
> 
> I like the idea of just giving them staples.  Bread, peanut butter, eggs, milk, spagetti.  No more giving them a charge card where they can go to the store and buy steaks and lobster.  Fuck that.  Here is some shit so you won't starve but I'll be damned if you are going to buy twinkees with your food stamp money.
> 
> In other words, food stamps and welfare benefits make poor women not worry about making those mistakes.
> 
> You think they'll starve and be homeless if we don't give them food stamps?  They won't.
> 
> I say they won't make the mistakes if they don't have the social safety nets under them.
> 
> The one thing I love that Republicans want to do is make food stamp recipients work 10 hours a week for those benefits.  Most of the women won't do the work and will figure it out on their own, rather than work the 10 hours.  But right now, all they have to do is go in and fill out a form and they get it.  With no plan of how they're going to get off of it.  They have no plan to get off of it.  So, we have an entire generation of people who are taking advantage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you think it’s that simple don’t you think we could have fixed those problems right now?
> Since when Americans will even agree to that kind of solutions? It’s like dictatorial.
> 
> Nice try. But come up with something else more realistic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No because us liberals won't let conservatives implement the tough love most slackers need.
> 
> We worry about the 1 or 2 kids that might starve if we cut them all off foodstamps.
> 
> Or we say, "how is mom going to find a job if you are making her work for her foodstamps.
> 
> You see, us liberals are good at worrying about the "What ifs" but the fact is, most of these women and their kids aren't going to starve if we cut them off foodstamps.  So they don't "need" it but if you are just going to easily and freely give it away, of course they're going to take it.
> 
> And right now there is no hoops you have to jump through to get the help.  Just go fill out the forms and in a month you'll get this credit card and every month it will have $200 so you can go to the grocery store a buy whatever you want.  FUCK THAT.  They need to make the food you can buy on foodstamps the most bland boring tasteless shit.  So the kids won't starve but they also won't be eating twinkees or lobster anymore.  Just oatmeal, bread, cereal, spagetti, milk, etc.  Very limited menu for the poor.
> 
> I know women who got prego in their 20's and their parents have money.  Their parents said, "go get your government assistance".
Click to expand...

You don't seem to care about the teenage girls who deliberately get themselves pregnant because they know Uncle Sam will pay the bills for them.  By removing the stigma and difficulty of illegitimacy, you promote more of it.  

It used to be in this country that if you couldn't afford to feed, house and cloth your children, then the state took them away from you.  That's a policy that needs to be reinstated.


----------



## Unkotare

bripat9643 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> But it's not the truth.
> 
> 1. So, are you saying that you want the status quo to continue?  You want poor uneducated people to keep having 4 or 5 kids?  So what do you want to do about it?  If you are like me and bripat9643, all we want to do is cut them off foodstamps, welfare, school lunches and Obamacare.  In other words all the things that make it possible for a poor person to have 4 or 5 kids.  We should be discouraging not encouraging them to have more kids.
> 
> 2. The only thing Hitlerish in my plan is that I would tell a woman who wants foodstamps for her 2nd mistake that she has to get fixed or she will not get any additional funds for that second mistake.  If she gets fixed she can have the 2nd child and get the foodstamps and Obamacare.
> 
> And if she chooses not to get fixed that's ok with us because we aren't paying for the 2nd mistake.  Have as many kids as you want as long as you aren't asking for financial help raising them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1. Explain to me. What is your proposal to solve this problem? Except rounding these poor people and force them to do what you want.
> If this is so easy. Don’t you think we could have fixed this a long time ago? Even Bri himself could have fixed this.
> 
> You want to cut off food stamps and welfare because they have 4 or 5 kids? Really? Where do you think they will end up? We already have homeless crisis. You want to add more to the problem? Or you are part of the problem?
> 
> So Please explain to me how are you going to fix this very simple problem.
> 
> 2. There’s no 2nd mistakes with Hitler. They just eliminate the minorities. With inhumane cruelties like some of the people i know here.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Simple solution.  If you have one kid you can't afford, come get your food stamps.  If you have a second mistake and want double the food stamps ok, but first you have to fix yourself so we know you won't have a 3rd mistake.  If you don't fix yourself then you will continue to only get food stamps for 1 kid.
> 
> We already see Republican policies where they cut down on how much you get in food stamps is working to lower the number of "mistakes" poor women have.  If they aren't going to get more money for their 2nd and 3rd mistake, guess what they do?  They don't have the 2nd and 3rd mistake.
> 
> I like the idea of just giving them staples.  Bread, peanut butter, eggs, milk, spagetti.  No more giving them a charge card where they can go to the store and buy steaks and lobster.  Fuck that.  Here is some shit so you won't starve but I'll be damned if you are going to buy twinkees with your food stamp money.
> 
> In other words, food stamps and welfare benefits make poor women not worry about making those mistakes.
> 
> You think they'll starve and be homeless if we don't give them food stamps?  They won't.
> 
> I say they won't make the mistakes if they don't have the social safety nets under them.
> 
> The one thing I love that Republicans want to do is make food stamp recipients work 10 hours a week for those benefits.  Most of the women won't do the work and will figure it out on their own, rather than work the 10 hours.  But right now, all they have to do is go in and fill out a form and they get it.  With no plan of how they're going to get off of it.  They have no plan to get off of it.  So, we have an entire generation of people who are taking advantage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you think it’s that simple don’t you think we could have fixed those problems right now?
> Since when Americans will even agree to that kind of solutions? It’s like dictatorial.
> 
> Nice try. But come up with something else more realistic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No because us liberals won't let conservatives implement the tough love most slackers need.
> 
> We worry about the 1 or 2 kids that might starve if we cut them all off foodstamps.
> 
> Or we say, "how is mom going to find a job if you are making her work for her foodstamps.
> 
> You see, us liberals are good at worrying about the "What ifs" but the fact is, most of these women and their kids aren't going to starve if we cut them off foodstamps.  So they don't "need" it but if you are just going to easily and freely give it away, of course they're going to take it.
> 
> And right now there is no hoops you have to jump through to get the help.  Just go fill out the forms and in a month you'll get this credit card and every month it will have $200 so you can go to the grocery store a buy whatever you want.  FUCK THAT.  They need to make the food you can buy on foodstamps the most bland boring tasteless shit.  So the kids won't starve but they also won't be eating twinkees or lobster anymore.  Just oatmeal, bread, cereal, spagetti, milk, etc.  Very limited menu for the poor.
> 
> I know women who got prego in their 20's and their parents have money.  Their parents said, "go get your government assistance".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You don't seem to care about the teenage girls who deliberately get themselves pregnant because they know Uncle Sam will pay the bills for them.  By removing the stigma and difficulty of illegitimacy, you promote more of it.
> 
> It used to be in this country that if you couldn't afford to feed, house and cloth your children, then the state took them away from you.  That's a policy that needs to be reinstated.
Click to expand...


Why is the U.S. teen birth rate falling?


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 1. Explain to me. What is your proposal to solve this problem? Except rounding these poor people and force them to do what you want.
> If this is so easy. Don’t you think we could have fixed this a long time ago? Even Bri himself could have fixed this.
> 
> You want to cut off food stamps and welfare because they have 4 or 5 kids? Really? Where do you think they will end up? We already have homeless crisis. You want to add more to the problem? Or you are part of the problem?
> 
> So Please explain to me how are you going to fix this very simple problem.
> 
> 2. There’s no 2nd mistakes with Hitler. They just eliminate the minorities. With inhumane cruelties like some of the people i know here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Simple solution.  If you have one kid you can't afford, come get your food stamps.  If you have a second mistake and want double the food stamps ok, but first you have to fix yourself so we know you won't have a 3rd mistake.  If you don't fix yourself then you will continue to only get food stamps for 1 kid.
> 
> We already see Republican policies where they cut down on how much you get in food stamps is working to lower the number of "mistakes" poor women have.  If they aren't going to get more money for their 2nd and 3rd mistake, guess what they do?  They don't have the 2nd and 3rd mistake.
> 
> I like the idea of just giving them staples.  Bread, peanut butter, eggs, milk, spagetti.  No more giving them a charge card where they can go to the store and buy steaks and lobster.  Fuck that.  Here is some shit so you won't starve but I'll be damned if you are going to buy twinkees with your food stamp money.
> 
> In other words, food stamps and welfare benefits make poor women not worry about making those mistakes.
> 
> You think they'll starve and be homeless if we don't give them food stamps?  They won't.
> 
> I say they won't make the mistakes if they don't have the social safety nets under them.
> 
> The one thing I love that Republicans want to do is make food stamp recipients work 10 hours a week for those benefits.  Most of the women won't do the work and will figure it out on their own, rather than work the 10 hours.  But right now, all they have to do is go in and fill out a form and they get it.  With no plan of how they're going to get off of it.  They have no plan to get off of it.  So, we have an entire generation of people who are taking advantage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you think it’s that simple don’t you think we could have fixed those problems right now?
> Since when Americans will even agree to that kind of solutions? It’s like dictatorial.
> 
> Nice try. But come up with something else more realistic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No because us liberals won't let conservatives implement the tough love most slackers need.
> 
> We worry about the 1 or 2 kids that might starve if we cut them all off foodstamps.
> 
> Or we say, "how is mom going to find a job if you are making her work for her foodstamps.
> 
> You see, us liberals are good at worrying about the "What ifs" but the fact is, most of these women and their kids aren't going to starve if we cut them off foodstamps.  So they don't "need" it but if you are just going to easily and freely give it away, of course they're going to take it.
> 
> And right now there is no hoops you have to jump through to get the help.  Just go fill out the forms and in a month you'll get this credit card and every month it will have $200 so you can go to the grocery store a buy whatever you want.  FUCK THAT.  They need to make the food you can buy on foodstamps the most bland boring tasteless shit.  So the kids won't starve but they also won't be eating twinkees or lobster anymore.  Just oatmeal, bread, cereal, spagetti, milk, etc.  Very limited menu for the poor.
> 
> I know women who got prego in their 20's and their parents have money.  Their parents said, "go get your government assistance".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You don't seem to care about the teenage girls who deliberately get themselves pregnant because they know Uncle Sam will pay the bills for them.  By removing the stigma and difficulty of illegitimacy, you promote more of it.
> 
> It used to be in this country that if you couldn't afford to feed, house and cloth your children, then the state took them away from you.  That's a policy that needs to be reinstated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why is the U.S. teen birth rate falling?
Click to expand...


In 2018, the birth rate for Hispanic and black teens ages 15 to 19 was almost double the rate among white teens and more than five times as high as the rate among Asians and Pacific Islanders.

Back in 1960, most teen mothers – an estimated 85% – were married. Today, the majority of teen births (89%) are to unmarried mothers.

The teen birth rate has been on a steep decline since the early 1990s, and that trend accelerated after the onset of the Great Recession in 2007.

One possible factor is the economy:  They tied the declining birth rate to the economic downturn of the recession. But this trend in teen birth rates has continued even as the economy has recovered, and birth rates for teens have fallen faster than they have for all women ages 15 to 44 (58% and 4% declines, respectively, from 2008 to 2018).

What else may be contributing to the decline in teen birth rates? Less sex, use of more effective contraception and more information about pregnancy prevention.

Among those teens who have had sex, the majority (81% of females and 84% of males) used a contraceptive method the first time they had sex. This figure has not changed significantly for males, but it has increased for females since 2002, when 74.5% used contraception.

Moreover, the share of teens using some form of highly effective contraceptive methods is increasing. The share of sexually active female teens who have used emergency contraception (e.g., the morning-after pill) rose from 8% in 2002 to 23% in 2011-15. And A cdc analysis of the roughly 600,000 low-income teens who used the Title X National Family Planning Program for contraception found that the use of long-acting reversible contraceptives such as IUDs and implants – which are considered more effective than other means of contraception – rose from 0.4% in 2005 to 7.1% by 2013.

Pregnancy prevention programs and messages directed toward teens may also have played a role. A 2014 Brookings report found that reality TV shows that follow the struggles of teen mothers may have contributed to up to a third of the decline in teen births from June 2009, when they began airing, through the end of 2010.

It’s worth noting that birth rate figures only include live births. In 2013, the estimated teen pregnancy rate – which reflects not only live births, but also miscarriages, stillbirths and abortions – was 43.4 pregnancies per 1,000 females ages 15 to 19. This marks a steep decline, especially since 1990, when the pregnancy rate among teens peaked at 117.6.

The abortion rate among 15- to 19-year-old girls and women has also been declining, from 44.0 per 1,000 in 1988 to 10.6 in 2013. Of the roughly 450,000 pregnancies among teens in 2013, about 61% are estimated to have ended in live births, 24% in abortions and 15% in miscarriages or stillbirths.


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> ......
> 
> In 2018, the birth rate for Hispanic and black teens ages 15 to 19 was almost double the rate among white teens and more than five times as high as the rate among Asians and Pacific Islanders......




And falling faster than any other demographic.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 1. Explain to me. What is your proposal to solve this problem? Except rounding these poor people and force them to do what you want.
> If this is so easy. Don’t you think we could have fixed this a long time ago? Even Bri himself could have fixed this.
> 
> You want to cut off food stamps and welfare because they have 4 or 5 kids? Really? Where do you think they will end up? We already have homeless crisis. You want to add more to the problem? Or you are part of the problem?
> 
> So Please explain to me how are you going to fix this very simple problem.
> 
> 2. There’s no 2nd mistakes with Hitler. They just eliminate the minorities. With inhumane cruelties like some of the people i know here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Simple solution.  If you have one kid you can't afford, come get your food stamps.  If you have a second mistake and want double the food stamps ok, but first you have to fix yourself so we know you won't have a 3rd mistake.  If you don't fix yourself then you will continue to only get food stamps for 1 kid.
> 
> We already see Republican policies where they cut down on how much you get in food stamps is working to lower the number of "mistakes" poor women have.  If they aren't going to get more money for their 2nd and 3rd mistake, guess what they do?  They don't have the 2nd and 3rd mistake.
> 
> I like the idea of just giving them staples.  Bread, peanut butter, eggs, milk, spagetti.  No more giving them a charge card where they can go to the store and buy steaks and lobster.  Fuck that.  Here is some shit so you won't starve but I'll be damned if you are going to buy twinkees with your food stamp money.
> 
> In other words, food stamps and welfare benefits make poor women not worry about making those mistakes.
> 
> You think they'll starve and be homeless if we don't give them food stamps?  They won't.
> 
> I say they won't make the mistakes if they don't have the social safety nets under them.
> 
> The one thing I love that Republicans want to do is make food stamp recipients work 10 hours a week for those benefits.  Most of the women won't do the work and will figure it out on their own, rather than work the 10 hours.  But right now, all they have to do is go in and fill out a form and they get it.  With no plan of how they're going to get off of it.  They have no plan to get off of it.  So, we have an entire generation of people who are taking advantage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you think it’s that simple don’t you think we could have fixed those problems right now?
> Since when Americans will even agree to that kind of solutions? It’s like dictatorial.
> 
> Nice try. But come up with something else more realistic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No because us liberals won't let conservatives implement the tough love most slackers need.
> 
> We worry about the 1 or 2 kids that might starve if we cut them all off foodstamps.
> 
> Or we say, "how is mom going to find a job if you are making her work for her foodstamps.
> 
> You see, us liberals are good at worrying about the "What ifs" but the fact is, most of these women and their kids aren't going to starve if we cut them off foodstamps.  So they don't "need" it but if you are just going to easily and freely give it away, of course they're going to take it.
> 
> And right now there is no hoops you have to jump through to get the help.  Just go fill out the forms and in a month you'll get this credit card and every month it will have $200 so you can go to the grocery store a buy whatever you want.  FUCK THAT.  They need to make the food you can buy on foodstamps the most bland boring tasteless shit.  So the kids won't starve but they also won't be eating twinkees or lobster anymore.  Just oatmeal, bread, cereal, spagetti, milk, etc.  Very limited menu for the poor.
> 
> I know women who got prego in their 20's and their parents have money.  Their parents said, "go get your government assistance".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You don't seem to care about the teenage girls who deliberately get themselves pregnant because they know Uncle Sam will pay the bills for them.  By removing the stigma and difficulty of illegitimacy, you promote more of it.
> 
> It used to be in this country that if you couldn't afford to feed, house and cloth your children, then the state took them away from you.  That's a policy that needs to be reinstated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why is the U.S. teen birth rate falling?
Click to expand...


We're overpopulated you dip shits!!!  

*World Must Protect Land To Avoid Climate Disaster, New UN Report Warns*
Averting catastrophic warming requires rapid, global changes to land use and food production, the assessment says.

Unsustainable land use and greenhouse gas emissions are delivering a one-two punch to natural ecosystems that are key to the fight against global climate change. And without sweeping emissions cuts and transformations to food production and land management, the world stands no chance of staving off catastrophic planetary warming. 

That’s according to a dire new United Nations assessment of the complex relationship between terrestrial landscapes and climate change. The report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC, the leading U.N. body of researchers studying human-caused global warming, warns that the unfolding crisis poses a serious threat global food security.


An estimated 500 million people live in areas where once productive land has dried out and turned to desert, including North Africa, East Asia and the Middle East.

“In general, climate change will cause declined yields, increased prices, reduced nutrient levels and disruptions in supply chains for food,” report co-author Panmao Zhai said at a Thursday press conference in Geneva, Switzerland.

limate change has taken a toll on natural environments by fueling drought, extreme weather, wildfires, coastal erosion and the thawing of Arctic permafrost. And those risks are forecast to become “increasingly severe with increasing temperatures,” according to the findings. At the same time, humans have altered as much as 76% of the planet’s ice-free land. Agriculture, deforestation, urban development and other types of land use account for approximately 23% of total human greenhouse gas emissions and have left swaths of the global landscape degraded.

“If we continue to degrade ecosystems, if we continue to convert natural ecosystems, to deforest, to destroy our soils, we’re going to lose this natural subsidy that’s protecting us, in part, from ourselves and from the damage we’re creating as we pump these greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.” 

Every 30 seconds in the U.S., a natural area the size of a football field is lost to development, according to a separate study released this week and commissioned by the left-leaning Center for American Progress.

The 1,300-page IPCC report ― co-authored by more than 100 experts from 53 countries


In October, the IPCC concluded that world governments must cut global emissions roughly in half by 2030 to keep the global mean temperature from hitting the 1.5 degree mark, at which point climate-related damages will cost an estimated $54 trillion. The planet has already warmed 1.1 degrees Celsius (just shy of 2 degrees Fahrenheit).

Still, President Donald Trump continues to downplay the threat and defend his 2017 decision to withdraw the U.S from the Paris Agreement. His administration has worked to gut major Obama-era policies that sought to rein in planet-warming emissions, revoked land protections and forged ahead with its fossil fuel-centric “energy dominance” agenda.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> ......
> 
> In 2018, the birth rate for Hispanic and black teens ages 15 to 19 was almost double the rate among white teens and more than five times as high as the rate among Asians and Pacific Islanders......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And falling faster than any other demographic.
Click to expand...


The panel of scientists looked at the climate change effects of agriculture, deforestation and other land use, such as harvesting peat and managing grasslands and wetlands. Together, those activities generate about a third of human greenhouse gas emissions, including more than 40% of methane.

That's important because methane is particularly good at trapping heat in the atmosphere. And the problem is getting more severe.

"Emissions from agricultural production are projected to increase," the authors warn. "Delaying action" on reducing greenhouse gas emissions, they continue, "could result in some irreversible impacts on some ecosystems."

This is the latest in a series of reports from the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The new report adds weight and detail to a warning put out by the same panel of scientists last fall, in which they sounded the alarm about the inadequacy of the pledges countries have made so far to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Too many people!


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> ....
> 
> We're overpopulated you dip shits!!! .....




Not even close, dumbass. We have far more than enough room and resources for many, many more people than our current population, which will begin to contract in the next 40-50 years anyway, as your dumb ass has been taught several times now. Just because someone frightened you with a false crisis sometime back in the late 70s and you never got over it - because you're stupid as shit - doesn't make it so.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....
> 
> We're overpopulated you dip shits!!! .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not even close, dumbass. We have far more than enough room and resources for many, many more people than our current population, which will begin to contract in the next 40-50 years anyway, as your dumb ass has been taught several times now. Just because someone frightened you with a false crisis sometime back in the late 70s and you never got over it - because you're stupid as shit - doesn't make it so.
Click to expand...


This is what scares me about conservative Americans.  They believe the corporate media/polluters/republicans/Lobbyists, over the 100 experts from 53 countries.

You believe you are right and the scientists are wrong.  This is scary shit.  This is why Krypton blew up.  They didn't listen to the scientists.


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> ....
> 
> You believe you are right and the scientists are wrong.  .....




Scientists know we are not anywhere near the carrying capacity of this planet. Scientists know we have the means to feed more than the number of people currently alive. Scientists know a global population contraction is just around the corner. 

Scientists have yet to figure out what made you so fucking stupid.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....
> 
> You believe you are right and the scientists are wrong.  .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Scientists know we are not anywhere near the carrying capacity of this planet. Scientists know we have the means to feed more than the number of people currently alive. Scientists know a global population contraction is just around the corner.
> 
> Scientists have yet to figure out what made you so fucking stupid.
Click to expand...


This article supports your claims

The confusion over the rules of romance in the digital age shared by Koch and so many others might explain why millions of Americans are having less sex than previous generations did at the same age. Add in a focus on building a career before having a family, and it all may be contributing to a national birthrate that keeps falling.

All this raises alarms for the economy. Economies need new workers to replace older workers as they retire. When a nation's birthrate drops too low, certain sectors can experience employee shortages, and ultimately, the economy might shrink.

Like an increasing number of young people in America, Koch is single.

"When I was in high school, I really liked that show _How I Met Your Mother_," he says. Shows like that, he says, "created this sort of image of what it's like to be in your 20s. You know, you're hanging out in bars, and you're just sort of meeting people in these strange ways."

Many young men and women across the country have been having less sex than those in previous generations. Almost a quarter of adults under 30 didn't have sex in the last year — a record high, according to the 2018 General Social Survey from NORC at the University of Chicago.

There are reasons besides just online dating, but experts and journalists have declared that America is in the middle of a "sex drought" or "sex recession."

Part of the explanation is the challenges of online dating. Part of it is that people are spending more time alone on the Internet. Part of it is about young men and women waiting longer to find life partners or to cohabitate as they prioritize getting their careers and finances in order.

This is why I'm a Republican now.  The GOP's policies where the poor and middle class are struggling more than ever has made people put their penis' back in their pants.  Kids today no longer want to have kids and live in poverty.  And people in poverty aren't getting all the free shit they used to get.

The birthrate dropped 2% between 2017 and 2018 — and the number of births slid to a 32-year low.

WONDERFUL

Another reason America's birthrate has dipped so low is that many women are dealing with career considerations first.

Rashmi Venkatesh, a married 30-year-old with a Ph.D., works in science research. She says her job is in many ways her No. 1 priority right now.

She had pictured "a fully formed professional life and a fully formed family life." But, she says, the family life "has gone by the wayside."

Venkatesh says she's moving up the career ladder really quickly. So when she thinks of having a child, she worries it might hurt her advancement. She says she couldn't even imagine taking 10 or 12 weeks off for a new baby.

"You would miss something," she says. "Or the time that I spend in the evening reading up on things would now be focused on something else — a child, which I guess is very important! It sounds awful when I say that."

Like many working women, Venkatesh worries about losing income if she leaves work to have a child, and she worries about the cost of child care.

When Venkatesh was younger, she says, she imagined having three children. Now she thinks one, down the road, is more realistic.

"It's a bummer," she says. "It's a bummer for sure."

The longer women like Venkatesh wait to have a child, the fewer children they're likely to have.

So, though the reasons are many and vary for men and women, America is in the midst of a sex (and baby) drought that it just can't seem to get out of.

I LOVE IT!!!


----------



## sealybobo

But the United States is not alone. Developed nations across the world have been experiencing the same thing. Western Europe is dealing with falling birthrates, and Japan's birthrate has dipped so low its population has started to fall.

Jennifer Glass, a demographer at the University of Texas at Austin, notes that some countries have tried to boost their birthrates by urging citizens to get busy.

So if the USA wants more kids they better start paying blue collar/the masses a hell of a lot better than they do now.  

Look at you making around $70K and even you are struggling to keep your head above water.  Luckily you have 3 jobs.  LOL


----------



## Slyhunter

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....
> 
> We're overpopulated you dip shits!!! .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not even close, dumbass. We have far more than enough room and resources for many, many more people than our current population, which will begin to contract in the next 40-50 years anyway, as your dumb ass has been taught several times now. Just because someone frightened you with a false crisis sometime back in the late 70s and you never got over it - because you're stupid as shit - doesn't make it so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is what scares me about conservative Americans.  They believe the corporate media/polluters/republicans/Lobbyists, over the 100 experts from 53 countries.
> 
> You believe you are right and the scientists are wrong.  This is scary shit.  This is why Krypton blew up.  They didn't listen to the scientists.
Click to expand...

You believe fairy tale about Krypton and equated it to the fairy tale you believed in, climate change.


----------



## BasicHumanUnit

Unkotare said:


> BasicHumanUnit said:
> 
> 
> 
> .....  Guaranteed.  Billions will go at once.  it's part of nature.
> 
> ......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No it's not.
Click to expand...


Another Suh Wiiiiiing And a MISS !

For someone who claims to be a educator....you sure are uneducated.

HISTORY 101 (just two examples for you)
Bubonic Plague
1918 H1N1 pandemic

Man, not much you can teach anyone but how to be stupid.


----------



## toobfreak

BasicHumanUnit said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BasicHumanUnit said:
> 
> 
> 
> .....  Guaranteed.  Billions will go at once.  it's part of nature.
> ......
> 
> 
> 
> No it's not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Another Suh Wiiiiiing And a MISS !
> For someone who claims to be a educator....you sure are uneducated.
Click to expand...


Oh yeah, the "educator" claim (much like Admiral Tory who can't read or teach shit).  Speaking of shit, an educator who collects and plays with it.  Nah, I believe him.  Having read and debated his posts many times in the past it goes a long way of explaining why so many kids growing up now are so fucked in the head.


----------



## PK1

Pedro de San Patricio said:


> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?


YES, i believe there are too many humans on Earth today, especially in urban areas.
We need to reverse the trend, IMO.


----------



## fncceo

PK1 said:


> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> YES, i believe there are too many humans on Earth today, especially in urban areas.
> We need to reverse the trend, IMO.
Click to expand...


You first...


----------



## PK1

fncceo said:


> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> YES, i believe there are too many humans on Earth today, especially in urban areas.
> We need to reverse the trend, IMO.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You first...
Click to expand...

Sorry, i’m already living & using up Earth’s geography & resourses.
Birth control will help, like NOT having more than 3 kids to replace parents.


----------



## fncceo

PK1 said:


> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> YES, i believe there are too many humans on Earth today, especially in urban areas.
> We need to reverse the trend, IMO.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You first...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry, i’m already living & using up Earth’s geography & resourses.
> Birth control will help, like NOT having more than 3 kids to replace parents.
Click to expand...


I fully support your decision not to reproduce for the good of the species.

Let other people make that decision for themselves.


----------



## Death Angel

PK1 said:


> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> YES, i believe there are too many humans on Earth today, especially in urban areas.
> We need to reverse the trend, IMO.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You first...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry, i’m already living & using up Earth’s geography & resourses.
> Birth control will help, like NOT having more than 3 kids to replace parents.
Click to expand...

Margaret Sanger was right. Every responsible branch of the human race has stopped increasing while the "human weeds" are using child bearing as a political weapon, and we keep importing these people into the west as if they are contributing members of our culture.

They plan to breed us out of existence, and they will unless the natural forces cull the herd or unless we adopt the policies of one branch of the left and cull the herd ourselves.


----------



## PK1

fncceo said:


> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pedro de San Patricio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Simple question before I head out to work. Do you believe in overpopulation, do you think it's a current problem or a very near future one, and what label would you use to identify yourself overall?
> 
> 
> 
> YES, i believe there are too many humans on Earth today, especially in urban areas.
> We need to reverse the trend, IMO.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You first...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry, i’m already living & using up Earth’s geography & resourses.
> Birth control will help, like NOT having more than 3 kids to replace parents.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I fully support your decision not to reproduce for the good of the species.
> 
> Let other people make that decision for themselves.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but we’re ALL on this planet together.
However, feel free to overpopulate a far away island.


----------



## fncceo

PK1 said:


> Sorry, but we’re ALL on this planet together.



And my decisions are just as valid as yours.


----------



## Slyhunter

The right to reproduce should be taken out of the hands of the poor and given only to those who can afford to pay their own way.


----------



## PK1

fncceo said:


> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, but we’re ALL on this planet together.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And my decisions are just as valid as yours.
Click to expand...

I agree ... until we start stepping on each other’s toes.
We need to compromise with others in common social environments.


----------



## fncceo

Slyhunter said:


> The right to reproduce should be taken out of the hands of the poor and given only to those who can afford to pay their own way.



The right to reproduce is as inalienable a right as can exist.  However, there is nothing that says the care of children must be subsidized by society.


----------



## fncceo

PK1 said:


> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, but we’re ALL on this planet together.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And my decisions are just as valid as yours.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I agree ... until we start stepping on each other’s toes.
> We need to compromise with others in common social environments.
Click to expand...


I'll keep my kids on my property, you keep your kids on yours.


----------



## PK1

Slyhunter said:


> The right to reproduce should be taken out of the hands of the poor and given only to those who can afford to pay their own way.


The poor should have rights too, but maybe not have kids they cannot support.
Perhaps we should enforce a 3-child limit, and the rich can PAY the poor to have their allotment of offspring (if the rich want more than 3)?


----------



## Kondor3

Perhaps "Captain Trips" ( coronavirus? ) will solve the problem...


----------



## 2aguy

PK1 said:


> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> The right to reproduce should be taken out of the hands of the poor and given only to those who can afford to pay their own way.
> 
> 
> 
> The poor should have rights too, but maybe not have kids they cannot support.
> Perhaps we should enforce a 3-child limit, and the rich can PAY the poor to have their allotment of offspring (if the rich want more than 3)?
Click to expand...



Yes......the classic socialist move......telling people how many children they will have...the socialists in Germany wanted soldiers and breeders, so they pushed more children.....the socialists in China wanted fewer children, so they murdered children with their one child policy......


We don't have an over population problem.......in fact, Europe, Japan, are facing a population decline....

As countries become wealthy, their is less incentive to have more children....freedom takes care the population...socialist eugenics lead to mass graves.


----------



## Unkotare

BasicHumanUnit said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BasicHumanUnit said:
> 
> 
> 
> .....  Guaranteed.  Billions will go at once.  it's part of nature.
> 
> ......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No it's not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Another Suh Wiiiiiing And a MISS !
> 
> For someone who claims to be a educator....you sure are uneducated.
> 
> HISTORY 101 (just two examples for you)
> Bubonic Plague
> 1918 H1N1 pandemic
> 
> Man, not much you can teach anyone but how to be stupid.
Click to expand...


In neither case did “billions go at once,” and neither case was the result of any imaginary ‘overpopulation’ myth.

You mentioned something about a swing and a miss?


----------



## Lysistrata

The earth is already over-populated, a problem that was foreseen as early as the 1960s or before. Funny, it has been the "conservatives" all along who didn't want anyone to talk about or to put any policies in place to avert it.

It's hilarious to read the comments by the "conservatives" who now want to curb population growth, but who are anti-birth control and anti-choice, and justify discrimination against LGBTs because they can't reproduce naturally on other threads.


----------



## 2aguy

Lysistrata said:


> The earth is already over-populated, a problem that was foreseen as early as the 1960s or before. Funny, it has been the "conservatives" all along who didn't want anyone to talk about or to put any policies in place to avert it.
> 
> It's hilarious to read the comments by the "conservatives" who now want to curb population growth, but who are anti-birth control and anti-choice, and justify discrimination against LGBTs because they can't reproduce naturally on other threads.




The earth isn't even close to being overpopulated.........and your solution for this problem that doesn't exist.....kill brown people in 3rd world countries.......that is all you socialists ever have....


----------



## there4eyeM

It seems very few have studied or understood basic biology.
There will definitely be a decline of human population. It will either be done with intelligence and gently or stupidly and horrifyingly.


----------



## Unkotare

2aguy said:


> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> 
> The earth is already over-populated, a problem that was foreseen as early as the 1960s or before. Funny, it has been the "conservatives" all along who didn't want anyone to talk about or to put any policies in place to avert it.
> 
> It's hilarious to read the comments by the "conservatives" who now want to curb population growth, but who are anti-birth control and anti-choice, and justify discrimination against LGBTs because they can't reproduce naturally on other threads.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The earth isn't even close to being overpopulated.........and your solution for this problem that doesn't exist.....kill brown people in 3rd world countries.......that is all you socialists ever have....
Click to expand...

100% correct.


----------



## 2aguy

Unkotare said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> 
> The earth is already over-populated, a problem that was foreseen as early as the 1960s or before. Funny, it has been the "conservatives" all along who didn't want anyone to talk about or to put any policies in place to avert it.
> 
> It's hilarious to read the comments by the "conservatives" who now want to curb population growth, but who are anti-birth control and anti-choice, and justify discrimination against LGBTs because they can't reproduce naturally on other threads.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The earth isn't even close to being overpopulated.........and your solution for this problem that doesn't exist.....kill brown people in 3rd world countries.......that is all you socialists ever have....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 100% correct.
Click to expand...



It always amazes me that no one on the left looks at their overpopulation solutions......and thinks....Hey....isn't that a little bit....teeny tiny bit.....racist?


----------



## Unkotare

there4eyeM said:


> It seems very few have studied or understood basic biology.
> There will definitely be a decline of human population. It will either be done with intelligence and gently or stupidly and horrifyingly.


None of the above. It will happen as a matter of course. The wheels are already turning. No need for left’s macabre obsession with killing the unborn, but that won’t deter them.


----------



## 2aguy

Unkotare said:


> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> It seems very few have studied or understood basic biology.
> There will definitely be a decline of human population. It will either be done with intelligence and gently or stupidly and horrifyingly.
> 
> 
> 
> None of the above. It will happen as a matter of course. The wheels are already turning. No need for left’s macabre obsession with killing the unborn, but that won’t deter them.
Click to expand...



It is always fun to point out......for the individuals that believe the world is overpopulated...there is one life that they have complete control over...if they are concerned about too many people.....and yet, that life is not going to be the one sacrificed on the altar of the overpopulation myth...


----------



## there4eyeM

Unkotare said:


> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> It seems very few have studied or understood basic biology.
> There will definitely be a decline of human population. It will either be done with intelligence and gently or stupidly and horrifyingly.
> 
> 
> 
> None of the above. It will happen as a matter of course. The wheels are already turning. No need for left’s macabre obsession with killing the unborn, but that won’t deter them.
Click to expand...

"None of the above", yet an admission of "There will definitely be a decline of human population."
Notice, the quoted post merely stated a biological inevitability and encouraged no particular action.


----------



## Lysistrata

2aguy said:


> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> 
> The earth is already over-populated, a problem that was foreseen as early as the 1960s or before. Funny, it has been the "conservatives" all along who didn't want anyone to talk about or to put any policies in place to avert it.
> 
> It's hilarious to read the comments by the "conservatives" who now want to curb population growth, but who are anti-birth control and anti-choice, and justify discrimination against LGBTs because they can't reproduce naturally on other threads.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The earth isn't even close to being overpopulated.........and your solution for this problem that doesn't exist.....kill brown people in 3rd world countries.......that is all you socialists ever have....
Click to expand...


This is a ridiculous response. We've been hearing about the growing overpopulation problem for decades. Your assertion that anyone, including myself, wants to "kill brown people in 3rd world countries" or has ever contemplated aggression toward such people is totally absurd. I've never heard of anyone even proposing such a thing.

Your gibberish about "socialists" is a further indication of your distance from reality. Stop being a moron.


----------



## Unkotare

there4eyeM said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> It seems very few have studied or understood basic biology.
> There will definitely be a decline of human population. It will either be done with intelligence and gently or stupidly and horrifyingly.
> 
> 
> 
> None of the above. It will happen as a matter of course. The wheels are already turning. No need for left’s macabre obsession with killing the unborn, but that won’t deter them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "None of the above", yet an admission of "There will definitely be a decline of human population."
> Notice, the quoted post merely stated a biological inevitability and encouraged no particular action.
Click to expand...

None of the above. Neither “gently” nor “horrifyingly.”


----------



## 2aguy

Lysistrata said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> 
> The earth is already over-populated, a problem that was foreseen as early as the 1960s or before. Funny, it has been the "conservatives" all along who didn't want anyone to talk about or to put any policies in place to avert it.
> 
> It's hilarious to read the comments by the "conservatives" who now want to curb population growth, but who are anti-birth control and anti-choice, and justify discrimination against LGBTs because they can't reproduce naturally on other threads.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The earth isn't even close to being overpopulated.........and your solution for this problem that doesn't exist.....kill brown people in 3rd world countries.......that is all you socialists ever have....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is a ridiculous response. We've been hearing about the growing overpopulation problem for decades. Your assertion that anyone, including myself, wants to "kill brown people in 3rd world countries" or has ever contemplated aggression toward such people is totally absurd. I've never heard of anyone even proposing such a thing.
> 
> Your gibberish about "socialists" is a further indication of your distance from reality. Stop being a moron.
Click to expand...



Yes......you morons have been Chicken Little for decades....as the population of Japan and Europe declines.....and of course you want to kill 3rd world people.....you want abortion in those countries...to keep their populations down.......


----------



## Unkotare

Lysistrata said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> 
> The earth is already over-populated, a problem that was foreseen as early as the 1960s or before. Funny, it has been the "conservatives" all along who didn't want anyone to talk about or to put any policies in place to avert it.
> 
> It's hilarious to read the comments by the "conservatives" who now want to curb population growth, but who are anti-birth control and anti-choice, and justify discrimination against LGBTs because they can't reproduce naturally on other threads.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The earth isn't even close to being overpopulated.........and your solution for this problem that doesn't exist.....kill brown people in 3rd world countries.......that is all you socialists ever have....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is a ridiculous response. We've been hearing about the growing overpopulation problem for decades. ....
Click to expand...

Just like we heard about the coming of the next ice age for decades. We heard all the airplanes would fall from the skies on 1/1/2000. We heard there would never be another war after WW1. We heard that sickness is caused by miasma. We heard that the earth is the center of the solar system.


----------



## there4eyeM

Any population that experiences the exponential growth such as been displayed by our race always undergoes a rapid die-off. Biology is non-ideological and doesn't lie. We can learn and prepare in order to avoid the worst or slam into the wall. 
Some could call that a choice.


----------



## Unkotare

there4eyeM said:


> Any population that experiences the exponential growth such as been displayed by our race always undergoes a rapid die-off. .


Our race has been growing exponentially since 9500 BC. Not such a rapid die-off.


----------



## there4eyeM

Unkotare said:


> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> Any population that experiences the exponential growth such as been displayed by our race always undergoes a rapid die-off. .
> 
> 
> 
> Our race has been growing exponentially since 9500 BC. Not such a rapid die-off.
Click to expand...

Mid-14th century brought quite a change.


----------



## 2aguy

there4eyeM said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> Any population that experiences the exponential growth such as been displayed by our race always undergoes a rapid die-off. .
> 
> 
> 
> Our race has been growing exponentially since 9500 BC. Not such a rapid die-off.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Mid-14th century brought quite a change.
Click to expand...



Wow.......yes.....leeches are not the best medicine.......failing to see that the population has grown...and yet we still aren't overpopulated, not even close.


----------



## Lysistrata

2aguy said:


> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> 
> The earth is already over-populated, a problem that was foreseen as early as the 1960s or before. Funny, it has been the "conservatives" all along who didn't want anyone to talk about or to put any policies in place to avert it.
> 
> It's hilarious to read the comments by the "conservatives" who now want to curb population growth, but who are anti-birth control and anti-choice, and justify discrimination against LGBTs because they can't reproduce naturally on other threads.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The earth isn't even close to being overpopulated.........and your solution for this problem that doesn't exist.....kill brown people in 3rd world countries.......that is all you socialists ever have....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is a ridiculous response. We've been hearing about the growing overpopulation problem for decades. Your assertion that anyone, including myself, wants to "kill brown people in 3rd world countries" or has ever contemplated aggression toward such people is totally absurd. I've never heard of anyone even proposing such a thing.
> 
> Your gibberish about "socialists" is a further indication of your distance from reality. Stop being a moron.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yes......you morons have been Chicken Little for decades....as the population of Japan and Europe declines.....and of course you want to kill 3rd world people.....you want abortion in those countries...to keep their populations down.......
Click to expand...


Many factors are at play. In Japan, they don't want foreigners but have negative cultural customs that result in people becoming wary of entering into marriage. In Europe, migration is a large factor. 

Your assertion that anyone wants to kill 3rd world people is total trash. Your assertion that I "want abortion in those countries" is true, but _only as one of many options to be available to the people in those countries._

You always avoid the fact that people are perfectly capable of making their own personal decisions without being forced one way or the other. People know what conditions they live under. Most people would rather avoid an unwanted pregnancy rather than undergo an abortion. Would you chose surgery over a pill? Give people access to choices and let them do as they are pleased to.

I once had a neighbor from Honduras, who said that her large family slept eight in a room, curtained off with blankets. She told be that she was grateful to be here and pleased that she was able to stop at two kids, which was all she wanted.


----------



## there4eyeM

The population has doubled two times since the end of WWII. Certainly, at current levels of resource use, it cannot double again.
There is no reason to debate too fervently, for we will soon see. It is just too bad that we don't do things better.


----------



## 2aguy

there4eyeM said:


> The population has doubled two times since the end of WWII. Certainly, at current levels of resource use, it cannot double again.
> There is no reason to debate too fervently, for we will soon see. It is just too bad that we don't do things better.




Yes......according to "The Population Bomb," we should be fighting over food in the streets of New York right now.......so....we'll see you in about 100 years.....when we still won't be over populated...


----------



## PK1

2aguy said:


> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> The population has doubled two times since the end of WWII. Certainly, at current levels of resource use, it cannot double again.
> There is no reason to debate too fervently, for we will soon see. It is just too bad that we don't do things better.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes......according to "The Population Bomb," we should be fighting over food in the streets of New York right now.......so....we'll see you in about 100 years.....when we still won't be over populated...
Click to expand...

The “Population Bomb” was an excellent warning. Yes, we (Earth) have been able to absorb the increasing human population, but there is an eventual “diminishing return” on that, depending on where you live.
Urban areas have seen growth beyond comfort levels of many people, and i’d prefer that trend to reverse, since i am negatively impacted by that.


----------



## PK1

Unkotare said:


> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> 
> The earth is already over-populated, a problem that was foreseen as early as the 1960s or before. Funny, it has been the "conservatives" all along who didn't want anyone to talk about or to put any policies in place to avert it.
> 
> It's hilarious to read the comments by the "conservatives" who now want to curb population growth, but who are anti-birth control and anti-choice, and justify discrimination against LGBTs because they can't reproduce naturally on other threads.
> 
> 
> 
> The earth isn't even close to being overpopulated.........and your solution for this problem that doesn't exist.....kill brown people in 3rd world countries.......that is all you socialists ever have....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> This is a ridiculous response. We've been hearing about the growing overpopulation problem for decades. ....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Just like we heard about the coming of the next ice age for decades. We heard all the airplanes would fall from the skies on 1/1/2000. We heard there would never be another war after WW1. We heard that sickness is caused by miasma. We heard that the earth is the center of the solar system.
Click to expand...

No need to “hear”.
I have experienced the negative (& some positive) effects of increasing population ... in *urban* areas, esp the popular ones.
If *farm* families want to quadruple their population, that is another story.


----------



## Slyhunter

Can't wait for my first serving of Cloned Rib Eye. Why clone the whole being when you can just  clone the body part.


----------



## sam5971

yeah...i agree.


----------



## PK1

OVERPOPULATION?

This Covid-19 pandemic is a cruel reminder of how HUMAN population DENSITY contributes to the spread of deadly viruses ... 
as well as POLLUTION, CONFLICT, CRIME.
.


----------



## Rigby5

Unkotare said:


> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> 
> The earth is already over-populated, a problem that was foreseen as early as the 1960s or before. Funny, it has been the "conservatives" all along who didn't want anyone to talk about or to put any policies in place to avert it.
> 
> It's hilarious to read the comments by the "conservatives" who now want to curb population growth, but who are anti-birth control and anti-choice, and justify discrimination against LGBTs because they can't reproduce naturally on other threads.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The earth isn't even close to being overpopulated.........and your solution for this problem that doesn't exist.....kill brown people in 3rd world countries.......that is all you socialists ever have....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is a ridiculous response. We've been hearing about the growing overpopulation problem for decades. ....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Just like we heard about the coming of the next ice age for decades. We heard all the airplanes would fall from the skies on 1/1/2000. We heard there would never be another war after WW1. We heard that sickness is caused by miasma. We heard that the earth is the center of the solar system.
Click to expand...


The next iceage has already started.
It started several thousand years ago, but a total ice-age and warming cycle is about 110,000 years long.  So we have about 53,000 years before it will get to its coldest.
And we don't want to stop it, but just adapt to it.
It is very useful and keeps longer and more drastic cycles from happening.

No experts said planes would fall from the skies at the turn of the millenium.
No experts said WWI would end all wars.
There is a connection between miasma and sickness, in that growing pathogens give off toxic gases.
The earth is the center of the solar system once you understand physics and relativity.  Two objects to effect each other, but you just notice the effects of the larger one more.
You can use any point as the center of your system.


----------



## Rigby5

Unkotare said:


> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> Any population that experiences the exponential growth such as been displayed by our race always undergoes a rapid die-off. .
> 
> 
> 
> Our race has been growing exponentially since 9500 BC. Not such a rapid die-off.
Click to expand...


That is a blink of an eye.
Obviously all species that go extinct either are over whelmed by a superior species or first become so successful that they poison their own Eden. 
You could think of this either way, that we are breeding a virus superior to our species, or that we destroy the environment that spawned us.
The rapid die-off has not even begun, yet.


----------



## Rigby5

2aguy said:


> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> Any population that experiences the exponential growth such as been displayed by our race always undergoes a rapid die-off. .
> 
> 
> 
> Our race has been growing exponentially since 9500 BC. Not such a rapid die-off.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Mid-14th century brought quite a change.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Wow.......yes.....leeches are not the best medicine.......failing to see that the population has grown...and yet we still aren't overpopulated, not even close.
Click to expand...



We are way over populated.
How would you know if we were not?
If you are thinking of square footage to stand on, that has little to do with survival.
For example, how many hundreds of acres of trees do each of us need, in order to replace the oxygen we breath?
The fact we have about a 300 year oxygen surplus is not relevant.
That is just another blink of an eye.
When we breath in oxygen and exhale CO2,  plants have to reverse that with photosynthesis, or we all die.  There is no artificial way to replace natural photosynthesis, as the energy requirements would be way too huge.

We evolved for the planet as it was millions of years ago, so we alter the planet at our own peril.  When species go extinct that we used to rely on, that risks our survival.
For example, if pollinator like bees die from glyphosates, our food production will be cut by more than half.  When we run out of fossil fuel for fertilizers, our food production will also be cut by about 75%.  So in no way are we sustainable currently.


----------



## Rigby5

2aguy said:


> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> The population has doubled two times since the end of WWII. Certainly, at current levels of resource use, it cannot double again.
> There is no reason to debate too fervently, for we will soon see. It is just too bad that we don't do things better.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes......according to "The Population Bomb," we should be fighting over food in the streets of New York right now.......so....we'll see you in about 100 years.....when we still won't be over populated...
Click to expand...


The fact we are experiencing pandemics show that we already are over populated.
The fact we rely on limited fossil fuels for 75% of our food production shows we are over populated.
The fact pollinators are going extinct and risk 50% of our food production shows we are over populated.


----------



## Rigby5

Slyhunter said:


> Can't wait for my first serving of Cloned Rib Eye. Why clone the whole being when you can just  clone the body part.



Because we don't know enough about DNA to be able to tell if we are doing it right or causing some horrific side effect.  We can read the whole sequence, but only know about 2% of what each part does.  That is because DNA does not just have one sequence do one thing, but each sequence does tens of thousands of different things, at different times, and in conjunction with other sequences.  So when we play around with DNA, we can easily make extinction level mistakes.


----------



## Rigby5

PK1 said:


> OVERPOPULATION?
> 
> This Covid-19 pandemic is a cruel reminder of how HUMAN population DENSITY contributes to the spread of deadly viruses ...
> as well as POLLUTION, CONFLICT, CRIME.
> .



Not to mention war, radiation, ozone depletion, pollinator extinction, fossil fuel depletion, deforestation, etc.

I remember a physicist watching the first hydrogen bomb test in the Pacific, holding his breath because there was still a risk the deuterium in the ocean would propagate the explosion, taking the whole world with it.
We do foolish risks like that all the time.


----------



## there4eyeM

Couples who find satisfaction in life without reproducing may become much more numerous. There is much more to life than adding future deaths.
Humanity does not need so many humans in order to survive; technology has replaced much of the need for muscle and brain. 'Enough people' will live better than the 'most possible'.


----------



## Theowl32

BasicHumanUnit said:


> Redfish said:
> 
> 
> 
> The earth is already overpopulated.   modern medicine is mostly responsible (or gets the credit).
> 
> there are limits on how many humans this planet can feed,  Africa and parts of asia are already unable to feed all the people who live there,
> 
> the real question is how do we stop or control it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We (humanity) need not worry......
> Mother nature WILL thin the heard.  It's happened throughout history.  Modern medicine has delayed the process, but that just means that when she comes charging back, it's gonna be a wipe out.   A new virus will evolve, anti-biotics will become useless  or something.   Guaranteed.  Billions will go at once.  it's part of nature.
> 
> China's working on mutated pathogens that only affect humans without certain Asian genes.
> No proof at this time.....but they're innovative and scientifically evolving rapidly.   Plus, they don't have government restrictions.
Click to expand...

Bump this post


----------



## westwall

Rigby5 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> Any population that experiences the exponential growth such as been displayed by our race always undergoes a rapid die-off. .
> 
> 
> 
> Our race has been growing exponentially since 9500 BC. Not such a rapid die-off.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Mid-14th century brought quite a change.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Wow.......yes.....leeches are not the best medicine.......failing to see that the population has grown...and yet we still aren't overpopulated, not even close.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> We are way over populated.
> How would you know if we were not?
> If you are thinking of square footage to stand on, that has little to do with survival.
> For example, how many hundreds of acres of trees do each of us need, in order to replace the oxygen we breath?
> The fact we have about a 300 year oxygen surplus is not relevant.
> That is just another blink of an eye.
> When we breath in oxygen and exhale CO2,  plants have to reverse that with photosynthesis, or we all die.  There is no artificial way to replace natural photosynthesis, as the energy requirements would be way too huge.
> 
> We evolved for the planet as it was millions of years ago, so we alter the planet at our own peril.  When species go extinct that we used to rely on, that risks our survival.
> For example, if pollinator like bees die from glyphosates, our food production will be cut by more than half.  When we run out of fossil fuel for fertilizers, our food production will also be cut by about 75%.  So in no way are we sustainable currently.
Click to expand...







No, we are not way overpopulated.  The carrying capacity of this planet without technology is around 15 billion.  With technology it jumps to around 40 billion.  Right now, every person living on the globe can be packed in to the State of Rhode Island, and there is room to spare.  The problem is corruption, and ideology.  Those are what cause famine and disease outbreaks.


----------



## westwall

Rigby5 said:


> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> OVERPOPULATION?
> 
> This Covid-19 pandemic is a cruel reminder of how HUMAN population DENSITY contributes to the spread of deadly viruses ...
> as well as POLLUTION, CONFLICT, CRIME.
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not to mention war, radiation, ozone depletion, pollinator extinction, fossil fuel depletion, deforestation, etc.
> 
> I remember a physicist watching the first hydrogen bomb test in the Pacific, holding his breath because there was still a risk the deuterium in the ocean would propagate the explosion, taking the whole world with it.
> We do foolish risks like that all the time.
Click to expand...








No, there was no risk.  If there was a legit risk, they wouldn't have detonated it.


----------



## PK1

westwall said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> Any population that experiences the exponential growth such as been displayed by our race always undergoes a rapid die-off. .
> 
> 
> 
> Our race has been growing exponentially since 9500 BC. Not such a rapid die-off.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Mid-14th century brought quite a change.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Wow.......yes.....leeches are not the best medicine.......failing to see that the population has grown...and yet we still aren't overpopulated, not even close.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> We are way over populated.
> How would you know if we were not?
> If you are thinking of square footage to stand on, that has little to do with survival.
> For example, how many hundreds of acres of trees do each of us need, in order to replace the oxygen we breath?
> The fact we have about a 300 year oxygen surplus is not relevant.
> That is just another blink of an eye.
> When we breath in oxygen and exhale CO2,  plants have to reverse that with photosynthesis, or we all die.  There is no artificial way to replace natural photosynthesis, as the energy requirements would be way too huge.
> 
> We evolved for the planet as it was millions of years ago, so we alter the planet at our own peril.  When species go extinct that we used to rely on, that risks our survival.
> For example, if pollinator like bees die from glyphosates, our food production will be cut by more than half.  When we run out of fossil fuel for fertilizers, our food production will also be cut by about 75%.  So in no way are we sustainable currently.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, we are not way overpopulated.  The carrying capacity of this planet without technology is around 15 billion.  With technology it jumps to around 40 billion.  Right now, every person living on the globe can be packed in to the State of Rhode Island, and there is room to spare.  The problem is corruption, and ideology.  Those are what cause famine and disease outbreaks.
Click to expand...

Population DENSITY is the main variable, which relates to CONFLICT among animals in their ecologies.
If humans practiced ideology such as FAIRNESS, EMPATHY & RESPECT, that would mitigate the hi-density conflicts, including corruption.

Two of the benefits from this pandemic are REDUCED URBAN TRAFFIC and CLEANER AIR. 
I would like to keep it that way, and NOT increase population!
Why do we need more people??
. 

.


----------



## westwall

PK1 said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> Any population that experiences the exponential growth such as been displayed by our race always undergoes a rapid die-off. .
> 
> 
> 
> Our race has been growing exponentially since 9500 BC. Not such a rapid die-off.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Mid-14th century brought quite a change.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Wow.......yes.....leeches are not the best medicine.......failing to see that the population has grown...and yet we still aren't overpopulated, not even close.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> We are way over populated.
> How would you know if we were not?
> If you are thinking of square footage to stand on, that has little to do with survival.
> For example, how many hundreds of acres of trees do each of us need, in order to replace the oxygen we breath?
> The fact we have about a 300 year oxygen surplus is not relevant.
> That is just another blink of an eye.
> When we breath in oxygen and exhale CO2,  plants have to reverse that with photosynthesis, or we all die.  There is no artificial way to replace natural photosynthesis, as the energy requirements would be way too huge.
> 
> We evolved for the planet as it was millions of years ago, so we alter the planet at our own peril.  When species go extinct that we used to rely on, that risks our survival.
> For example, if pollinator like bees die from glyphosates, our food production will be cut by more than half.  When we run out of fossil fuel for fertilizers, our food production will also be cut by about 75%.  So in no way are we sustainable currently.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, we are not way overpopulated.  The carrying capacity of this planet without technology is around 15 billion.  With technology it jumps to around 40 billion.  Right now, every person living on the globe can be packed in to the State of Rhode Island, and there is room to spare.  The problem is corruption, and ideology.  Those are what cause famine and disease outbreaks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Population DENSITY is the main variable, which relates to CONFLICT among animals in their ecologies.
> If humans practiced ideology such as FAIRNESS, EMPATHY & RESPECT, that would mitigate the hi-density conflicts, including corruption.
> 
> Two of the benefits from this pandemic are REDUCED URBAN TRAFFIC and CLEANER AIR.
> I would like to keep it that way, and NOT increase population!
> Why do we need more people??
> .
> 
> .
Click to expand...







Environmental loons are demanding that population density be increased.  No, density doesn't necessarily equate to violence.   Animal conflict is about resources.   Each critter has a niche, the battles are about who is going to fill that niche.

Yes, lack of traffic is nice, but ultimately the result is increased unemployment and the problems that come with that.

Why more people?  Why not?  The more people the more opportunities for geniuses to be born.  Geniuses are needed to advance us off of this single planet.


----------



## 2aguy

PK1 said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> Any population that experiences the exponential growth such as been displayed by our race always undergoes a rapid die-off. .
> 
> 
> 
> Our race has been growing exponentially since 9500 BC. Not such a rapid die-off.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Mid-14th century brought quite a change.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Wow.......yes.....leeches are not the best medicine.......failing to see that the population has grown...and yet we still aren't overpopulated, not even close.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> We are way over populated.
> How would you know if we were not?
> If you are thinking of square footage to stand on, that has little to do with survival.
> For example, how many hundreds of acres of trees do each of us need, in order to replace the oxygen we breath?
> The fact we have about a 300 year oxygen surplus is not relevant.
> That is just another blink of an eye.
> When we breath in oxygen and exhale CO2,  plants have to reverse that with photosynthesis, or we all die.  There is no artificial way to replace natural photosynthesis, as the energy requirements would be way too huge.
> 
> We evolved for the planet as it was millions of years ago, so we alter the planet at our own peril.  When species go extinct that we used to rely on, that risks our survival.
> For example, if pollinator like bees die from glyphosates, our food production will be cut by more than half.  When we run out of fossil fuel for fertilizers, our food production will also be cut by about 75%.  So in no way are we sustainable currently.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, we are not way overpopulated.  The carrying capacity of this planet without technology is around 15 billion.  With technology it jumps to around 40 billion.  Right now, every person living on the globe can be packed in to the State of Rhode Island, and there is room to spare.  The problem is corruption, and ideology.  Those are what cause famine and disease outbreaks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Population DENSITY is the main variable, which relates to CONFLICT among animals in their ecologies.
> If humans practiced ideology such as FAIRNESS, EMPATHY & RESPECT, that would mitigate the hi-density conflicts, including corruption.
> 
> Two of the benefits from this pandemic are REDUCED URBAN TRAFFIC and CLEANER AIR.
> I would like to keep it that way, and NOT increase population!
> Why do we need more people??
> .
> 
> .
Click to expand...



Cause....freedom?   Will you be the one choosing who can have sex and make babies or will you leave it to some nerd at the Federal Bureau of Baby Making?

Socialists in Germany did this in the 30s cause their leader needed soldiers and workers....Socialists in China decided only male babies were important.....both ended badly for their countries.......


----------



## Slyhunter

Rigby5 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> Any population that experiences the exponential growth such as been displayed by our race always undergoes a rapid die-off. .
> 
> 
> 
> Our race has been growing exponentially since 9500 BC. Not such a rapid die-off.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Mid-14th century brought quite a change.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Wow.......yes.....leeches are not the best medicine.......failing to see that the population has grown...and yet we still aren't overpopulated, not even close.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> We are way over populated.
> How would you know if we were not?
> If you are thinking of square footage to stand on, that has little to do with survival.
> For example, how many hundreds of acres of trees do each of us need, in order to replace the oxygen we breath?
> The fact we have about a 300 year oxygen surplus is not relevant.
> That is just another blink of an eye.
> When we breath in oxygen and exhale CO2,  plants have to reverse that with photosynthesis, or we all die.  There is no artificial way to replace natural photosynthesis, as the energy requirements would be way too huge.
> 
> We evolved for the planet as it was millions of years ago, so we alter the planet at our own peril.  When species go extinct that we used to rely on, that risks our survival.
> For example, if pollinator like bees die from glyphosates, our food production will be cut by more than half.  When we run out of fossil fuel for fertilizers, our food production will also be cut by about 75%.  So in no way are we sustainable currently.
Click to expand...

Seaweed.


----------



## Unkotare

Rigby5 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> Any population that experiences the exponential growth such as been displayed by our race always undergoes a rapid die-off. .
> 
> 
> 
> Our race has been growing exponentially since 9500 BC. Not such a rapid die-off.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Mid-14th century brought quite a change.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Wow.......yes.....leeches are not the best medicine.......failing to see that the population has grown...and yet we still aren't overpopulated, not even close.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> We are way over populated.
> How would you know if we were not?
> If you are thinking of square footage to stand on, that has little to do with survival.
> For example, how many hundreds of acres of trees do each of us need, in order to replace the oxygen we breath?
> The fact we have about a 300 year oxygen surplus is not relevant.
> That is just another blink of an eye.
> When we breath in oxygen and exhale CO2,  plants have to reverse that with photosynthesis, or we all die.  There is no artificial way to replace natural photosynthesis, as the energy requirements would be way too huge.
> 
> We evolved for the planet as it was millions of years ago, so we alter the planet at our own peril.  When species go extinct that we used to rely on, that risks our survival.
> For example, if pollinator like bees die from glyphosates, our food production will be cut by more than half.  When we run out of fossil fuel for fertilizers, our food production will also be cut by about 75%.  So in no way are we sustainable currently.
Click to expand...

Some people were fed this false crisis about ‘overpopulation’ back in the 70s and still can’t let it go.


----------



## 2aguy

Unkotare said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> Any population that experiences the exponential growth such as been displayed by our race always undergoes a rapid die-off. .
> 
> 
> 
> Our race has been growing exponentially since 9500 BC. Not such a rapid die-off.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Mid-14th century brought quite a change.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Wow.......yes.....leeches are not the best medicine.......failing to see that the population has grown...and yet we still aren't overpopulated, not even close.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> We are way over populated.
> How would you know if we were not?
> If you are thinking of square footage to stand on, that has little to do with survival.
> For example, how many hundreds of acres of trees do each of us need, in order to replace the oxygen we breath?
> The fact we have about a 300 year oxygen surplus is not relevant.
> That is just another blink of an eye.
> When we breath in oxygen and exhale CO2,  plants have to reverse that with photosynthesis, or we all die.  There is no artificial way to replace natural photosynthesis, as the energy requirements would be way too huge.
> 
> We evolved for the planet as it was millions of years ago, so we alter the planet at our own peril.  When species go extinct that we used to rely on, that risks our survival.
> For example, if pollinator like bees die from glyphosates, our food production will be cut by more than half.  When we run out of fossil fuel for fertilizers, our food production will also be cut by about 75%.  So in no way are we sustainable currently.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Some people were fed this false crisis about ‘overpopulation’ back in the 70s and still can’t let it go.
Click to expand...



It just the next step in their attempt to scare people into giving them power and control......


----------



## Unkotare

Rigby5 said:


> ...
> 
> The fact we are experiencing pandemics show that we already are over populated.
> The fact we rely on limited fossil fuels for 75% of our food production shows we are over populated.
> The fact pollinators are going extinct and risk 50% of our food production shows we are over populated.



  More lefty logic!


----------



## 2aguy

Unkotare said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> The fact we are experiencing pandemics show that we already are over populated.
> The fact we rely on limited fossil fuels for 75% of our food production shows we are over populated.
> The fact pollinators are going extinct and risk 50% of our food production shows we are over populated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More lefty logic!
Click to expand...



And again....the ones screeching loudest about the world being over populated always mean....."Over populated by other people,"  but they never mean themselves...the one person they have absolute control over and who they could easily "remove," to make the planet less populated....by one....


----------



## HenryBHough

In his Easter Rant The Pope promoted "Mother Nature" to become the fourth member of what used to be The Holy Trinity.  Not "Mother Mary", mind you....Nay...Mother Nature.  So if Mother Nature says we are overpopulated and is punishing humankind with Global What-The-Fuck and plagues....well, kneel down and suck it up.


----------



## there4eyeM

Well, nature will, indeed, sort this out since human intelligence is so sadly lacking. Continuing to procreate in areas where even the parents can barely survive will continue suffering, disease, crisis and conflict. Turning a blind eye to it is the least human thing we can do.
Every person born will suffer and die. We used to make babies in order to have a security in old age and take care of us until death. Death is the ultimate end of life. We don't need so many children now to assure old age care. Making more people just so they die is not rational.


----------



## 2aguy

there4eyeM said:


> Well, nature will, indeed, sort this out since human intelligence is so sadly lacking. Continuing to procreate in areas where even the parents can barely survive will continue suffering, disease, crisis and conflict. Turning a blind eye to it is the least human thing we can do.
> Every person born will suffer and die. We used to make babies in order to have a security in old age and take care of us until death. Death is the ultimate end of life. We don't need so many children now to assure old age care. Making more people just so they die is not rational.




Population in first world countries is already on the decline....as countries become wealthy they stop having as many children...so you doom and gloomers have nothing to worry about.


----------



## Redfish

Soylent Green is the answer


----------



## xyz

PK1 said:


> OVERPOPULATION?
> 
> This Covid-19 pandemic is a cruel reminder of how HUMAN population DENSITY contributes to the spread of deadly viruses ...
> as well as POLLUTION, CONFLICT, CRIME.
> .


And also how poorly urban (and suburban as well) agglomerations are managed, in particular with regards to transportation.


----------



## there4eyeM

xyz said:


> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> OVERPOPULATION?
> 
> This Covid-19 pandemic is a cruel reminder of how HUMAN population DENSITY contributes to the spread of deadly viruses ...
> as well as POLLUTION, CONFLICT, CRIME.
> .
> 
> 
> 
> And also how poorly urban (and suburban as well) agglomerations are managed, in particular with regards to transportation.
Click to expand...

The present population's demand for excess (such as the current ludicrous private vehicles) increases pressure on resources.
The problem is not if there is enough for all, it is that some want far too much.


----------



## PK1

2aguy said:


> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> Any population that experiences the exponential growth such as been displayed by our race always undergoes a rapid die-off. .
> 
> 
> 
> Our race has been growing exponentially since 9500 BC. Not such a rapid die-off.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Mid-14th century brought quite a change.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Wow.......yes.....leeches are not the best medicine.......failing to see that the population has grown...and yet we still aren't overpopulated, not even close.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We are way over populated.
> How would you know if we were not?
> If you are thinking of square footage to stand on, that has little to do with survival.
> For example, how many hundreds of acres of trees do each of us need, in order to replace the oxygen we breath?
> The fact we have about a 300 year oxygen surplus is not relevant.
> That is just another blink of an eye.
> When we breath in oxygen and exhale CO2,  plants have to reverse that with photosynthesis, or we all die.  There is no artificial way to replace natural photosynthesis, as the energy requirements would be way too huge.
> 
> We evolved for the planet as it was millions of years ago, so we alter the planet at our own peril.  When species go extinct that we used to rely on, that risks our survival.
> For example, if pollinator like bees die from glyphosates, our food production will be cut by more than half.  When we run out of fossil fuel for fertilizers, our food production will also be cut by about 75%.  So in no way are we sustainable currently.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, we are not way overpopulated.  The carrying capacity of this planet without technology is around 15 billion.  With technology it jumps to around 40 billion.  Right now, every person living on the globe can be packed in to the State of Rhode Island, and there is room to spare.  The problem is corruption, and ideology.  Those are what cause famine and disease outbreaks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Population DENSITY is the main variable, which relates to CONFLICT among animals in their ecologies.
> If humans practiced ideology such as FAIRNESS, EMPATHY & RESPECT, that would mitigate the hi-density conflicts, including corruption.
> 
> Two of the benefits from this pandemic are REDUCED URBAN TRAFFIC and CLEANER AIR.
> I would like to keep it that way, and NOT increase population!
> Why do we need more people??
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Cause....freedom?   Will you be the one choosing who can have sex and make babies or will you leave it to some nerd at the Federal Bureau of Baby Making?
> 
> Socialists in Germany did this in the 30s cause their leader needed soldiers and workers....Socialists in China decided only male babies were important.....both ended badly for their countries.......
Click to expand...

As an ethical libertatian, i do NOT want to take away an individual’s FREEDOM to procreate, or have an abortion.
With cultural/ecological incentives AND decent education, including PLANNED Parenthood type of initiatives, individuals can be better informed & make proactive responsible decisions about the number of children they need to fulfill their desired family expectations.
The truly wanted & nurtured children are more likely to be an asset to themselves, their families, their societies, and our planet.
.


----------



## Blues Man




----------



## Likkmee

Just stop it ! The population "problem" takes quite a while to "solve".


----------



## Jitss617

Democrats need over population and chaos, to win elections


----------



## Marion Morrison

there4eyeM said:


> Well, nature will, indeed, sort this out since human intelligence is so sadly lacking. Continuing to procreate in areas where even the parents can barely survive will continue suffering, disease, crisis and conflict. Turning a blind eye to it is the least human thing we can do.
> Every person born will suffer and die. We used to make babies in order to have a security in old age and take care of us until death. Death is the ultimate end of life. We don't need so many children now to assure old age care. Making more people just so they die is not rational.


Moar lefty logic.
Yeah sure; Let the state take care of your elderly loved ones, what could go wrong?


----------



## Blues Man

The earth is a closed system with finite resources.

Of course it is possible to overpopulate the earth to the point where the needs of the population exceed the finite resources available.


----------



## Marion Morrison

Blues Man said:


> The earth is a closed system with finite resources.
> 
> Of course it is possible to overpopulate the earth to the point where the needs of the population exceed the finite resources available.


Needs or wants? Hmm?


----------



## Blues Man

Marion Morrison said:


> Blues Man said:
> 
> 
> 
> The earth is a closed system with finite resources.
> 
> Of course it is possible to overpopulate the earth to the point where the needs of the population exceed the finite resources available.
> 
> 
> 
> Needs or wants? Hmm?
Click to expand...


Does it matter?

But both


----------



## gipper

Marion Morrison said:


> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, nature will, indeed, sort this out since human intelligence is so sadly lacking. Continuing to procreate in areas where even the parents can barely survive will continue suffering, disease, crisis and conflict. Turning a blind eye to it is the least human thing we can do.
> Every person born will suffer and die. We used to make babies in order to have a security in old age and take care of us until death. Death is the ultimate end of life. We don't need so many children now to assure old age care. Making more people just so they die is not rational.
> 
> 
> 
> Moar lefty logic.
> Yeah sure; Let the state take care of your elderly loved ones, what could go wrong?
Click to expand...

This scientist doctor thinks humans could live for 1000 years. What then?


----------



## there4eyeM

Head up ass or in sand has same vision.


----------



## Unkotare

PK1 said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> Any population that experiences the exponential growth such as been displayed by our race always undergoes a rapid die-off. .
> 
> 
> 
> Our race has been growing exponentially since 9500 BC. Not such a rapid die-off.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Mid-14th century brought quite a change.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Wow.......yes.....leeches are not the best medicine.......failing to see that the population has grown...and yet we still aren't overpopulated, not even close.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> We are way over populated.
> How would you know if we were not?
> If you are thinking of square footage to stand on, that has little to do with survival.
> For example, how many hundreds of acres of trees do each of us need, in order to replace the oxygen we breath?
> The fact we have about a 300 year oxygen surplus is not relevant.
> That is just another blink of an eye.
> When we breath in oxygen and exhale CO2,  plants have to reverse that with photosynthesis, or we all die.  There is no artificial way to replace natural photosynthesis, as the energy requirements would be way too huge.
> 
> We evolved for the planet as it was millions of years ago, so we alter the planet at our own peril.  When species go extinct that we used to rely on, that risks our survival.
> For example, if pollinator like bees die from glyphosates, our food production will be cut by more than half.  When we run out of fossil fuel for fertilizers, our food production will also be cut by about 75%.  So in no way are we sustainable currently.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, we are not way overpopulated.  The carrying capacity of this planet without technology is around 15 billion.  With technology it jumps to around 40 billion.  Right now, every person living on the globe can be packed in to the State of Rhode Island, and there is room to spare.  The problem is corruption, and ideology.  Those are what cause famine and disease outbreaks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Population DENSITY is the main variable, which relates to CONFLICT among animals in their ecologies.
> If humans practiced ideology such as FAIRNESS, EMPATHY & RESPECT, that would mitigate the hi-density conflicts, including corruption.
> 
> Two of the benefits from this pandemic are REDUCED URBAN TRAFFIC and CLEANER AIR.
> I would like to keep it that way, and NOT increase population!
> Why do we need more people??
> .
> 
> .
Click to expand...

Why do we need you?


----------



## 2aguy

gipper said:


> Marion Morrison said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, nature will, indeed, sort this out since human intelligence is so sadly lacking. Continuing to procreate in areas where even the parents can barely survive will continue suffering, disease, crisis and conflict. Turning a blind eye to it is the least human thing we can do.
> Every person born will suffer and die. We used to make babies in order to have a security in old age and take care of us until death. Death is the ultimate end of life. We don't need so many children now to assure old age care. Making more people just so they die is not rational.
> 
> 
> 
> Moar lefty logic.
> Yeah sure; Let the state take care of your elderly loved ones, what could go wrong?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> This scientist doctor thinks humans could live for 1000 years. What then?
Click to expand...



As societies become wealthy, people tend to have fewer children.   We are already seeing his happen across the world.  The overpopulation hysteria in some people is simply that, a hysteria and nothing that is based in truth, facts or reality.


----------



## PK1

Unkotare said:


> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> Any population that experiences the exponential growth such as been displayed by our race always undergoes a rapid die-off. .
> 
> 
> 
> Our race has been growing exponentially since 9500 BC. Not such a rapid die-off.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Mid-14th century brought quite a change.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Wow.......yes.....leeches are not the best medicine.......failing to see that the population has grown...and yet we still aren't overpopulated, not even close.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We are way over populated.
> How would you know if we were not?
> If you are thinking of square footage to stand on, that has little to do with survival.
> For example, how many hundreds of acres of trees do each of us need, in order to replace the oxygen we breath?
> The fact we have about a 300 year oxygen surplus is not relevant.
> That is just another blink of an eye.
> When we breath in oxygen and exhale CO2,  plants have to reverse that with photosynthesis, or we all die.  There is no artificial way to replace natural photosynthesis, as the energy requirements would be way too huge.
> 
> We evolved for the planet as it was millions of years ago, so we alter the planet at our own peril.  When species go extinct that we used to rely on, that risks our survival.
> For example, if pollinator like bees die from glyphosates, our food production will be cut by more than half.  When we run out of fossil fuel for fertilizers, our food production will also be cut by about 75%.  So in no way are we sustainable currently.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, we are not way overpopulated.  The carrying capacity of this planet without technology is around 15 billion.  With technology it jumps to around 40 billion.  Right now, every person living on the globe can be packed in to the State of Rhode Island, and there is room to spare.  The problem is corruption, and ideology.  Those are what cause famine and disease outbreaks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Population DENSITY is the main variable, which relates to CONFLICT among animals in their ecologies.
> If humans practiced ideology such as FAIRNESS, EMPATHY & RESPECT, that would mitigate the hi-density conflicts, including corruption.
> 
> Two of the benefits from this pandemic are REDUCED URBAN TRAFFIC and CLEANER AIR.
> I would like to keep it that way, and NOT increase population!
> Why do we need more people??
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why do we need you?
Click to expand...

To demonstrate how idiotic posters like you are.
.


----------



## there4eyeM

What is the motivation for so many people to have so many children? Isn't it really that offspring are the thoughtless result of simple physical pleasure in sex? With the slightest care, this pleasure can be had without making a baby. To bring a human into this world of pain and sorrow just because of a passing urge would seem to be against reason. There are far too many unreasonable people, so, in that way at least, the earth is overpopulated.


----------



## PK1

there4eyeM said:


> What is the motivation for so many people to have so many children? Isn't it really that offspring are the thoughtless result of simple physical pleasure in sex? With the slightest care, this pleasure can be had without making a baby. To bring a human into this world of pain and sorrow just because of a passing urge would seem to be against reason. There are far too many unreasonable people, so, in that way at least, the earth is overpopulated.


The basic motivation for procreation (sex) should no longer explain large families in civilized cultures. When starvation, war, or disease are no longer reasons for having many children to pass on our genes via survivors, and our human lifespans have doubled in the past 150 years, then why have large families? 
Mindless ego? Mindless religion?
Fear of being alone when old?

I think parenthood is FUN overall, and i understand why some people have many offspring, but i wish all the children born are well nurtured too, and grow up being responsible citizens.
.


----------



## Unkotare

PK1 said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> Any population that experiences the exponential growth such as been displayed by our race always undergoes a rapid die-off. .
> 
> 
> 
> Our race has been growing exponentially since 9500 BC. Not such a rapid die-off.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Mid-14th century brought quite a change.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Wow.......yes.....leeches are not the best medicine.......failing to see that the population has grown...and yet we still aren't overpopulated, not even close.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We are way over populated.
> How would you know if we were not?
> If you are thinking of square footage to stand on, that has little to do with survival.
> For example, how many hundreds of acres of trees do each of us need, in order to replace the oxygen we breath?
> The fact we have about a 300 year oxygen surplus is not relevant.
> That is just another blink of an eye.
> When we breath in oxygen and exhale CO2,  plants have to reverse that with photosynthesis, or we all die.  There is no artificial way to replace natural photosynthesis, as the energy requirements would be way too huge.
> 
> We evolved for the planet as it was millions of years ago, so we alter the planet at our own peril.  When species go extinct that we used to rely on, that risks our survival.
> For example, if pollinator like bees die from glyphosates, our food production will be cut by more than half.  When we run out of fossil fuel for fertilizers, our food production will also be cut by about 75%.  So in no way are we sustainable currently.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, we are not way overpopulated.  The carrying capacity of this planet without technology is around 15 billion.  With technology it jumps to around 40 billion.  Right now, every person living on the globe can be packed in to the State of Rhode Island, and there is room to spare.  The problem is corruption, and ideology.  Those are what cause famine and disease outbreaks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Population DENSITY is the main variable, which relates to CONFLICT among animals in their ecologies.
> If humans practiced ideology such as FAIRNESS, EMPATHY & RESPECT, that would mitigate the hi-density conflicts, including corruption.
> 
> Two of the benefits from this pandemic are REDUCED URBAN TRAFFIC and CLEANER AIR.
> I would like to keep it that way, and NOT increase population!
> Why do we need more people??
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why do we need you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> To demonstrate how idiotic posters like you are.
> .
Click to expand...

Hypocrite.


----------



## Unkotare

there4eyeM said:


> What is the motivation for so many people to have so many children? Isn't it really that offspring are the thoughtless result of simple physical pleasure in sex? With the slightest care, this pleasure can be had without making a baby. To bring a human into this world of pain and sorrow just because of a passing urge would seem to be against reason. There are far too many unreasonable people, so, in that way at least, the earth is overpopulated.



“This world of pain and sorrow”?   Are you a wannabe Buddhist, or just a drama queen weeping into your Cheerios?


----------



## Unkotare

If nothing else, this thread sadly shows that we’ve got numbskulls who swallowed a false crisis in the 70s, and have been pacing the same street corner wearing a “The End is Near!” sandwich board for almost 50 years. The sign is cracked and faded, but these old fools are still trying to maintain a look of smug superiority on their wrinkled old nihilistic faces.


----------



## there4eyeM

Such passion and personal enmity exhibited! What is so ego-challenging about an opposing opinion concerning something that time, and time alone, will resolve?
The case for increasing the population has never been demonstrated here. Rational arguments for a moderate approach have been offered. There is no need for invective and name-calling. It only shows desperation.


----------



## gipper

there4eyeM said:


> Such passion and personal enmity exhibited! What is so ego-challenging about an opposing opinion concerning something that time, and time alone, will resolve?
> The case for increasing the population has never been demonstrated here. Rational arguments for a moderate approach have been offered. There is no need for invective and name-calling. It only shows desperation.


It’s evident that most humans of child bearing years aren’t having a lot of children. Many nations are experiencing little to negative population growth. So it would seem this debate is really about nothing.


----------



## Unkotare

there4eyeM said:


> ...something that time, and time alone, will resolve?
> ...



Time - every time - has proven it to be a false crisis.


----------



## 2aguy

PK1 said:


> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> What is the motivation for so many people to have so many children? Isn't it really that offspring are the thoughtless result of simple physical pleasure in sex? With the slightest care, this pleasure can be had without making a baby. To bring a human into this world of pain and sorrow just because of a passing urge would seem to be against reason. There are far too many unreasonable people, so, in that way at least, the earth is overpopulated.
> 
> 
> 
> The basic motivation for procreation (sex) should no longer explain large families in civilized cultures. When starvation, war, or disease are no longer reasons for having many children to pass on our genes via survivors, and our human lifespans have doubled in the past 150 years, then why have large families?
> Mindless ego? Mindless religion?
> Fear of being alone when old?
> 
> I think parenthood is FUN overall, and i understand why some people have many offspring, but i wish all the children born are well nurtured too, and grow up being responsible citizens.
> .
Click to expand...



How about...if you want more kids...have them....if you don't, don't, and then everyone else mind their own business?   The world isn't close to being fully populated let alone over populated and people who are wealthy have fewer children....as Capitalism creates wealth, even in the 3rd world, they too will have fewer children on their own.....without the jack boot of government telling them what to do.


----------



## Unkotare

2aguy said:


> ...
> 
> How about...if you want more kids...have them....if you don't, don't, and then everyone else mind their own business?   The world isn't close to being fully populated let alone over populated and people who are wealthy have fewer children....as Capitalism creates wealth, even in the 3rd world, they too will have fewer children on their own.....without the jack boot of government telling them what to do.


THIS ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


----------



## there4eyeM

[/QUOTE]


How about...if you want more kids...have them....if you don't, don't, and then everyone else mind their own business?   The world isn't close to being fully populated let alone over populated and people who are wealthy have fewer children....as Capitalism creates wealth, even in the 3rd world, they too will have fewer children on their own.....without the jack boot of government telling them what to do.
[/QUOTE]
This seems based on responding to someone trying to tell others what to do. That was not the original sense of the thread. The question was if we believed the world to be overpopulated. Some of us believe so. I certainly make no proposal of what to do about it other than to express my thoughts. If that convinces others, so be it.


----------



## JOSweetHeart

Jitss617 said:


> Democrats need over population and chaos, to win elections


If such a statement is true, why are so many of them cheerleaders for abortions. The only thing that happens when doing away with babies is getting rid of a future election voters.

God bless you always!!!

Holly


----------



## Dick Foster

Well there are too damn many democrats that's for sure.


----------



## 2aguy

JOSweetHeart said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Democrats need over population and chaos, to win elections
> 
> 
> 
> If such a statement is true, why are so many of them cheerleaders for abortions. The only thing that happens when doing away with babies is getting rid of a future election voters.
> 
> God bless you always!!!
> 
> Holly
Click to expand...



They need the fear of overpopulation......they tell us all the time, never let a crisis go to waste...and they mean it....


----------



## Slyhunter

2aguy said:


> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> What is the motivation for so many people to have so many children? Isn't it really that offspring are the thoughtless result of simple physical pleasure in sex? With the slightest care, this pleasure can be had without making a baby. To bring a human into this world of pain and sorrow just because of a passing urge would seem to be against reason. There are far too many unreasonable people, so, in that way at least, the earth is overpopulated.
> 
> 
> 
> The basic motivation for procreation (sex) should no longer explain large families in civilized cultures. When starvation, war, or disease are no longer reasons for having many children to pass on our genes via survivors, and our human lifespans have doubled in the past 150 years, then why have large families?
> Mindless ego? Mindless religion?
> Fear of being alone when old?
> 
> I think parenthood is FUN overall, and i understand why some people have many offspring, but i wish all the children born are well nurtured too, and grow up being responsible citizens.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> How about...if you want more kids...have them....if you don't, don't, and then everyone else mind their own business?   The world isn't close to being fully populated let alone over populated and people who are wealthy have fewer children....as Capitalism creates wealth, even in the 3rd world, they too will have fewer children on their own.....without the jack boot of government telling them what to do.
Click to expand...

Only those who can afford to support their own kids without help from the government should have kids.


----------



## Slyhunter

JOSweetHeart said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Democrats need over population and chaos, to win elections
> 
> 
> 
> If such a statement is true, why are so many of them cheerleaders for abortions. The only thing that happens when doing away with babies is getting rid of a future election voters.
> 
> God bless you always!!!
> 
> Holly
Click to expand...

You know how you can prove Republicans value life highly when they value life even when it's a future Democrat voter being aborted.


----------



## Unkotare

Slyhunter said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> What is the motivation for so many people to have so many children? Isn't it really that offspring are the thoughtless result of simple physical pleasure in sex? With the slightest care, this pleasure can be had without making a baby. To bring a human into this world of pain and sorrow just because of a passing urge would seem to be against reason. There are far too many unreasonable people, so, in that way at least, the earth is overpopulated.
> 
> 
> 
> The basic motivation for procreation (sex) should no longer explain large families in civilized cultures. When starvation, war, or disease are no longer reasons for having many children to pass on our genes via survivors, and our human lifespans have doubled in the past 150 years, then why have large families?
> Mindless ego? Mindless religion?
> Fear of being alone when old?
> 
> I think parenthood is FUN overall, and i understand why some people have many offspring, but i wish all the children born are well nurtured too, and grow up being responsible citizens.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> How about...if you want more kids...have them....if you don't, don't, and then everyone else mind their own business?   The world isn't close to being fully populated let alone over populated and people who are wealthy have fewer children....as Capitalism creates wealth, even in the 3rd world, they too will have fewer children on their own.....without the jack boot of government telling them what to do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Only those who can afford to support their own kids without help from the government should have kids.
Click to expand...

What do you do with a family that could support themselves when they had kids, but later fell on hard times (like what is happening to millions of Americans right now)? Kill them all? Forced sterilization? You want to go down that road?


----------



## Slyhunter

Unkotare said:


> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> What is the motivation for so many people to have so many children? Isn't it really that offspring are the thoughtless result of simple physical pleasure in sex? With the slightest care, this pleasure can be had without making a baby. To bring a human into this world of pain and sorrow just because of a passing urge would seem to be against reason. There are far too many unreasonable people, so, in that way at least, the earth is overpopulated.
> 
> 
> 
> The basic motivation for procreation (sex) should no longer explain large families in civilized cultures. When starvation, war, or disease are no longer reasons for having many children to pass on our genes via survivors, and our human lifespans have doubled in the past 150 years, then why have large families?
> Mindless ego? Mindless religion?
> Fear of being alone when old?
> 
> I think parenthood is FUN overall, and i understand why some people have many offspring, but i wish all the children born are well nurtured too, and grow up being responsible citizens.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> How about...if you want more kids...have them....if you don't, don't, and then everyone else mind their own business?   The world isn't close to being fully populated let alone over populated and people who are wealthy have fewer children....as Capitalism creates wealth, even in the 3rd world, they too will have fewer children on their own.....without the jack boot of government telling them what to do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Only those who can afford to support their own kids without help from the government should have kids.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What do you do with a family that could support themselves when they had kids, but later fell on hard times (like what is happening to millions of Americans right now)? Kill them all? Forced sterilization? You want to go down that road?
Click to expand...

I'd make an exception on a case by case basis.


----------



## Slyhunter

Unkotare said:


> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there4eyeM said:
> 
> 
> 
> What is the motivation for so many people to have so many children? Isn't it really that offspring are the thoughtless result of simple physical pleasure in sex? With the slightest care, this pleasure can be had without making a baby. To bring a human into this world of pain and sorrow just because of a passing urge would seem to be against reason. There are far too many unreasonable people, so, in that way at least, the earth is overpopulated.
> 
> 
> 
> The basic motivation for procreation (sex) should no longer explain large families in civilized cultures. When starvation, war, or disease are no longer reasons for having many children to pass on our genes via survivors, and our human lifespans have doubled in the past 150 years, then why have large families?
> Mindless ego? Mindless religion?
> Fear of being alone when old?
> 
> I think parenthood is FUN overall, and i understand why some people have many offspring, but i wish all the children born are well nurtured too, and grow up being responsible citizens.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> How about...if you want more kids...have them....if you don't, don't, and then everyone else mind their own business?   The world isn't close to being fully populated let alone over populated and people who are wealthy have fewer children....as Capitalism creates wealth, even in the 3rd world, they too will have fewer children on their own.....without the jack boot of government telling them what to do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Only those who can afford to support their own kids without help from the government should have kids.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What do you do with a family that could support themselves when they had kids, but later fell on hard times (like what is happening to millions of Americans right now)? Kill them all? Forced sterilization? You want to go down that road?
Click to expand...

It's not happening to millions of americans because of a virus. What is happening to millions of americans is because of a lockdown. I would not do the lockdown. Hiding from a disease is pointless. everyone will get it sooner or later. Best get it while it's weak so you can kick it's ass.


----------



## PK1

Unkotare said:


> If nothing else, this thread sadly shows that we’ve got numbskulls who swallowed a false crisis in the 70s, and have been pacing the same street corner wearing a “The End is Near!” sandwich board for almost 50 years. The sign is cracked and faded, but these old fools are still trying to maintain a look of smug superiority on their wrinkled old nihilistic faces.


Fools are those who don’t heed Benjamin Franklin‘s advice: an ounce of prevention equals a pound of cure.
 Earth’s population has doubled since the 1970s and quadrupled in the past 100 years. And urban areas have greatly increased in density and  present major issues like pollution and pandemics.
 You are the fool.
.


----------



## Unkotare

PK1 said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> If nothing else, this thread sadly shows that we’ve got numbskulls who swallowed a false crisis in the 70s, and have been pacing the same street corner wearing a “The End is Near!” sandwich board for almost 50 years. The sign is cracked and faded, but these old fools are still trying to maintain a look of smug superiority on their wrinkled old nihilistic faces.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fools are those who don’t heed Benjamin Franklin‘s advice: an ounce of prevention equals a pound of cure.
> Earth’s population has doubled since the 1970s and quadrupled in the past 100 years. And urban areas have greatly increased in density and  present major issues like pollution and pandemics.
> You are the fool.
> .
Click to expand...

Relax, Chicken Little. We've still got plenty of room and resources, and demographics are trending toward an eventual global contraction. And guess what? With even half of the world's current population we would still have pollution, disease, war, and hunger. Those unfortunate aspects of life have existed as long as human society and they always will.


----------



## 2aguy

PK1 said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> If nothing else, this thread sadly shows that we’ve got numbskulls who swallowed a false crisis in the 70s, and have been pacing the same street corner wearing a “The End is Near!” sandwich board for almost 50 years. The sign is cracked and faded, but these old fools are still trying to maintain a look of smug superiority on their wrinkled old nihilistic faces.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fools are those who don’t heed Benjamin Franklin‘s advice: an ounce of prevention equals a pound of cure.
> Earth’s population has doubled since the 1970s and quadrupled in the past 100 years. And urban areas have greatly increased in density and  present major issues like pollution and pandemics.
> You are the fool.
> .
Click to expand...



No......western countries are experiencing declining birth rates...we don't have a problem.......and more and better pollution control will come with more wealth and technological innovation....


----------



## PK1

Unkotare said:


> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> If nothing else, this thread sadly shows that we’ve got numbskulls who swallowed a false crisis in the 70s, and have been pacing the same street corner wearing a “The End is Near!” sandwich board for almost 50 years. The sign is cracked and faded, but these old fools are still trying to maintain a look of smug superiority on their wrinkled old nihilistic faces.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fools are those who don’t heed Benjamin Franklin‘s advice: an ounce of prevention equals a pound of cure.
> Earth’s population has doubled since the 1970s and quadrupled in the past 100 years. And urban areas have greatly increased in density and  present major issues like pollution and pandemics.
> You are the fool.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Relax, Chicken Little. We've still got plenty of room and resources, and demographics are trending toward an eventual global contraction. And guess what? With even half of the world's current population we would still have pollution, disease, war, and hunger. Those unfortunate aspects of life have existed as long as human society and they always will.
Click to expand...

No, with half the world population, we would have significantly less pollution, and urban densities would be far less.
Most of the US population 100 years ago lived in rural areas.
Now, across most high-income countries (Western Europe, the Americas, Australia, Japan and the Middle East) more than 80% of the population live in urban areas. 
With higher densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections and pandemics.
.


----------



## 2aguy

PK1 said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> If nothing else, this thread sadly shows that we’ve got numbskulls who swallowed a false crisis in the 70s, and have been pacing the same street corner wearing a “The End is Near!” sandwich board for almost 50 years. The sign is cracked and faded, but these old fools are still trying to maintain a look of smug superiority on their wrinkled old nihilistic faces.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fools are those who don’t heed Benjamin Franklin‘s advice: an ounce of prevention equals a pound of cure.
> Earth’s population has doubled since the 1970s and quadrupled in the past 100 years. And urban areas have greatly increased in density and  present major issues like pollution and pandemics.
> You are the fool.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Relax, Chicken Little. We've still got plenty of room and resources, and demographics are trending toward an eventual global contraction. And guess what? With even half of the world's current population we would still have pollution, disease, war, and hunger. Those unfortunate aspects of life have existed as long as human society and they always will.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, with half the world population, we would have significantly less pollution, and urban densities would be far less.
> Most of the US population 100 years ago lived in rural areas.
> Now, across most high-income countries (Western Europe, the Americas, Australia, Japan and the Middle East) more than 80% of the population live in urban areas.
> With higher densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections and pandemics.
> .
Click to expand...



No...no matter what the population level humans group into specific areas, and with more wealth and more technology all of those issues are being taken care of.......


----------



## Unkotare

PK1 said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> If nothing else, this thread sadly shows that we’ve got numbskulls who swallowed a false crisis in the 70s, and have been pacing the same street corner wearing a “The End is Near!” sandwich board for almost 50 years. The sign is cracked and faded, but these old fools are still trying to maintain a look of smug superiority on their wrinkled old nihilistic faces.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fools are those who don’t heed Benjamin Franklin‘s advice: an ounce of prevention equals a pound of cure.
> Earth’s population has doubled since the 1970s and quadrupled in the past 100 years. And urban areas have greatly increased in density and  present major issues like pollution and pandemics.
> You are the fool.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Relax, Chicken Little. We've still got plenty of room and resources, and demographics are trending toward an eventual global contraction. And guess what? With even half of the world's current population we would still have pollution, disease, war, and hunger. Those unfortunate aspects of life have existed as long as human society and they always will.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, with half the world population, we would have significantly less pollution, and urban densities would be far less.
> Most of the US population 100 years ago lived in rural areas.
> Now, across most high-income countries (Western Europe, the Americas, Australia, Japan and the Middle East) more than 80% of the population live in urban areas.
> With higher densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections and pandemics.
> .
Click to expand...


Fail.

Remember how the Conquistadors met the Native Americans and so many Indians dropped dead of diseases that Europe had largely developed a herd immunity for? Do you know why? The answer goes back to the first permanent settlements and the domestication of animals in the Old World. Global population was much smaller then. 

The Black Death wiped out almost half of Europe and many more in China, and that was almost 700 years ago - when the global population was much smaller.

European immigrants crammed into tenements in cities like NY over 100 years there was a terrible degree of disease, pollution, and crime. Much more intense than NY today despite there being a smaller pop

Air pollution was much worse in LA in the 1980s than today, but our population is larger now.

Starting to get the picture?


----------



## PK1

Unkotare said:


> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> If nothing else, this thread sadly shows that we’ve got numbskulls who swallowed a false crisis in the 70s, and have been pacing the same street corner wearing a “The End is Near!” sandwich board for almost 50 years. The sign is cracked and faded, but these old fools are still trying to maintain a look of smug superiority on their wrinkled old nihilistic faces.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fools are those who don’t heed Benjamin Franklin‘s advice: an ounce of prevention equals a pound of cure.
> Earth’s population has doubled since the 1970s and quadrupled in the past 100 years. And urban areas have greatly increased in density and  present major issues like pollution and pandemics.
> You are the fool.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Relax, Chicken Little. We've still got plenty of room and resources, and demographics are trending toward an eventual global contraction. And guess what? With even half of the world's current population we would still have pollution, disease, war, and hunger. Those unfortunate aspects of life have existed as long as human society and they always will.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, with half the world population, we would have significantly less pollution, and urban densities would be far less.
> Most of the US population 100 years ago lived in rural areas.
> Now, across most high-income countries (Western Europe, the Americas, Australia, Japan and the Middle East) more than 80% of the population live in urban areas.
> With higher densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections and pandemics.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Fail.
> 
> Remember how the Conquistadors met the Native Americans and so many Indians dropped dead of diseases that Europe had largely developed a herd immunity for? Do you know why? The answer goes back to the first permanent settlements and the domestication of animals in the Old World. Global population was much smaller then.
> 
> The Black Death wiped out almost half of Europe and many more in China, and that was almost 700 years ago - when the global population was much smaller.
> 
> European immigrants crammed into tenements in cities like NY over 100 years there was a terrible degree of disease, pollution, and crime. Much more intense than NY today despite there being a smaller pop
> 
> Air pollution was much worse in LA in the 1980s than today, but our population is larger now.
> 
> Starting to get the picture?
Click to expand...

You’re polluting the discussion with irrelevant historical, cultural, & geographic variables.
Yes, thanks to bipartisan support for the 
creation of EPA in 1970, LA & elsewhere has significantly reduced air pollution from cars/etc, but all other things being equal:

With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... unless the pandemic keeps people at home.

Starting to get the picture?
.


----------



## PK1

2aguy said:


> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> If nothing else, this thread sadly shows that we’ve got numbskulls who swallowed a false crisis in the 70s, and have been pacing the same street corner wearing a “The End is Near!” sandwich board for almost 50 years. The sign is cracked and faded, but these old fools are still trying to maintain a look of smug superiority on their wrinkled old nihilistic faces.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fools are those who don’t heed Benjamin Franklin‘s advice: an ounce of prevention equals a pound of cure.
> Earth’s population has doubled since the 1970s and quadrupled in the past 100 years. And urban areas have greatly increased in density and  present major issues like pollution and pandemics.
> You are the fool.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Relax, Chicken Little. We've still got plenty of room and resources, and demographics are trending toward an eventual global contraction. And guess what? With even half of the world's current population we would still have pollution, disease, war, and hunger. Those unfortunate aspects of life have existed as long as human society and they always will.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, with half the world population, we would have significantly less pollution, and urban densities would be far less.
> Most of the US population 100 years ago lived in rural areas.
> Now, across most high-income countries (Western Europe, the Americas, Australia, Japan and the Middle East) more than 80% of the population live in urban areas.
> With higher densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections and pandemics.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No...no matter what the population level humans group into specific areas, and with more wealth and more technology all of those issues are being taken care of.......
Click to expand...

And the current Covid pandemic is taking care of those population problems ...

In cities across the United States, traffic on roads and highways has fallen dramatically over the past week as the coronavirus outbreak forces people to stay at home and everyday life grinds to a halt.

Pollution has dropped too.

A satellite that detects emissions in the atmosphere linked to cars and trucks shows huge declines in pollution over major metropolitan areas, including Los Angeles, Seattle, New York, Chicago and Atlanta.








						Traffic and Pollution Plummet as U.S. Cities Shut Down for Coronavirus (Published 2020)
					

A satellite that detects pollution linked to cars and trucks shows declines over major metropolitan areas, including Los Angeles, Seattle, and New York.



					www.nytimes.com
				



.


----------



## gipper

2aguy said:


> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> If nothing else, this thread sadly shows that we’ve got numbskulls who swallowed a false crisis in the 70s, and have been pacing the same street corner wearing a “The End is Near!” sandwich board for almost 50 years. The sign is cracked and faded, but these old fools are still trying to maintain a look of smug superiority on their wrinkled old nihilistic faces.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fools are those who don’t heed Benjamin Franklin‘s advice: an ounce of prevention equals a pound of cure.
> Earth’s population has doubled since the 1970s and quadrupled in the past 100 years. And urban areas have greatly increased in density and  present major issues like pollution and pandemics.
> You are the fool.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No......western countries are experiencing declining birth rates...we don't have a problem.......and more and better pollution control will come with more wealth and technological innovation....
Click to expand...

I have a close family member who truly believes global warming, overpopulation, and pollution are destroying the planet. He has become obsessed with this. He has told my children not to have children. Thankfully they know he’s a nut and have ignored him.

Technology if government doesn’t impede it, will and is fixing our problems.


----------



## PK1

gipper said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> If nothing else, this thread sadly shows that we’ve got numbskulls who swallowed a false crisis in the 70s, and have been pacing the same street corner wearing a “The End is Near!” sandwich board for almost 50 years. The sign is cracked and faded, but these old fools are still trying to maintain a look of smug superiority on their wrinkled old nihilistic faces.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fools are those who don’t heed Benjamin Franklin‘s advice: an ounce of prevention equals a pound of cure.
> Earth’s population has doubled since the 1970s and quadrupled in the past 100 years. And urban areas have greatly increased in density and  present major issues like pollution and pandemics.
> You are the fool.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No......western countries are experiencing declining birth rates...we don't have a problem.......and more and better pollution control will come with more wealth and technological innovation....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have a close family member who truly believes global warming, overpopulation, and pollution are destroying the planet. He has become obsessed with this. He has told my children not to have children. Thankfully they know he’s a nut and have ignored him.
> 
> Technology if government doesn’t impede it, will and is fixing our problems.
Click to expand...

And SCIENCE, if government doesn’t impede it, will assess and help fix our population problems.
.


----------



## Unkotare

PK1 said:


> ...
> You’re polluting the discussion with irrelevant historical, cultural, & geographic variables.
> ...
> .




Sucks when reality gets in the way of your agenda, huh?


----------



## Unkotare

PK1 said:


> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .




What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.


----------



## 2aguy

PK1 said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> If nothing else, this thread sadly shows that we’ve got numbskulls who swallowed a false crisis in the 70s, and have been pacing the same street corner wearing a “The End is Near!” sandwich board for almost 50 years. The sign is cracked and faded, but these old fools are still trying to maintain a look of smug superiority on their wrinkled old nihilistic faces.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fools are those who don’t heed Benjamin Franklin‘s advice: an ounce of prevention equals a pound of cure.
> Earth’s population has doubled since the 1970s and quadrupled in the past 100 years. And urban areas have greatly increased in density and  present major issues like pollution and pandemics.
> You are the fool.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Relax, Chicken Little. We've still got plenty of room and resources, and demographics are trending toward an eventual global contraction. And guess what? With even half of the world's current population we would still have pollution, disease, war, and hunger. Those unfortunate aspects of life have existed as long as human society and they always will.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, with half the world population, we would have significantly less pollution, and urban densities would be far less.
> Most of the US population 100 years ago lived in rural areas.
> Now, across most high-income countries (Western Europe, the Americas, Australia, Japan and the Middle East) more than 80% of the population live in urban areas.
> With higher densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections and pandemics.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Fail.
> 
> Remember how the Conquistadors met the Native Americans and so many Indians dropped dead of diseases that Europe had largely developed a herd immunity for? Do you know why? The answer goes back to the first permanent settlements and the domestication of animals in the Old World. Global population was much smaller then.
> 
> The Black Death wiped out almost half of Europe and many more in China, and that was almost 700 years ago - when the global population was much smaller.
> 
> European immigrants crammed into tenements in cities like NY over 100 years there was a terrible degree of disease, pollution, and crime. Much more intense than NY today despite there being a smaller pop
> 
> Air pollution was much worse in LA in the 1980s than today, but our population is larger now.
> 
> Starting to get the picture?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You’re polluting the discussion with irrelevant historical, cultural, & geographic variables.
> Yes, thanks to bipartisan support for the
> creation of EPA in 1970, LA & elsewhere has significantly reduced air pollution from cars/etc, but all other things being equal:
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... unless the pandemic keeps people at home.
> 
> Starting to get the picture?
> .
Click to expand...



Wrong.......our pollution problem has decreased as we have more people in this country............we had a pollution problem due to the transition to an industrial society...now, with time and experience, and an increase in wealth and technological innovation we have more people and less pollution, not more pollution......

You don't understand the issue or the solutions.


----------



## PK1

2aguy said:


> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> If nothing else, this thread sadly shows that we’ve got numbskulls who swallowed a false crisis in the 70s, and have been pacing the same street corner wearing a “The End is Near!” sandwich board for almost 50 years. The sign is cracked and faded, but these old fools are still trying to maintain a look of smug superiority on their wrinkled old nihilistic faces.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fools are those who don’t heed Benjamin Franklin‘s advice: an ounce of prevention equals a pound of cure.
> Earth’s population has doubled since the 1970s and quadrupled in the past 100 years. And urban areas have greatly increased in density and  present major issues like pollution and pandemics.
> You are the fool.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Relax, Chicken Little. We've still got plenty of room and resources, and demographics are trending toward an eventual global contraction. And guess what? With even half of the world's current population we would still have pollution, disease, war, and hunger. Those unfortunate aspects of life have existed as long as human society and they always will.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, with half the world population, we would have significantly less pollution, and urban densities would be far less.
> Most of the US population 100 years ago lived in rural areas.
> Now, across most high-income countries (Western Europe, the Americas, Australia, Japan and the Middle East) more than 80% of the population live in urban areas.
> With higher densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections and pandemics.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Fail.
> 
> Remember how the Conquistadors met the Native Americans and so many Indians dropped dead of diseases that Europe had largely developed a herd immunity for? Do you know why? The answer goes back to the first permanent settlements and the domestication of animals in the Old World. Global population was much smaller then.
> 
> The Black Death wiped out almost half of Europe and many more in China, and that was almost 700 years ago - when the global population was much smaller.
> 
> European immigrants crammed into tenements in cities like NY over 100 years there was a terrible degree of disease, pollution, and crime. Much more intense than NY today despite there being a smaller pop
> 
> Air pollution was much worse in LA in the 1980s than today, but our population is larger now.
> 
> Starting to get the picture?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You’re polluting the discussion with irrelevant historical, cultural, & geographic variables.
> Yes, thanks to bipartisan support for the
> creation of EPA in 1970, LA & elsewhere has significantly reduced air pollution from cars/etc, but all other things being equal:
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... unless the pandemic keeps people at home.
> 
> Starting to get the picture?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong.......our pollution problem has decreased as we have more people in this country............we had a pollution problem due to the transition to an industrial society...now, with time and experience, and an increase in wealth and technological innovation we have more people and less pollution, not more pollution......
> 
> You don't understand the issue or the solutions.
Click to expand...

You are blind to my Post #977, or you don’t  want to understand that more traffic equates to more air pollution even nowadays?

“In cities across the United States, traffic on roads and highways has fallen dramatically ... as the coronavirus outbreak forces people to stay at home ...
A satellite that detects emissions in the atmosphere linked to cars and trucks shows huge declines in pollution over major metropolitan areas, including Los Angeles, Seattle, New York, Chicago and Atlanta.”
.


----------



## PK1

Unkotare said:


> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
Click to expand...

“Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
This thread’s title asks our opinion.
 In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
.


----------



## Unkotare

PK1 said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
Click to expand...


Yes. You still fail.


----------



## PK1

Unkotare said:


> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
Click to expand...

The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
.


----------



## PK1

HAPPY MOTHERS DAY to all those WONDERFUL mothers ...
who gave BIRTH to 1-3 healthy children and spent a great deal of her time & resources in raising them responsibly!

You make Mother Nature “proud”.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
Click to expand...


I know you believe that if the human race is capable of engineering a solution to you that means we aren't overpopulated but just the fact this is true tells me that we are overpopulated









						Ocean Plastics Could Triple If We Don’t Act Now, Warn Experts
					

And they have a plan to dramatically reduce plastic pollution by 80% by 2040.




					www.huffpost.com
				





Plastic waste in the ocean could nearly triple over the next two decades unless the world takes unprecedented levels of action now and completely changes the way it uses plastics, warns a new report released Thursday.
The study ― commissioned by nonprofit The Pew Charitable Trusts and sustainability consultancy and incubator SYSTEMIQ ― finds that if plastic production and consumption continues at the current pace, by 2040 there could be 600 million metric tons (661 million tons) of plastic polluting precious marine ecosystems, clogging waterways and sinking to the depths of the sea. Over the next two decades, we could see over 2.5 times more plastic in the ocean each year, the report projects.


The fact this is happening proves we are overpopulated.  



There is no single solution that can succeed, the report makes clear; simply focusing on recycling or alternative materials alone would be nowhere near effective enough. Instead, the report lays out measures to completely change the way we use, produce and dispose of plastics from production, to use, to disposal. These include: reducing the amount of plastic produced in the first place by eliminating avoidable plastics and designing products for reuse; using alternative materials where appropriate; improving labelling to help people better understand what’s recyclable; and increasing waste collection. 
The next two years are crucial for adopting these solutions, the report warns. Even a five-year delay in taking action could lead to an additional 80 million metric tons (88 million tons) of plastic in the ocean in 20 years. That’s equivalent to around 6.2 million garbage trucks’ worth of waste.


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I know you believe that if the human race is capable of engineering a solution to you that means we aren't overpopulated but just the fact this is true tells me that we are overpopulated
> ...
Click to expand...


You don't even understand the words you post.


----------



## 2aguy

Unkotare said:


> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
Click to expand...



To you....


----------



## Unkotare

2aguy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> To you....
Click to expand...


----------



## there4eyeM

Doubtlessly, the population will appear to be supportable up to the time catastrophe strikes and the woeful excess will be undeniably evident. There is no good reason for such massive concentrations of people that occur and these are all tragedies waiting for the inevitable. Humans are capable of intelligent action, yet it seems so rare. 
A person may point these things out while holding life and humanity quite dear. It is not misanthropic to look around objectively. What would be wrong with a planet wide population at post WWII levels, around 1.5 billion? That is just a question, not a proposition that any steps be taken to effect population reduction by violent means.


----------



## Unkotare

there4eyeM said:


> Doubtlessly, the population will appear to be supportable up to the time catastrophe strikes and the woeful excess will be undeniably evident. There is no good reason for such massive concentrations of people that occur and these are all tragedies waiting for the inevitable. Humans are capable of intelligent action, yet it seems so rare.
> A person may point these things out while holding life and humanity quite dear. It is not misanthropic to look around objectively. What would be wrong with a planet wide population at post WWII levels, around 1.5 billion? That is just a question, not a proposition that any steps be taken to effect population reduction by violent means.


Did you read the entire thread?


----------



## there4eyeM

PK1 said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
Click to expand...

The discussion has included a bit too much passion and not enough objectivity. The above quote seems to sum things up.


----------



## Unkotare

Unkotare said:


> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
Click to expand...

.


----------



## Unkotare

Unkotare said:


> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> If nothing else, this thread sadly shows that we’ve got numbskulls who swallowed a false crisis in the 70s, and have been pacing the same street corner wearing a “The End is Near!” sandwich board for almost 50 years. The sign is cracked and faded, but these old fools are still trying to maintain a look of smug superiority on their wrinkled old nihilistic faces.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fools are those who don’t heed Benjamin Franklin‘s advice: an ounce of prevention equals a pound of cure.
> Earth’s population has doubled since the 1970s and quadrupled in the past 100 years. And urban areas have greatly increased in density and  present major issues like pollution and pandemics.
> You are the fool.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Relax, Chicken Little. We've still got plenty of room and resources, and demographics are trending toward an eventual global contraction. And guess what? With even half of the world's current population we would still have pollution, disease, war, and hunger. Those unfortunate aspects of life have existed as long as human society and they always will.
Click to expand...

.


----------



## Unkotare

Unkotare said:


> If nothing else, this thread sadly shows that we’ve got numbskulls who swallowed a false crisis in the 70s, and have been pacing the same street corner wearing a “The End is Near!” sandwich board for almost 50 years. The sign is cracked and faded, but these old fools are still trying to maintain a look of smug superiority on their wrinkled old nihilistic faces.


.


----------



## Unkotare

Unkotare said:


> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lysistrata said:
> 
> 
> 
> The earth is already over-populated, a problem that was foreseen as early as the 1960s or before. Funny, it has been the "conservatives" all along who didn't want anyone to talk about or to put any policies in place to avert it.
> 
> It's hilarious to read the comments by the "conservatives" who now want to curb population growth, but who are anti-birth control and anti-choice, and justify discrimination against LGBTs because they can't reproduce naturally on other threads.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The earth isn't even close to being overpopulated.........and your solution for this problem that doesn't exist.....kill brown people in 3rd world countries.......that is all you socialists ever have....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is a ridiculous response. We've been hearing about the growing overpopulation problem for decades. ....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Just like we heard about the coming of the next ice age for decades. We heard all the airplanes would fall from the skies on 1/1/2000. We heard there would never be another war after WW1. We heard that sickness is caused by miasma. We heard that the earth is the center of the solar system.
Click to expand...

.


----------



## Unkotare

Unkotare said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....
> 
> We're overpopulated you dip shits!!! .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not even close, dumbass. We have far more than enough room and resources for many, many more people than our current population, which will begin to contract in the next 40-50 years anyway, as your dumb ass has been taught several times now. Just because someone frightened you with a false crisis sometime back in the late 70s and you never got over it - because you're stupid as shit - doesn't make it so.
Click to expand...

.


----------



## TheParser

Yes, we are overpopulated with bad people.

Just read the crime statistics and look at the rioters on TV every day. 

There would be even more human beings of that ilk  if it were not for family planning and abortion.


----------



## sealybobo

PK1 said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
> .
Click to expand...










						David Attenborough Says Climate Change Is A ‘Crime’ Humanity Has Inflicted On The Planet
					

The documentarian reiterated his grief that society has destroyed large swaths of the natural world, but said humanity is “not beyond redemption.”




					www.huffpost.com
				




Unkotare is smarter than David Attenborough

“Well, a crime has been committed,” Attenborough, 95, replied. “And it so happens that, I’m of such an age, that I was able to see it beginning.”
“It isn’t that I enjoy saying: ‘Doom, doom, doom,’” he continued. “On the contrary, I’d much rather [say]: ‘Enjoy, take thrill, excitement, pleasure, joy, joy, joy, joy.’ But if you’ve got any sense of responsibility, you can’t do that.”

The documentarian’s comments come amid ongoing and increasingly dire warnings from the planet’s scientists that climate change is largely continuing unabated. A report released last month by the Environmental Protection Agency detailed a disturbing shift in the United States caused by a warming world: The destruction of permafrost in Alaska, a spike in heat waves nationwide and longer-lasting wildfire and pollen season. 

In his book and documentary, Attenborough pointed to existing technology that could help greatly alleviate the threat of climate change, primarily an immediate shift away from fossil fuels and an effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.
The threat, he concluded, has grown so large as to be beyond the burden of any one nation.
“I would say that the time has come to put aside national ambitions and look for an international ambition of survival,” he said. He later added: “What good does it do to say, “Oh, to hell with it, I don’t care.’ You can’t say that. Not if … you love your children. Not if you love the rest of human― how can you say that?”


----------



## sealybobo

I love this part:  effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.

Detroit would be a great place to start.  Any slums or ghettos need to be torn down and turned back into forests.  The people who are displaced can come live with the rest of us.  If 70% of Detroit is a shit hole turn 70% of it into a forest.  There are no jobs there anyways so get the fuck out!  Same for Flint and Saginaw.  Turn 70% of these major cities back into forests.


----------



## sealybobo

Why would unkotare want to keep our nations ghettos and slums in tact?  Maybe he doesn't want those people moving to his neighborhood.


----------



## Rigby5

Unkotare said:


> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
Click to expand...


You make some good points in that improved technology can reduce emissions, take less space, make medical breakthroughs, etc.
However, there are 2 main reasons you are wrong.  

One is that which made Malthus wrong was all fossil fuel based, and that is going to run out.
Fossil fuels powered the miracle that created the fertilizers that increased farming production by more than a factor of 4, and allow such wider food distribution that our grocery store have fresh produce from all over the world.
Solar and wind are awful because then you need some means of energy storage.
Fission and fusion are not sustainable either, since we have limited fissile material and will produce lots of radioactive wastes.
There is no energy solution I know of, and no one has suggested one.

The other is that there are many limits to how much of the earth we have to leave alone.  Not only are we dependent upon things like birds to eat insects and pollinators, but the oxygen we breath itself has to be regenerated on about a 200 year cycle.  We dump lots of wastes into the ocean, and eventually that has to bite us as well.  And we need a lot more trees.  They not only produce oxygen, but reduce erosion, provide habitat, create shade, and change weather.  There is so much we do not even know about or take for granted.  Even fresh water could well become a limiting resource very soon.


----------



## bripat9643

sealybobo said:


> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Attenborough Says Climate Change Is A ‘Crime’ Humanity Has Inflicted On The Planet
> 
> 
> The documentarian reiterated his grief that society has destroyed large swaths of the natural world, but said humanity is “not beyond redemption.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare is smarter than David Attenborough
> 
> “Well, a crime has been committed,” Attenborough, 95, replied. “And it so happens that, I’m of such an age, that I was able to see it beginning.”
> “It isn’t that I enjoy saying: ‘Doom, doom, doom,’” he continued. “On the contrary, I’d much rather [say]: ‘Enjoy, take thrill, excitement, pleasure, joy, joy, joy, joy.’ But if you’ve got any sense of responsibility, you can’t do that.”
> 
> The documentarian’s comments come amid ongoing and increasingly dire warnings from the planet’s scientists that climate change is largely continuing unabated. A report released last month by the Environmental Protection Agency detailed a disturbing shift in the United States caused by a warming world: The destruction of permafrost in Alaska, a spike in heat waves nationwide and longer-lasting wildfire and pollen season.
> 
> In his book and documentary, Attenborough pointed to existing technology that could help greatly alleviate the threat of climate change, primarily an immediate shift away from fossil fuels and an effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.
> The threat, he concluded, has grown so large as to be beyond the burden of any one nation.
> “I would say that the time has come to put aside national ambitions and look for an international ambition of survival,” he said. He later added: “What good does it do to say, “Oh, to hell with it, I don’t care.’ You can’t say that. Not if … you love your children. Not if you love the rest of human― how can you say that?”
Click to expand...

_Appeal to authority _- a logical fallacy.


----------



## Unkotare

Rigby5 said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You make some good points in that improved technology can reduce emissions, take less space, make medical breakthroughs, etc.
> However, there are 2 main reasons you are wrong.
> 
> One is that which made Malthus wrong was all fossil fuel based, and that is going to run out.
> Fossil fuels powered the miracle that created the fertilizers that increased farming production by more than a factor of 4, and allow such wider food distribution that our grocery store have fresh produce from all over the world.
> Solar and wind are awful because then you need some means of energy storage.
> Fission and fusion are not sustainable either, since we have limited fissile material and will produce lots of radioactive wastes.
> There is no energy solution I know of, and no one has suggested one.
> 
> The other is that there are many limits to how much of the earth we have to leave alone.  Not only are we dependent upon things like birds to eat insects and pollinators, but the oxygen we breath itself has to be regenerated on about a 200 year cycle.  We dump lots of wastes into the ocean, and eventually that has to bite us as well.  And we need a lot more trees.  They not only produce oxygen, but reduce erosion, provide habitat, create shade, and change weather.  There is so much we do not even know about or take for granted.  Even fresh water could well become a limiting resource very soon.
Click to expand...

It would be a contradiction to assume that improving techniques, technology, and a declining global population can’t mitigate the above.


----------



## sealybobo

Rigby5 said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You make some good points in that improved technology can reduce emissions, take less space, make medical breakthroughs, etc.
> However, there are 2 main reasons you are wrong.
> 
> One is that which made Malthus wrong was all fossil fuel based, and that is going to run out.
> Fossil fuels powered the miracle that created the fertilizers that increased farming production by more than a factor of 4, and allow such wider food distribution that our grocery store have fresh produce from all over the world.
> Solar and wind are awful because then you need some means of energy storage.
> Fission and fusion are not sustainable either, since we have limited fissile material and will produce lots of radioactive wastes.
> There is no energy solution I know of, and no one has suggested one.
> 
> The other is that there are many limits to how much of the earth we have to leave alone.  Not only are we dependent upon things like birds to eat insects and pollinators, but the oxygen we breath itself has to be regenerated on about a 200 year cycle.  We dump lots of wastes into the ocean, and eventually that has to bite us as well.  And we need a lot more trees.  They not only produce oxygen, but reduce erosion, provide habitat, create shade, and change weather.  There is so much we do not even know about or take for granted.  Even fresh water could well become a limiting resource very soon.
Click to expand...

There's no doubt we could solve this problem but unkotare acts like it's not a problem or that we will have no problem solving the problem before it's too late.  He reminds me of a citizen on Krypton.


----------



## sealybobo

bripat9643 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Attenborough Says Climate Change Is A ‘Crime’ Humanity Has Inflicted On The Planet
> 
> 
> The documentarian reiterated his grief that society has destroyed large swaths of the natural world, but said humanity is “not beyond redemption.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare is smarter than David Attenborough
> 
> “Well, a crime has been committed,” Attenborough, 95, replied. “And it so happens that, I’m of such an age, that I was able to see it beginning.”
> “It isn’t that I enjoy saying: ‘Doom, doom, doom,’” he continued. “On the contrary, I’d much rather [say]: ‘Enjoy, take thrill, excitement, pleasure, joy, joy, joy, joy.’ But if you’ve got any sense of responsibility, you can’t do that.”
> 
> The documentarian’s comments come amid ongoing and increasingly dire warnings from the planet’s scientists that climate change is largely continuing unabated. A report released last month by the Environmental Protection Agency detailed a disturbing shift in the United States caused by a warming world: The destruction of permafrost in Alaska, a spike in heat waves nationwide and longer-lasting wildfire and pollen season.
> 
> In his book and documentary, Attenborough pointed to existing technology that could help greatly alleviate the threat of climate change, primarily an immediate shift away from fossil fuels and an effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.
> The threat, he concluded, has grown so large as to be beyond the burden of any one nation.
> “I would say that the time has come to put aside national ambitions and look for an international ambition of survival,” he said. He later added: “What good does it do to say, “Oh, to hell with it, I don’t care.’ You can’t say that. Not if … you love your children. Not if you love the rest of human― how can you say that?”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> _Appeal to authority _- a logical fallacy.
Click to expand...

Sort of like how Christians believe priests?  

I don't think it's an appeal to authority when you get sick and go see a doctor is it?  Well when it comes to climate change, who else are you going to appeal to?  It's not a fallacy.


----------



## danielpalos

We could put more infrastructure underground to free up green space.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You make some good points in that improved technology can reduce emissions, take less space, make medical breakthroughs, etc.
> However, there are 2 main reasons you are wrong.
> 
> One is that which made Malthus wrong was all fossil fuel based, and that is going to run out.
> Fossil fuels powered the miracle that created the fertilizers that increased farming production by more than a factor of 4, and allow such wider food distribution that our grocery store have fresh produce from all over the world.
> Solar and wind are awful because then you need some means of energy storage.
> Fission and fusion are not sustainable either, since we have limited fissile material and will produce lots of radioactive wastes.
> There is no energy solution I know of, and no one has suggested one.
> 
> The other is that there are many limits to how much of the earth we have to leave alone.  Not only are we dependent upon things like birds to eat insects and pollinators, but the oxygen we breath itself has to be regenerated on about a 200 year cycle.  We dump lots of wastes into the ocean, and eventually that has to bite us as well.  And we need a lot more trees.  They not only produce oxygen, but reduce erosion, provide habitat, create shade, and change weather.  There is so much we do not even know about or take for granted.  Even fresh water could well become a limiting resource very soon.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It would be a contradiction to assume that improving techniques, technology, and a declining global population can’t mitigate the above.
Click to expand...

Is the decline in global population going to be enough?  How low will our population go do you think?

*Population growth* is the *increase* in the number of individuals in a *population*. Global *human population growth* amounts to around 83 million annually, or 1.1% per year. The global *population* has grown from 1 billion in 1800 to 7.9 billion in 2020.

If it stays at 7 billion that's too much.


----------



## sealybobo

danielpalos said:


> We could put more infrastructure underground to free up green space.


Floating condos and the marine life eats our poop and food waste.


----------



## danielpalos

sealybobo said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> We could put more infrastructure underground to free up green space.
> 
> 
> 
> Floating condos and the marine life eats our poop and food waste.
Click to expand...

Underwater apartments could have live "aquariums" for scenery.


----------



## Weatherman2020

sealybobo said:


> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Attenborough Says Climate Change Is A ‘Crime’ Humanity Has Inflicted On The Planet
> 
> 
> The documentarian reiterated his grief that society has destroyed large swaths of the natural world, but said humanity is “not beyond redemption.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare is smarter than David Attenborough
> 
> “Well, a crime has been committed,” Attenborough, 95, replied. “And it so happens that, I’m of such an age, that I was able to see it beginning.”
> “It isn’t that I enjoy saying: ‘Doom, doom, doom,’” he continued. “On the contrary, I’d much rather [say]: ‘Enjoy, take thrill, excitement, pleasure, joy, joy, joy, joy.’ But if you’ve got any sense of responsibility, you can’t do that.”
> 
> The documentarian’s comments come amid ongoing and increasingly dire warnings from the planet’s scientists that climate change is largely continuing unabated. A report released last month by the Environmental Protection Agency detailed a disturbing shift in the United States caused by a warming world: The destruction of permafrost in Alaska, a spike in heat waves nationwide and longer-lasting wildfire and pollen season.
> 
> In his book and documentary, Attenborough pointed to existing technology that could help greatly alleviate the threat of climate change, primarily an immediate shift away from fossil fuels and an effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.
> The threat, he concluded, has grown so large as to be beyond the burden of any one nation.
> “I would say that the time has come to put aside national ambitions and look for an international ambition of survival,” he said. He later added: “What good does it do to say, “Oh, to hell with it, I don’t care.’ You can’t say that. Not if … you love your children. Not if you love the rest of human― how can you say that?”
Click to expand...

A. The world is far from being overpopulated. You can fit the entire world population in Texas and give ever family a quarter of an acre home.

B. Only science deniers think the climate of today is optimum and believe that for the first time since time began the climate must stop changing.


----------



## bripat9643

sealybobo said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Attenborough Says Climate Change Is A ‘Crime’ Humanity Has Inflicted On The Planet
> 
> 
> The documentarian reiterated his grief that society has destroyed large swaths of the natural world, but said humanity is “not beyond redemption.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare is smarter than David Attenborough
> 
> “Well, a crime has been committed,” Attenborough, 95, replied. “And it so happens that, I’m of such an age, that I was able to see it beginning.”
> “It isn’t that I enjoy saying: ‘Doom, doom, doom,’” he continued. “On the contrary, I’d much rather [say]: ‘Enjoy, take thrill, excitement, pleasure, joy, joy, joy, joy.’ But if you’ve got any sense of responsibility, you can’t do that.”
> 
> The documentarian’s comments come amid ongoing and increasingly dire warnings from the planet’s scientists that climate change is largely continuing unabated. A report released last month by the Environmental Protection Agency detailed a disturbing shift in the United States caused by a warming world: The destruction of permafrost in Alaska, a spike in heat waves nationwide and longer-lasting wildfire and pollen season.
> 
> In his book and documentary, Attenborough pointed to existing technology that could help greatly alleviate the threat of climate change, primarily an immediate shift away from fossil fuels and an effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.
> The threat, he concluded, has grown so large as to be beyond the burden of any one nation.
> “I would say that the time has come to put aside national ambitions and look for an international ambition of survival,” he said. He later added: “What good does it do to say, “Oh, to hell with it, I don’t care.’ You can’t say that. Not if … you love your children. Not if you love the rest of human― how can you say that?”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> _Appeal to authority _- a logical fallacy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sort of like how Christians believe priests?
> 
> I don't think it's an appeal to authority when you get sick and go see a doctor is it?  Well when it comes to climate change, who else are you going to appeal to?  It's not a fallacy.
Click to expand...

It's an appeal to authority, moron.  You failed to prove it's not.  You attempted to claim that some appeals to authority are valid, but you failed to prove it.


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You make some good points in that improved technology can reduce emissions, take less space, make medical breakthroughs, etc.
> However, there are 2 main reasons you are wrong.
> 
> One is that which made Malthus wrong was all fossil fuel based, and that is going to run out.
> Fossil fuels powered the miracle that created the fertilizers that increased farming production by more than a factor of 4, and allow such wider food distribution that our grocery store have fresh produce from all over the world.
> Solar and wind are awful because then you need some means of energy storage.
> Fission and fusion are not sustainable either, since we have limited fissile material and will produce lots of radioactive wastes.
> There is no energy solution I know of, and no one has suggested one.
> 
> The other is that there are many limits to how much of the earth we have to leave alone.  Not only are we dependent upon things like birds to eat insects and pollinators, but the oxygen we breath itself has to be regenerated on about a 200 year cycle.  We dump lots of wastes into the ocean, and eventually that has to bite us as well.  And we need a lot more trees.  They not only produce oxygen, but reduce erosion, provide habitat, create shade, and change weather.  There is so much we do not even know about or take for granted.  Even fresh water could well become a limiting resource very soon.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It would be a contradiction to assume that improving techniques, technology, and a declining global population can’t mitigate the above.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Is the decline in global population going to be enough?  How low will our population go do you think?
> 
> *Population growth* is the *increase* in the number of individuals in a *population*. Global *human population growth* amounts to around 83 million annually, or 1.1% per year. The global *population* has grown from 1 billion in 1800 to 7.9 billion in 2020.
> 
> If it stays at 7 billion that's too much.
Click to expand...

No, it’s not.


----------



## 2aguy

sealybobo said:


> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Attenborough Says Climate Change Is A ‘Crime’ Humanity Has Inflicted On The Planet
> 
> 
> The documentarian reiterated his grief that society has destroyed large swaths of the natural world, but said humanity is “not beyond redemption.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare is smarter than David Attenborough
> 
> “Well, a crime has been committed,” Attenborough, 95, replied. “And it so happens that, I’m of such an age, that I was able to see it beginning.”
> “It isn’t that I enjoy saying: ‘Doom, doom, doom,’” he continued. “On the contrary, I’d much rather [say]: ‘Enjoy, take thrill, excitement, pleasure, joy, joy, joy, joy.’ But if you’ve got any sense of responsibility, you can’t do that.”
> 
> The documentarian’s comments come amid ongoing and increasingly dire warnings from the planet’s scientists that climate change is largely continuing unabated. A report released last month by the Environmental Protection Agency detailed a disturbing shift in the United States caused by a warming world: The destruction of permafrost in Alaska, a spike in heat waves nationwide and longer-lasting wildfire and pollen season.
> 
> In his book and documentary, Attenborough pointed to existing technology that could help greatly alleviate the threat of climate change, primarily an immediate shift away from fossil fuels and an effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.
> The threat, he concluded, has grown so large as to be beyond the burden of any one nation.
> “I would say that the time has come to put aside national ambitions and look for an international ambition of survival,” he said. He later added: “What good does it do to say, “Oh, to hell with it, I don’t care.’ You can’t say that. Not if … you love your children. Not if you love the rest of human― how can you say that?”
Click to expand...


Yeah....China is about to experience a rapid decline in population so much so they have lifted their one child policy and now want 3......

Climate change is a scam....the planet changes climate without any help......and anyone who is telling you to give them money and power to save the planet is selling you BS....


----------



## sealybobo

Weatherman2020 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Attenborough Says Climate Change Is A ‘Crime’ Humanity Has Inflicted On The Planet
> 
> 
> The documentarian reiterated his grief that society has destroyed large swaths of the natural world, but said humanity is “not beyond redemption.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare is smarter than David Attenborough
> 
> “Well, a crime has been committed,” Attenborough, 95, replied. “And it so happens that, I’m of such an age, that I was able to see it beginning.”
> “It isn’t that I enjoy saying: ‘Doom, doom, doom,’” he continued. “On the contrary, I’d much rather [say]: ‘Enjoy, take thrill, excitement, pleasure, joy, joy, joy, joy.’ But if you’ve got any sense of responsibility, you can’t do that.”
> 
> The documentarian’s comments come amid ongoing and increasingly dire warnings from the planet’s scientists that climate change is largely continuing unabated. A report released last month by the Environmental Protection Agency detailed a disturbing shift in the United States caused by a warming world: The destruction of permafrost in Alaska, a spike in heat waves nationwide and longer-lasting wildfire and pollen season.
> 
> In his book and documentary, Attenborough pointed to existing technology that could help greatly alleviate the threat of climate change, primarily an immediate shift away from fossil fuels and an effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.
> The threat, he concluded, has grown so large as to be beyond the burden of any one nation.
> “I would say that the time has come to put aside national ambitions and look for an international ambition of survival,” he said. He later added: “What good does it do to say, “Oh, to hell with it, I don’t care.’ You can’t say that. Not if … you love your children. Not if you love the rest of human― how can you say that?”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A. The world is far from being overpopulated. You can fit the entire world population in Texas and give ever family a quarter of an acre home.
> 
> B. Only science deniers think the climate of today is optimum and believe that for the first time since time began the climate must stop changing.
Click to expand...

Some like to assert that everybody on *Earth could* be *fit* into the State of *Texas*, using logic as follows. The area of *Texas* is about 262,000 mi2. Dividing this figure by the current human *population* of 7 billion leaves each person with less than 100 square meters, a small plot the size of a big room about 10 m x 10 m.

One third of Earth's surface is desert which supports very few people.

Without going into the fact that almost half the State is desert, notice we have not allowed for any roads, shopping malls, schools, hospitals, football stadiums, prisons, sewage plants, rivers, lakes, reservoirs, golf courses, parks, and what else? How much land does it take to support a human being?

Right now China, USA, Mexico, India, Europe, Canada, Australia, are all putting up too many toxic fumes.  We need to stop.  We are destroying the planet.  THat's the scientific consensus.


----------



## sealybobo

2aguy said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Attenborough Says Climate Change Is A ‘Crime’ Humanity Has Inflicted On The Planet
> 
> 
> The documentarian reiterated his grief that society has destroyed large swaths of the natural world, but said humanity is “not beyond redemption.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare is smarter than David Attenborough
> 
> “Well, a crime has been committed,” Attenborough, 95, replied. “And it so happens that, I’m of such an age, that I was able to see it beginning.”
> “It isn’t that I enjoy saying: ‘Doom, doom, doom,’” he continued. “On the contrary, I’d much rather [say]: ‘Enjoy, take thrill, excitement, pleasure, joy, joy, joy, joy.’ But if you’ve got any sense of responsibility, you can’t do that.”
> 
> The documentarian’s comments come amid ongoing and increasingly dire warnings from the planet’s scientists that climate change is largely continuing unabated. A report released last month by the Environmental Protection Agency detailed a disturbing shift in the United States caused by a warming world: The destruction of permafrost in Alaska, a spike in heat waves nationwide and longer-lasting wildfire and pollen season.
> 
> In his book and documentary, Attenborough pointed to existing technology that could help greatly alleviate the threat of climate change, primarily an immediate shift away from fossil fuels and an effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.
> The threat, he concluded, has grown so large as to be beyond the burden of any one nation.
> “I would say that the time has come to put aside national ambitions and look for an international ambition of survival,” he said. He later added: “What good does it do to say, “Oh, to hell with it, I don’t care.’ You can’t say that. Not if … you love your children. Not if you love the rest of human― how can you say that?”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah....China is about to experience a rapid decline in population so much so they have lifted their one child policy and now want 3......
> 
> Climate change is a scam....the planet changes climate without any help......and anyone who is telling you to give them money and power to save the planet is selling you BS....
Click to expand...

Bullshit.  And the ocean is a toilet bowl.

But, these Green companies will be the new industries.  I have a battery powered bike.  My girlfriend just bought a home and purchased a battery powered lawn mower.  

We need to pay taxes to hire people to go clean out the oceans of all the plastic you stupid conservatives are really ignorant.


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You make some good points in that improved technology can reduce emissions, take less space, make medical breakthroughs, etc.
> However, there are 2 main reasons you are wrong.
> 
> One is that which made Malthus wrong was all fossil fuel based, and that is going to run out.
> Fossil fuels powered the miracle that created the fertilizers that increased farming production by more than a factor of 4, and allow such wider food distribution that our grocery store have fresh produce from all over the world.
> Solar and wind are awful because then you need some means of energy storage.
> Fission and fusion are not sustainable either, since we have limited fissile material and will produce lots of radioactive wastes.
> There is no energy solution I know of, and no one has suggested one.
> 
> The other is that there are many limits to how much of the earth we have to leave alone.  Not only are we dependent upon things like birds to eat insects and pollinators, but the oxygen we breath itself has to be regenerated on about a 200 year cycle.  We dump lots of wastes into the ocean, and eventually that has to bite us as well.  And we need a lot more trees.  They not only produce oxygen, but reduce erosion, provide habitat, create shade, and change weather.  There is so much we do not even know about or take for granted.  Even fresh water could well become a limiting resource very soon.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It would be a contradiction to assume that improving techniques, technology, and a declining global population can’t mitigate the above.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Is the decline in global population going to be enough?  How low will our population go do you think?
> 
> *Population growth* is the *increase* in the number of individuals in a *population*. Global *human population growth* amounts to around 83 million annually, or 1.1% per year. The global *population* has grown from 1 billion in 1800 to 7.9 billion in 2020.
> 
> If it stays at 7 billion that's too much.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, it’s not.
Click to expand...

I asked you a question why didn't you answer it?  You always say if I ask you will answer.  How low do you think the human population is going to go?


----------



## sealybobo

bripat9643 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Attenborough Says Climate Change Is A ‘Crime’ Humanity Has Inflicted On The Planet
> 
> 
> The documentarian reiterated his grief that society has destroyed large swaths of the natural world, but said humanity is “not beyond redemption.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare is smarter than David Attenborough
> 
> “Well, a crime has been committed,” Attenborough, 95, replied. “And it so happens that, I’m of such an age, that I was able to see it beginning.”
> “It isn’t that I enjoy saying: ‘Doom, doom, doom,’” he continued. “On the contrary, I’d much rather [say]: ‘Enjoy, take thrill, excitement, pleasure, joy, joy, joy, joy.’ But if you’ve got any sense of responsibility, you can’t do that.”
> 
> The documentarian’s comments come amid ongoing and increasingly dire warnings from the planet’s scientists that climate change is largely continuing unabated. A report released last month by the Environmental Protection Agency detailed a disturbing shift in the United States caused by a warming world: The destruction of permafrost in Alaska, a spike in heat waves nationwide and longer-lasting wildfire and pollen season.
> 
> In his book and documentary, Attenborough pointed to existing technology that could help greatly alleviate the threat of climate change, primarily an immediate shift away from fossil fuels and an effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.
> The threat, he concluded, has grown so large as to be beyond the burden of any one nation.
> “I would say that the time has come to put aside national ambitions and look for an international ambition of survival,” he said. He later added: “What good does it do to say, “Oh, to hell with it, I don’t care.’ You can’t say that. Not if … you love your children. Not if you love the rest of human― how can you say that?”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> _Appeal to authority _- a logical fallacy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sort of like how Christians believe priests?
> 
> I don't think it's an appeal to authority when you get sick and go see a doctor is it?  Well when it comes to climate change, who else are you going to appeal to?  It's not a fallacy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's an appeal to authority, moron.  You failed to prove it's not.  You attempted to claim that some appeals to authority are valid, but you failed to prove it.
Click to expand...

Well if that's your only comment I guess we're done.  Even if it is an appeal to authority what's wrong with that?  If the guy's a scientists or expert in the field why not point to him and say look he agrees with us?

You do it with Ben Carson.


----------



## RetiredGySgt

sealybobo said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Attenborough Says Climate Change Is A ‘Crime’ Humanity Has Inflicted On The Planet
> 
> 
> The documentarian reiterated his grief that society has destroyed large swaths of the natural world, but said humanity is “not beyond redemption.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare is smarter than David Attenborough
> 
> “Well, a crime has been committed,” Attenborough, 95, replied. “And it so happens that, I’m of such an age, that I was able to see it beginning.”
> “It isn’t that I enjoy saying: ‘Doom, doom, doom,’” he continued. “On the contrary, I’d much rather [say]: ‘Enjoy, take thrill, excitement, pleasure, joy, joy, joy, joy.’ But if you’ve got any sense of responsibility, you can’t do that.”
> 
> The documentarian’s comments come amid ongoing and increasingly dire warnings from the planet’s scientists that climate change is largely continuing unabated. A report released last month by the Environmental Protection Agency detailed a disturbing shift in the United States caused by a warming world: The destruction of permafrost in Alaska, a spike in heat waves nationwide and longer-lasting wildfire and pollen season.
> 
> In his book and documentary, Attenborough pointed to existing technology that could help greatly alleviate the threat of climate change, primarily an immediate shift away from fossil fuels and an effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.
> The threat, he concluded, has grown so large as to be beyond the burden of any one nation.
> “I would say that the time has come to put aside national ambitions and look for an international ambition of survival,” he said. He later added: “What good does it do to say, “Oh, to hell with it, I don’t care.’ You can’t say that. Not if … you love your children. Not if you love the rest of human― how can you say that?”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah....China is about to experience a rapid decline in population so much so they have lifted their one child policy and now want 3......
> 
> Climate change is a scam....the planet changes climate without any help......and anyone who is telling you to give them money and power to save the planet is selling you BS....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Bullshit.  And the ocean is a toilet bowl.
> 
> But, these Green companies will be the new industries.  I have a battery powered bike.  My girlfriend just bought a home and purchased a battery powered lawn mower.
> 
> We need to pay taxes to hire people to go clean out the oceans of all the plastic you stupid conservatives are really ignorant.
Click to expand...

lol batteries are toxic where do you think they go when used up?


----------



## bripat9643

sealybobo said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Attenborough Says Climate Change Is A ‘Crime’ Humanity Has Inflicted On The Planet
> 
> 
> The documentarian reiterated his grief that society has destroyed large swaths of the natural world, but said humanity is “not beyond redemption.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare is smarter than David Attenborough
> 
> “Well, a crime has been committed,” Attenborough, 95, replied. “And it so happens that, I’m of such an age, that I was able to see it beginning.”
> “It isn’t that I enjoy saying: ‘Doom, doom, doom,’” he continued. “On the contrary, I’d much rather [say]: ‘Enjoy, take thrill, excitement, pleasure, joy, joy, joy, joy.’ But if you’ve got any sense of responsibility, you can’t do that.”
> 
> The documentarian’s comments come amid ongoing and increasingly dire warnings from the planet’s scientists that climate change is largely continuing unabated. A report released last month by the Environmental Protection Agency detailed a disturbing shift in the United States caused by a warming world: The destruction of permafrost in Alaska, a spike in heat waves nationwide and longer-lasting wildfire and pollen season.
> 
> In his book and documentary, Attenborough pointed to existing technology that could help greatly alleviate the threat of climate change, primarily an immediate shift away from fossil fuels and an effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.
> The threat, he concluded, has grown so large as to be beyond the burden of any one nation.
> “I would say that the time has come to put aside national ambitions and look for an international ambition of survival,” he said. He later added: “What good does it do to say, “Oh, to hell with it, I don’t care.’ You can’t say that. Not if … you love your children. Not if you love the rest of human― how can you say that?”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> _Appeal to authority _- a logical fallacy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sort of like how Christians believe priests?
> 
> I don't think it's an appeal to authority when you get sick and go see a doctor is it?  Well when it comes to climate change, who else are you going to appeal to?  It's not a fallacy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's an appeal to authority, moron.  You failed to prove it's not.  You attempted to claim that some appeals to authority are valid, but you failed to prove it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well if that's your only comment I guess we're done.  Even if it is an appeal to authority what's wrong with that?  If the guy's a scientists or expert in the field why not point to him and say look he agrees with us?
> 
> You do it with Ben Carson.
Click to expand...

What's wrong with using an appeal to authority?

You're a true Democrat.


----------



## 2aguy

sealybobo said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Attenborough Says Climate Change Is A ‘Crime’ Humanity Has Inflicted On The Planet
> 
> 
> The documentarian reiterated his grief that society has destroyed large swaths of the natural world, but said humanity is “not beyond redemption.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare is smarter than David Attenborough
> 
> “Well, a crime has been committed,” Attenborough, 95, replied. “And it so happens that, I’m of such an age, that I was able to see it beginning.”
> “It isn’t that I enjoy saying: ‘Doom, doom, doom,’” he continued. “On the contrary, I’d much rather [say]: ‘Enjoy, take thrill, excitement, pleasure, joy, joy, joy, joy.’ But if you’ve got any sense of responsibility, you can’t do that.”
> 
> The documentarian’s comments come amid ongoing and increasingly dire warnings from the planet’s scientists that climate change is largely continuing unabated. A report released last month by the Environmental Protection Agency detailed a disturbing shift in the United States caused by a warming world: The destruction of permafrost in Alaska, a spike in heat waves nationwide and longer-lasting wildfire and pollen season.
> 
> In his book and documentary, Attenborough pointed to existing technology that could help greatly alleviate the threat of climate change, primarily an immediate shift away from fossil fuels and an effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.
> The threat, he concluded, has grown so large as to be beyond the burden of any one nation.
> “I would say that the time has come to put aside national ambitions and look for an international ambition of survival,” he said. He later added: “What good does it do to say, “Oh, to hell with it, I don’t care.’ You can’t say that. Not if … you love your children. Not if you love the rest of human― how can you say that?”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A. The world is far from being overpopulated. You can fit the entire world population in Texas and give ever family a quarter of an acre home.
> 
> B. Only science deniers think the climate of today is optimum and believe that for the first time since time began the climate must stop changing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Some like to assert that everybody on *Earth could* be *fit* into the State of *Texas*, using logic as follows. The area of *Texas* is about 262,000 mi2. Dividing this figure by the current human *population* of 7 billion leaves each person with less than 100 square meters, a small plot the size of a big room about 10 m x 10 m.
> 
> One third of Earth's surface is desert which supports very few people.
> 
> Without going into the fact that almost half the State is desert, notice we have not allowed for any roads, shopping malls, schools, hospitals, football stadiums, prisons, sewage plants, rivers, lakes, reservoirs, golf courses, parks, and what else? How much land does it take to support a human being?
> 
> Right now China, USA, Mexico, India, Europe, Canada, Australia, are all putting up too many toxic fumes.  We need to stop.  We are destroying the planet.  THat's the scientific consensus.
Click to expand...



No, we are not destroying the planet.....but please, feel free to giver your money to the ones telling you we are, and please, give your freedom to the ones who tell you we are....they need your money to buy more mansions on the various coasts around the country and they need power to extract even more of your money from you ....besides...when they fly on private jets...it costs a lot of money....and when you are in your smart car, just make sure to get out of the way of their gas guzzling SUVs as they tool around to their climate religious events..........of course, their Electric cars will be in their garages...only brought out as a show for people like you....


----------



## 2aguy

Unkotare said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You make some good points in that improved technology can reduce emissions, take less space, make medical breakthroughs, etc.
> However, there are 2 main reasons you are wrong.
> 
> One is that which made Malthus wrong was all fossil fuel based, and that is going to run out.
> Fossil fuels powered the miracle that created the fertilizers that increased farming production by more than a factor of 4, and allow such wider food distribution that our grocery store have fresh produce from all over the world.
> Solar and wind are awful because then you need some means of energy storage.
> Fission and fusion are not sustainable either, since we have limited fissile material and will produce lots of radioactive wastes.
> There is no energy solution I know of, and no one has suggested one.
> 
> The other is that there are many limits to how much of the earth we have to leave alone.  Not only are we dependent upon things like birds to eat insects and pollinators, but the oxygen we breath itself has to be regenerated on about a 200 year cycle.  We dump lots of wastes into the ocean, and eventually that has to bite us as well.  And we need a lot more trees.  They not only produce oxygen, but reduce erosion, provide habitat, create shade, and change weather.  There is so much we do not even know about or take for granted.  Even fresh water could well become a limiting resource very soon.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It would be a contradiction to assume that improving techniques, technology, and a declining global population can’t mitigate the above.
Click to expand...



Exactly...the only country really cutting CO2 emissions is the U.S....everyone else just keep polluting.........

Wealthy countries like clean things....they like forests and parks.....China wants power, and will enslave as many people, destroy as much of the environment, as it takes to get that power........


----------



## sealybobo

RetiredGySgt said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Attenborough Says Climate Change Is A ‘Crime’ Humanity Has Inflicted On The Planet
> 
> 
> The documentarian reiterated his grief that society has destroyed large swaths of the natural world, but said humanity is “not beyond redemption.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare is smarter than David Attenborough
> 
> “Well, a crime has been committed,” Attenborough, 95, replied. “And it so happens that, I’m of such an age, that I was able to see it beginning.”
> “It isn’t that I enjoy saying: ‘Doom, doom, doom,’” he continued. “On the contrary, I’d much rather [say]: ‘Enjoy, take thrill, excitement, pleasure, joy, joy, joy, joy.’ But if you’ve got any sense of responsibility, you can’t do that.”
> 
> The documentarian’s comments come amid ongoing and increasingly dire warnings from the planet’s scientists that climate change is largely continuing unabated. A report released last month by the Environmental Protection Agency detailed a disturbing shift in the United States caused by a warming world: The destruction of permafrost in Alaska, a spike in heat waves nationwide and longer-lasting wildfire and pollen season.
> 
> In his book and documentary, Attenborough pointed to existing technology that could help greatly alleviate the threat of climate change, primarily an immediate shift away from fossil fuels and an effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.
> The threat, he concluded, has grown so large as to be beyond the burden of any one nation.
> “I would say that the time has come to put aside national ambitions and look for an international ambition of survival,” he said. He later added: “What good does it do to say, “Oh, to hell with it, I don’t care.’ You can’t say that. Not if … you love your children. Not if you love the rest of human― how can you say that?”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah....China is about to experience a rapid decline in population so much so they have lifted their one child policy and now want 3......
> 
> Climate change is a scam....the planet changes climate without any help......and anyone who is telling you to give them money and power to save the planet is selling you BS....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Bullshit.  And the ocean is a toilet bowl.
> 
> But, these Green companies will be the new industries.  I have a battery powered bike.  My girlfriend just bought a home and purchased a battery powered lawn mower.
> 
> We need to pay taxes to hire people to go clean out the oceans of all the plastic you stupid conservatives are really ignorant.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> lol batteries are toxic where do you think they go when used up?
Click to expand...

Nonsense.  Venice is moving to battery boats.  Clean up the air, water and noise pollution.  




Don't hate.

You think it'd be better for me to be riding around on a gas powered moped than my battery bike?  

Where does everything go when we are done with them?  In the trash.  Recyle?  It's amazing what we are doing today.


----------



## 2aguy

sealybobo said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Attenborough Says Climate Change Is A ‘Crime’ Humanity Has Inflicted On The Planet
> 
> 
> The documentarian reiterated his grief that society has destroyed large swaths of the natural world, but said humanity is “not beyond redemption.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare is smarter than David Attenborough
> 
> “Well, a crime has been committed,” Attenborough, 95, replied. “And it so happens that, I’m of such an age, that I was able to see it beginning.”
> “It isn’t that I enjoy saying: ‘Doom, doom, doom,’” he continued. “On the contrary, I’d much rather [say]: ‘Enjoy, take thrill, excitement, pleasure, joy, joy, joy, joy.’ But if you’ve got any sense of responsibility, you can’t do that.”
> 
> The documentarian’s comments come amid ongoing and increasingly dire warnings from the planet’s scientists that climate change is largely continuing unabated. A report released last month by the Environmental Protection Agency detailed a disturbing shift in the United States caused by a warming world: The destruction of permafrost in Alaska, a spike in heat waves nationwide and longer-lasting wildfire and pollen season.
> 
> In his book and documentary, Attenborough pointed to existing technology that could help greatly alleviate the threat of climate change, primarily an immediate shift away from fossil fuels and an effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.
> The threat, he concluded, has grown so large as to be beyond the burden of any one nation.
> “I would say that the time has come to put aside national ambitions and look for an international ambition of survival,” he said. He later added: “What good does it do to say, “Oh, to hell with it, I don’t care.’ You can’t say that. Not if … you love your children. Not if you love the rest of human― how can you say that?”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah....China is about to experience a rapid decline in population so much so they have lifted their one child policy and now want 3......
> 
> Climate change is a scam....the planet changes climate without any help......and anyone who is telling you to give them money and power to save the planet is selling you BS....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Bullshit.  And the ocean is a toilet bowl.
> 
> But, these Green companies will be the new industries.  I have a battery powered bike.  My girlfriend just bought a home and purchased a battery powered lawn mower.
> 
> We need to pay taxes to hire people to go clean out the oceans of all the plastic you stupid conservatives are really ignorant.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> lol batteries are toxic where do you think they go when used up?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nonsense.  Venice is moving to battery boats.  Clean up the air, water and noise pollution.
> 
> View attachment 498293
> Don't hate.
> 
> You think it'd be better for me to be riding around on a gas powered moped than my battery bike?
> 
> Where does everything go when we are done with them?  In the trash.  Recyle?  It's amazing what we are doing today.
Click to expand...



Yeah......Italy is truly a world leader......in what, we don't know......but that boat looks cute...

Meanwhile, the U.S. protects europe, Asia, and provides advanced tech and medical innovation for the world.....

You go girl...


----------



## sealybobo

2aguy said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Attenborough Says Climate Change Is A ‘Crime’ Humanity Has Inflicted On The Planet
> 
> 
> The documentarian reiterated his grief that society has destroyed large swaths of the natural world, but said humanity is “not beyond redemption.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare is smarter than David Attenborough
> 
> “Well, a crime has been committed,” Attenborough, 95, replied. “And it so happens that, I’m of such an age, that I was able to see it beginning.”
> “It isn’t that I enjoy saying: ‘Doom, doom, doom,’” he continued. “On the contrary, I’d much rather [say]: ‘Enjoy, take thrill, excitement, pleasure, joy, joy, joy, joy.’ But if you’ve got any sense of responsibility, you can’t do that.”
> 
> The documentarian’s comments come amid ongoing and increasingly dire warnings from the planet’s scientists that climate change is largely continuing unabated. A report released last month by the Environmental Protection Agency detailed a disturbing shift in the United States caused by a warming world: The destruction of permafrost in Alaska, a spike in heat waves nationwide and longer-lasting wildfire and pollen season.
> 
> In his book and documentary, Attenborough pointed to existing technology that could help greatly alleviate the threat of climate change, primarily an immediate shift away from fossil fuels and an effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.
> The threat, he concluded, has grown so large as to be beyond the burden of any one nation.
> “I would say that the time has come to put aside national ambitions and look for an international ambition of survival,” he said. He later added: “What good does it do to say, “Oh, to hell with it, I don’t care.’ You can’t say that. Not if … you love your children. Not if you love the rest of human― how can you say that?”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah....China is about to experience a rapid decline in population so much so they have lifted their one child policy and now want 3......
> 
> Climate change is a scam....the planet changes climate without any help......and anyone who is telling you to give them money and power to save the planet is selling you BS....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Bullshit.  And the ocean is a toilet bowl.
> 
> But, these Green companies will be the new industries.  I have a battery powered bike.  My girlfriend just bought a home and purchased a battery powered lawn mower.
> 
> We need to pay taxes to hire people to go clean out the oceans of all the plastic you stupid conservatives are really ignorant.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> lol batteries are toxic where do you think they go when used up?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nonsense.  Venice is moving to battery boats.  Clean up the air, water and noise pollution.
> 
> View attachment 498293
> Don't hate.
> 
> You think it'd be better for me to be riding around on a gas powered moped than my battery bike?
> 
> Where does everything go when we are done with them?  In the trash.  Recyle?  It's amazing what we are doing today.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah......Italy is truly a world leader......in what, we don't know......but that boat looks cute...
> 
> Meanwhile, the U.S. protects europe, Asia, and provides advanced tech and medical innovation for the world.....
> 
> You go girl...
Click to expand...

I miss you Republicans back when you were at least pushing for more nuclear power.  What happened to that?  Are you hell bent on keeping the coal and gas business' going?  Lobbyists?  Votes?


----------



## Weatherman2020

sealybobo said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Attenborough Says Climate Change Is A ‘Crime’ Humanity Has Inflicted On The Planet
> 
> 
> The documentarian reiterated his grief that society has destroyed large swaths of the natural world, but said humanity is “not beyond redemption.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare is smarter than David Attenborough
> 
> “Well, a crime has been committed,” Attenborough, 95, replied. “And it so happens that, I’m of such an age, that I was able to see it beginning.”
> “It isn’t that I enjoy saying: ‘Doom, doom, doom,’” he continued. “On the contrary, I’d much rather [say]: ‘Enjoy, take thrill, excitement, pleasure, joy, joy, joy, joy.’ But if you’ve got any sense of responsibility, you can’t do that.”
> 
> The documentarian’s comments come amid ongoing and increasingly dire warnings from the planet’s scientists that climate change is largely continuing unabated. A report released last month by the Environmental Protection Agency detailed a disturbing shift in the United States caused by a warming world: The destruction of permafrost in Alaska, a spike in heat waves nationwide and longer-lasting wildfire and pollen season.
> 
> In his book and documentary, Attenborough pointed to existing technology that could help greatly alleviate the threat of climate change, primarily an immediate shift away from fossil fuels and an effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.
> The threat, he concluded, has grown so large as to be beyond the burden of any one nation.
> “I would say that the time has come to put aside national ambitions and look for an international ambition of survival,” he said. He later added: “What good does it do to say, “Oh, to hell with it, I don’t care.’ You can’t say that. Not if … you love your children. Not if you love the rest of human― how can you say that?”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A. The world is far from being overpopulated. You can fit the entire world population in Texas and give ever family a quarter of an acre home.
> 
> B. Only science deniers think the climate of today is optimum and believe that for the first time since time began the climate must stop changing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Some like to assert that everybody on *Earth could* be *fit* into the State of *Texas*, using logic as follows. The area of *Texas* is about 262,000 mi2. Dividing this figure by the current human *population* of 7 billion leaves each person with less than 100 square meters, a small plot the size of a big room about 10 m x 10 m.
> 
> One third of Earth's surface is desert which supports very few people.
> 
> Without going into the fact that almost half the State is desert, notice we have not allowed for any roads, shopping malls, schools, hospitals, football stadiums, prisons, sewage plants, rivers, lakes, reservoirs, golf courses, parks, and what else? How much land does it take to support a human being?
> 
> Right now China, USA, Mexico, India, Europe, Canada, Australia, are all putting up too many toxic fumes.  We need to stop.  We are destroying the planet.  THat's the scientific consensus.
Click to expand...

Math rule #1: don’t mix units of measurement.
Assumption: 7.6B population 
Texas = 268,820 sq miles = 7,494,271,488,000 sq ft

That means ever human on earth could live in Texas and have 3,944 sq ft. Family of 4 gives them .09 acres, which is standard suburban lot size.

As far as climates, many people live in deserts by choice. Most of the planet is covered by water and a third of our underground is filled with water. Much of the earth is covered in ice. Assuming that melts, we gain livable land. 

For anyone who travels, they know the earth is far from being overpopulated.


----------



## Weatherman2020

sealybobo said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Attenborough Says Climate Change Is A ‘Crime’ Humanity Has Inflicted On The Planet
> 
> 
> The documentarian reiterated his grief that society has destroyed large swaths of the natural world, but said humanity is “not beyond redemption.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare is smarter than David Attenborough
> 
> “Well, a crime has been committed,” Attenborough, 95, replied. “And it so happens that, I’m of such an age, that I was able to see it beginning.”
> “It isn’t that I enjoy saying: ‘Doom, doom, doom,’” he continued. “On the contrary, I’d much rather [say]: ‘Enjoy, take thrill, excitement, pleasure, joy, joy, joy, joy.’ But if you’ve got any sense of responsibility, you can’t do that.”
> 
> The documentarian’s comments come amid ongoing and increasingly dire warnings from the planet’s scientists that climate change is largely continuing unabated. A report released last month by the Environmental Protection Agency detailed a disturbing shift in the United States caused by a warming world: The destruction of permafrost in Alaska, a spike in heat waves nationwide and longer-lasting wildfire and pollen season.
> 
> In his book and documentary, Attenborough pointed to existing technology that could help greatly alleviate the threat of climate change, primarily an immediate shift away from fossil fuels and an effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.
> The threat, he concluded, has grown so large as to be beyond the burden of any one nation.
> “I would say that the time has come to put aside national ambitions and look for an international ambition of survival,” he said. He later added: “What good does it do to say, “Oh, to hell with it, I don’t care.’ You can’t say that. Not if … you love your children. Not if you love the rest of human― how can you say that?”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah....China is about to experience a rapid decline in population so much so they have lifted their one child policy and now want 3......
> 
> Climate change is a scam....the planet changes climate without any help......and anyone who is telling you to give them money and power to save the planet is selling you BS....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Bullshit.  And the ocean is a toilet bowl.
> 
> But, these Green companies will be the new industries.  I have a battery powered bike.  My girlfriend just bought a home and purchased a battery powered lawn mower.
> 
> We need to pay taxes to hire people to go clean out the oceans of all the plastic you stupid conservatives are really ignorant.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> lol batteries are toxic where do you think they go when used up?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nonsense.  Venice is moving to battery boats.  Clean up the air, water and noise pollution.
> 
> View attachment 498293
> Don't hate.
> 
> You think it'd be better for me to be riding around on a gas powered moped than my battery bike?
> 
> Where does everything go when we are done with them?  In the trash.  Recyle?  It's amazing what we are doing today.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah......Italy is truly a world leader......in what, we don't know......but that boat looks cute...
> 
> Meanwhile, the U.S. protects europe, Asia, and provides advanced tech and medical innovation for the world.....
> 
> You go girl...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I miss you Republicans back when you were at least pushing for more nuclear power.  What happened to that?  Are you hell bent on keeping the coal and gas business' going?  Lobbyists?  Votes?
Click to expand...

I wish I could say I miss the days the Left cared about the environment.  But there’s never been one of those days. Your killing of nuclear energy proves my point.


----------



## sealybobo

Weatherman2020 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Attenborough Says Climate Change Is A ‘Crime’ Humanity Has Inflicted On The Planet
> 
> 
> The documentarian reiterated his grief that society has destroyed large swaths of the natural world, but said humanity is “not beyond redemption.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare is smarter than David Attenborough
> 
> “Well, a crime has been committed,” Attenborough, 95, replied. “And it so happens that, I’m of such an age, that I was able to see it beginning.”
> “It isn’t that I enjoy saying: ‘Doom, doom, doom,’” he continued. “On the contrary, I’d much rather [say]: ‘Enjoy, take thrill, excitement, pleasure, joy, joy, joy, joy.’ But if you’ve got any sense of responsibility, you can’t do that.”
> 
> The documentarian’s comments come amid ongoing and increasingly dire warnings from the planet’s scientists that climate change is largely continuing unabated. A report released last month by the Environmental Protection Agency detailed a disturbing shift in the United States caused by a warming world: The destruction of permafrost in Alaska, a spike in heat waves nationwide and longer-lasting wildfire and pollen season.
> 
> In his book and documentary, Attenborough pointed to existing technology that could help greatly alleviate the threat of climate change, primarily an immediate shift away from fossil fuels and an effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.
> The threat, he concluded, has grown so large as to be beyond the burden of any one nation.
> “I would say that the time has come to put aside national ambitions and look for an international ambition of survival,” he said. He later added: “What good does it do to say, “Oh, to hell with it, I don’t care.’ You can’t say that. Not if … you love your children. Not if you love the rest of human― how can you say that?”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A. The world is far from being overpopulated. You can fit the entire world population in Texas and give ever family a quarter of an acre home.
> 
> B. Only science deniers think the climate of today is optimum and believe that for the first time since time began the climate must stop changing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Some like to assert that everybody on *Earth could* be *fit* into the State of *Texas*, using logic as follows. The area of *Texas* is about 262,000 mi2. Dividing this figure by the current human *population* of 7 billion leaves each person with less than 100 square meters, a small plot the size of a big room about 10 m x 10 m.
> 
> One third of Earth's surface is desert which supports very few people.
> 
> Without going into the fact that almost half the State is desert, notice we have not allowed for any roads, shopping malls, schools, hospitals, football stadiums, prisons, sewage plants, rivers, lakes, reservoirs, golf courses, parks, and what else? How much land does it take to support a human being?
> 
> Right now China, USA, Mexico, India, Europe, Canada, Australia, are all putting up too many toxic fumes.  We need to stop.  We are destroying the planet.  THat's the scientific consensus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Math rule #1: don’t mix units of measurement.
> Assumption: 7.6B population
> Texas = 268,820 sq miles = 7,494,271,488,000 sq ft
> 
> That means ever human on earth could live in Texas and have 3,944 sq ft. Family of 4 gives them .09 acres, which is standard suburban lot size.
> 
> As far as climates, many people live in deserts by choice. Most of the planet is covered by water and a third of our underground is filled with water. Much of the earth is covered in ice. Assuming that melts, we gain livable land.
> 
> For anyone who travels, they know the earth is far from being overpopulated.
Click to expand...

Yea that's why cities out west want to take our great lakes water and we say no because once the water goes there it never comes back.  

It's funny you cons refuse to admit this planet is fucked up.  Too many of us.  And yet at the same time you don't want to let any immigrants into the country because you know there are too many of us.


----------



## sealybobo

Weatherman2020 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Attenborough Says Climate Change Is A ‘Crime’ Humanity Has Inflicted On The Planet
> 
> 
> The documentarian reiterated his grief that society has destroyed large swaths of the natural world, but said humanity is “not beyond redemption.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare is smarter than David Attenborough
> 
> “Well, a crime has been committed,” Attenborough, 95, replied. “And it so happens that, I’m of such an age, that I was able to see it beginning.”
> “It isn’t that I enjoy saying: ‘Doom, doom, doom,’” he continued. “On the contrary, I’d much rather [say]: ‘Enjoy, take thrill, excitement, pleasure, joy, joy, joy, joy.’ But if you’ve got any sense of responsibility, you can’t do that.”
> 
> The documentarian’s comments come amid ongoing and increasingly dire warnings from the planet’s scientists that climate change is largely continuing unabated. A report released last month by the Environmental Protection Agency detailed a disturbing shift in the United States caused by a warming world: The destruction of permafrost in Alaska, a spike in heat waves nationwide and longer-lasting wildfire and pollen season.
> 
> In his book and documentary, Attenborough pointed to existing technology that could help greatly alleviate the threat of climate change, primarily an immediate shift away from fossil fuels and an effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.
> The threat, he concluded, has grown so large as to be beyond the burden of any one nation.
> “I would say that the time has come to put aside national ambitions and look for an international ambition of survival,” he said. He later added: “What good does it do to say, “Oh, to hell with it, I don’t care.’ You can’t say that. Not if … you love your children. Not if you love the rest of human― how can you say that?”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah....China is about to experience a rapid decline in population so much so they have lifted their one child policy and now want 3......
> 
> Climate change is a scam....the planet changes climate without any help......and anyone who is telling you to give them money and power to save the planet is selling you BS....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Bullshit.  And the ocean is a toilet bowl.
> 
> But, these Green companies will be the new industries.  I have a battery powered bike.  My girlfriend just bought a home and purchased a battery powered lawn mower.
> 
> We need to pay taxes to hire people to go clean out the oceans of all the plastic you stupid conservatives are really ignorant.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> lol batteries are toxic where do you think they go when used up?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nonsense.  Venice is moving to battery boats.  Clean up the air, water and noise pollution.
> 
> View attachment 498293
> Don't hate.
> 
> You think it'd be better for me to be riding around on a gas powered moped than my battery bike?
> 
> Where does everything go when we are done with them?  In the trash.  Recyle?  It's amazing what we are doing today.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah......Italy is truly a world leader......in what, we don't know......but that boat looks cute...
> 
> Meanwhile, the U.S. protects europe, Asia, and provides advanced tech and medical innovation for the world.....
> 
> You go girl...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I miss you Republicans back when you were at least pushing for more nuclear power.  What happened to that?  Are you hell bent on keeping the coal and gas business' going?  Lobbyists?  Votes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I wish I could say I miss the days the Left cared about the environment.  But there’s never been one of those days. Your killing of nuclear energy proves my point.
Click to expand...

Well it doesn't sound safe does it to you?

Instead of plastic straws we want to move to bio degradable paper straws and you guys fight us.  You love plastic coal and gas why?


----------



## sealybobo

Weatherman2020 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Attenborough Says Climate Change Is A ‘Crime’ Humanity Has Inflicted On The Planet
> 
> 
> The documentarian reiterated his grief that society has destroyed large swaths of the natural world, but said humanity is “not beyond redemption.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare is smarter than David Attenborough
> 
> “Well, a crime has been committed,” Attenborough, 95, replied. “And it so happens that, I’m of such an age, that I was able to see it beginning.”
> “It isn’t that I enjoy saying: ‘Doom, doom, doom,’” he continued. “On the contrary, I’d much rather [say]: ‘Enjoy, take thrill, excitement, pleasure, joy, joy, joy, joy.’ But if you’ve got any sense of responsibility, you can’t do that.”
> 
> The documentarian’s comments come amid ongoing and increasingly dire warnings from the planet’s scientists that climate change is largely continuing unabated. A report released last month by the Environmental Protection Agency detailed a disturbing shift in the United States caused by a warming world: The destruction of permafrost in Alaska, a spike in heat waves nationwide and longer-lasting wildfire and pollen season.
> 
> In his book and documentary, Attenborough pointed to existing technology that could help greatly alleviate the threat of climate change, primarily an immediate shift away from fossil fuels and an effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.
> The threat, he concluded, has grown so large as to be beyond the burden of any one nation.
> “I would say that the time has come to put aside national ambitions and look for an international ambition of survival,” he said. He later added: “What good does it do to say, “Oh, to hell with it, I don’t care.’ You can’t say that. Not if … you love your children. Not if you love the rest of human― how can you say that?”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah....China is about to experience a rapid decline in population so much so they have lifted their one child policy and now want 3......
> 
> Climate change is a scam....the planet changes climate without any help......and anyone who is telling you to give them money and power to save the planet is selling you BS....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Bullshit.  And the ocean is a toilet bowl.
> 
> But, these Green companies will be the new industries.  I have a battery powered bike.  My girlfriend just bought a home and purchased a battery powered lawn mower.
> 
> We need to pay taxes to hire people to go clean out the oceans of all the plastic you stupid conservatives are really ignorant.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> lol batteries are toxic where do you think they go when used up?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nonsense.  Venice is moving to battery boats.  Clean up the air, water and noise pollution.
> 
> View attachment 498293
> Don't hate.
> 
> You think it'd be better for me to be riding around on a gas powered moped than my battery bike?
> 
> Where does everything go when we are done with them?  In the trash.  Recyle?  It's amazing what we are doing today.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah......Italy is truly a world leader......in what, we don't know......but that boat looks cute...
> 
> Meanwhile, the U.S. protects europe, Asia, and provides advanced tech and medical innovation for the world.....
> 
> You go girl...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I miss you Republicans back when you were at least pushing for more nuclear power.  What happened to that?  Are you hell bent on keeping the coal and gas business' going?  Lobbyists?  Votes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I wish I could say I miss the days the Left cared about the environment.  But there’s never been one of those days. Your killing of nuclear energy proves my point.
Click to expand...

And you hate windmills, batteries and solar panels.  Why?  Why are you guys always against going green?


----------



## Weatherman2020

sealybobo said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Attenborough Says Climate Change Is A ‘Crime’ Humanity Has Inflicted On The Planet
> 
> 
> The documentarian reiterated his grief that society has destroyed large swaths of the natural world, but said humanity is “not beyond redemption.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare is smarter than David Attenborough
> 
> “Well, a crime has been committed,” Attenborough, 95, replied. “And it so happens that, I’m of such an age, that I was able to see it beginning.”
> “It isn’t that I enjoy saying: ‘Doom, doom, doom,’” he continued. “On the contrary, I’d much rather [say]: ‘Enjoy, take thrill, excitement, pleasure, joy, joy, joy, joy.’ But if you’ve got any sense of responsibility, you can’t do that.”
> 
> The documentarian’s comments come amid ongoing and increasingly dire warnings from the planet’s scientists that climate change is largely continuing unabated. A report released last month by the Environmental Protection Agency detailed a disturbing shift in the United States caused by a warming world: The destruction of permafrost in Alaska, a spike in heat waves nationwide and longer-lasting wildfire and pollen season.
> 
> In his book and documentary, Attenborough pointed to existing technology that could help greatly alleviate the threat of climate change, primarily an immediate shift away from fossil fuels and an effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.
> The threat, he concluded, has grown so large as to be beyond the burden of any one nation.
> “I would say that the time has come to put aside national ambitions and look for an international ambition of survival,” he said. He later added: “What good does it do to say, “Oh, to hell with it, I don’t care.’ You can’t say that. Not if … you love your children. Not if you love the rest of human― how can you say that?”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah....China is about to experience a rapid decline in population so much so they have lifted their one child policy and now want 3......
> 
> Climate change is a scam....the planet changes climate without any help......and anyone who is telling you to give them money and power to save the planet is selling you BS....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Bullshit.  And the ocean is a toilet bowl.
> 
> But, these Green companies will be the new industries.  I have a battery powered bike.  My girlfriend just bought a home and purchased a battery powered lawn mower.
> 
> We need to pay taxes to hire people to go clean out the oceans of all the plastic you stupid conservatives are really ignorant.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> lol batteries are toxic where do you think they go when used up?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nonsense.  Venice is moving to battery boats.  Clean up the air, water and noise pollution.
> 
> View attachment 498293
> Don't hate.
> 
> You think it'd be better for me to be riding around on a gas powered moped than my battery bike?
> 
> Where does everything go when we are done with them?  In the trash.  Recyle?  It's amazing what we are doing today.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah......Italy is truly a world leader......in what, we don't know......but that boat looks cute...
> 
> Meanwhile, the U.S. protects europe, Asia, and provides advanced tech and medical innovation for the world.....
> 
> You go girl...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I miss you Republicans back when you were at least pushing for more nuclear power.  What happened to that?  Are you hell bent on keeping the coal and gas business' going?  Lobbyists?  Votes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I wish I could say I miss the days the Left cared about the environment.  But there’s never been one of those days. Your killing of nuclear energy proves my point.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And you hate windmills, batteries and solar panels.  Why?  Why are you guys always against going green?
Click to expand...

I installed and owned solar panels on my last home. Only because I knew I had fossil fueled electricity as a backup.
Keep trying more lies to attack me.


----------



## Weatherman2020

sealybobo said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Attenborough Says Climate Change Is A ‘Crime’ Humanity Has Inflicted On The Planet
> 
> 
> The documentarian reiterated his grief that society has destroyed large swaths of the natural world, but said humanity is “not beyond redemption.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare is smarter than David Attenborough
> 
> “Well, a crime has been committed,” Attenborough, 95, replied. “And it so happens that, I’m of such an age, that I was able to see it beginning.”
> “It isn’t that I enjoy saying: ‘Doom, doom, doom,’” he continued. “On the contrary, I’d much rather [say]: ‘Enjoy, take thrill, excitement, pleasure, joy, joy, joy, joy.’ But if you’ve got any sense of responsibility, you can’t do that.”
> 
> The documentarian’s comments come amid ongoing and increasingly dire warnings from the planet’s scientists that climate change is largely continuing unabated. A report released last month by the Environmental Protection Agency detailed a disturbing shift in the United States caused by a warming world: The destruction of permafrost in Alaska, a spike in heat waves nationwide and longer-lasting wildfire and pollen season.
> 
> In his book and documentary, Attenborough pointed to existing technology that could help greatly alleviate the threat of climate change, primarily an immediate shift away from fossil fuels and an effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.
> The threat, he concluded, has grown so large as to be beyond the burden of any one nation.
> “I would say that the time has come to put aside national ambitions and look for an international ambition of survival,” he said. He later added: “What good does it do to say, “Oh, to hell with it, I don’t care.’ You can’t say that. Not if … you love your children. Not if you love the rest of human― how can you say that?”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah....China is about to experience a rapid decline in population so much so they have lifted their one child policy and now want 3......
> 
> Climate change is a scam....the planet changes climate without any help......and anyone who is telling you to give them money and power to save the planet is selling you BS....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Bullshit.  And the ocean is a toilet bowl.
> 
> But, these Green companies will be the new industries.  I have a battery powered bike.  My girlfriend just bought a home and purchased a battery powered lawn mower.
> 
> We need to pay taxes to hire people to go clean out the oceans of all the plastic you stupid conservatives are really ignorant.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> lol batteries are toxic where do you think they go when used up?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nonsense.  Venice is moving to battery boats.  Clean up the air, water and noise pollution.
> 
> View attachment 498293
> Don't hate.
> 
> You think it'd be better for me to be riding around on a gas powered moped than my battery bike?
> 
> Where does everything go when we are done with them?  In the trash.  Recyle?  It's amazing what we are doing today.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah......Italy is truly a world leader......in what, we don't know......but that boat looks cute...
> 
> Meanwhile, the U.S. protects europe, Asia, and provides advanced tech and medical innovation for the world.....
> 
> You go girl...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I miss you Republicans back when you were at least pushing for more nuclear power.  What happened to that?  Are you hell bent on keeping the coal and gas business' going?  Lobbyists?  Votes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I wish I could say I miss the days the Left cared about the environment.  But there’s never been one of those days. Your killing of nuclear energy proves my point.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well it doesn't sound safe does it to you?
> 
> Instead of plastic straws we want to move to bio degradable paper straws and you guys fight us.  You love plastic coal and gas why?
Click to expand...

Yeah, great move! Chop down trees for grocery bags and straws!


----------



## 2aguy

sealybobo said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Attenborough Says Climate Change Is A ‘Crime’ Humanity Has Inflicted On The Planet
> 
> 
> The documentarian reiterated his grief that society has destroyed large swaths of the natural world, but said humanity is “not beyond redemption.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare is smarter than David Attenborough
> 
> “Well, a crime has been committed,” Attenborough, 95, replied. “And it so happens that, I’m of such an age, that I was able to see it beginning.”
> “It isn’t that I enjoy saying: ‘Doom, doom, doom,’” he continued. “On the contrary, I’d much rather [say]: ‘Enjoy, take thrill, excitement, pleasure, joy, joy, joy, joy.’ But if you’ve got any sense of responsibility, you can’t do that.”
> 
> The documentarian’s comments come amid ongoing and increasingly dire warnings from the planet’s scientists that climate change is largely continuing unabated. A report released last month by the Environmental Protection Agency detailed a disturbing shift in the United States caused by a warming world: The destruction of permafrost in Alaska, a spike in heat waves nationwide and longer-lasting wildfire and pollen season.
> 
> In his book and documentary, Attenborough pointed to existing technology that could help greatly alleviate the threat of climate change, primarily an immediate shift away from fossil fuels and an effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.
> The threat, he concluded, has grown so large as to be beyond the burden of any one nation.
> “I would say that the time has come to put aside national ambitions and look for an international ambition of survival,” he said. He later added: “What good does it do to say, “Oh, to hell with it, I don’t care.’ You can’t say that. Not if … you love your children. Not if you love the rest of human― how can you say that?”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A. The world is far from being overpopulated. You can fit the entire world population in Texas and give ever family a quarter of an acre home.
> 
> B. Only science deniers think the climate of today is optimum and believe that for the first time since time began the climate must stop changing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Some like to assert that everybody on *Earth could* be *fit* into the State of *Texas*, using logic as follows. The area of *Texas* is about 262,000 mi2. Dividing this figure by the current human *population* of 7 billion leaves each person with less than 100 square meters, a small plot the size of a big room about 10 m x 10 m.
> 
> One third of Earth's surface is desert which supports very few people.
> 
> Without going into the fact that almost half the State is desert, notice we have not allowed for any roads, shopping malls, schools, hospitals, football stadiums, prisons, sewage plants, rivers, lakes, reservoirs, golf courses, parks, and what else? How much land does it take to support a human being?
> 
> Right now China, USA, Mexico, India, Europe, Canada, Australia, are all putting up too many toxic fumes.  We need to stop.  We are destroying the planet.  THat's the scientific consensus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Math rule #1: don’t mix units of measurement.
> Assumption: 7.6B population
> Texas = 268,820 sq miles = 7,494,271,488,000 sq ft
> 
> That means ever human on earth could live in Texas and have 3,944 sq ft. Family of 4 gives them .09 acres, which is standard suburban lot size.
> 
> As far as climates, many people live in deserts by choice. Most of the planet is covered by water and a third of our underground is filled with water. Much of the earth is covered in ice. Assuming that melts, we gain livable land.
> 
> For anyone who travels, they know the earth is far from being overpopulated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yea that's why cities out west want to take our great lakes water and we say no because once the water goes there it never comes back.
> 
> It's funny you cons refuse to admit this planet is fucked up.  Too many of us.  And yet at the same time you don't want to let any immigrants into the country because you know there are too many of us.
Click to expand...



No....we don't want illegal aliens into the country because we have laws that have to be followed to become citizens....too many people at one time and they do not assimilate American values, and then their crappy values from the hell holes they are fleeing become the policies of the democrat party.....

If they follow the law, enter legally, assimilate and love this country they are more than welcome to come in to this country...you doofus...


----------



## 2aguy

sealybobo said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Attenborough Says Climate Change Is A ‘Crime’ Humanity Has Inflicted On The Planet
> 
> 
> The documentarian reiterated his grief that society has destroyed large swaths of the natural world, but said humanity is “not beyond redemption.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare is smarter than David Attenborough
> 
> “Well, a crime has been committed,” Attenborough, 95, replied. “And it so happens that, I’m of such an age, that I was able to see it beginning.”
> “It isn’t that I enjoy saying: ‘Doom, doom, doom,’” he continued. “On the contrary, I’d much rather [say]: ‘Enjoy, take thrill, excitement, pleasure, joy, joy, joy, joy.’ But if you’ve got any sense of responsibility, you can’t do that.”
> 
> The documentarian’s comments come amid ongoing and increasingly dire warnings from the planet’s scientists that climate change is largely continuing unabated. A report released last month by the Environmental Protection Agency detailed a disturbing shift in the United States caused by a warming world: The destruction of permafrost in Alaska, a spike in heat waves nationwide and longer-lasting wildfire and pollen season.
> 
> In his book and documentary, Attenborough pointed to existing technology that could help greatly alleviate the threat of climate change, primarily an immediate shift away from fossil fuels and an effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.
> The threat, he concluded, has grown so large as to be beyond the burden of any one nation.
> “I would say that the time has come to put aside national ambitions and look for an international ambition of survival,” he said. He later added: “What good does it do to say, “Oh, to hell with it, I don’t care.’ You can’t say that. Not if … you love your children. Not if you love the rest of human― how can you say that?”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah....China is about to experience a rapid decline in population so much so they have lifted their one child policy and now want 3......
> 
> Climate change is a scam....the planet changes climate without any help......and anyone who is telling you to give them money and power to save the planet is selling you BS....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Bullshit.  And the ocean is a toilet bowl.
> 
> But, these Green companies will be the new industries.  I have a battery powered bike.  My girlfriend just bought a home and purchased a battery powered lawn mower.
> 
> We need to pay taxes to hire people to go clean out the oceans of all the plastic you stupid conservatives are really ignorant.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> lol batteries are toxic where do you think they go when used up?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nonsense.  Venice is moving to battery boats.  Clean up the air, water and noise pollution.
> 
> View attachment 498293
> Don't hate.
> 
> You think it'd be better for me to be riding around on a gas powered moped than my battery bike?
> 
> Where does everything go when we are done with them?  In the trash.  Recyle?  It's amazing what we are doing today.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah......Italy is truly a world leader......in what, we don't know......but that boat looks cute...
> 
> Meanwhile, the U.S. protects europe, Asia, and provides advanced tech and medical innovation for the world.....
> 
> You go girl...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I miss you Republicans back when you were at least pushing for more nuclear power.  What happened to that?  Are you hell bent on keeping the coal and gas business' going?  Lobbyists?  Votes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I wish I could say I miss the days the Left cared about the environment.  But there’s never been one of those days. Your killing of nuclear energy proves my point.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And you hate windmills, batteries and solar panels.  Why?  Why are you guys always against going green?
Click to expand...



Because windmills and solar panels don't work ......... you need fossil fuels to make sure when the windmills and solar fails......look at Texas last winter....that the fossil fuels will provide the energy you need...wind and solar completely failed......and take up too much room.


----------



## Rigby5

Unkotare said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You make some good points in that improved technology can reduce emissions, take less space, make medical breakthroughs, etc.
> However, there are 2 main reasons you are wrong.
> 
> One is that which made Malthus wrong was all fossil fuel based, and that is going to run out.
> Fossil fuels powered the miracle that created the fertilizers that increased farming production by more than a factor of 4, and allow such wider food distribution that our grocery store have fresh produce from all over the world.
> Solar and wind are awful because then you need some means of energy storage.
> Fission and fusion are not sustainable either, since we have limited fissile material and will produce lots of radioactive wastes.
> There is no energy solution I know of, and no one has suggested one.
> 
> The other is that there are many limits to how much of the earth we have to leave alone.  Not only are we dependent upon things like birds to eat insects and pollinators, but the oxygen we breath itself has to be regenerated on about a 200 year cycle.  We dump lots of wastes into the ocean, and eventually that has to bite us as well.  And we need a lot more trees.  They not only produce oxygen, but reduce erosion, provide habitat, create shade, and change weather.  There is so much we do not even know about or take for granted.  Even fresh water could well become a limiting resource very soon.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It would be a contradiction to assume that improving techniques, technology, and a declining global population can’t mitigate the above.
Click to expand...


Sure, a declining population especially.
Unfortunately, it is a biological instinct for species to increase population if under any sort of stress, so "Soylent Green" is more likely.


----------



## Rigby5

danielpalos said:


> We could put more infrastructure underground to free up green space.



That is likely a very good idea.
They say places with sky scrapers are awful and people are all afflicted with Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD).
It may even be cheaper to build down instead of up, because it need less strength.


----------



## Unkotare

Rigby5 said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sure, a declining population especially.
> Unfortunately, it is a biological instinct for species to increase population if under any sort of stress, .....
Click to expand...


Instinct or not, the wheels are in motion. A global population decline is coming. Just a matter of time.


----------



## Unkotare

Weatherman2020 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Attenborough Says Climate Change Is A ‘Crime’ Humanity Has Inflicted On The Planet
> 
> 
> The documentarian reiterated his grief that society has destroyed large swaths of the natural world, but said humanity is “not beyond redemption.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare is smarter than David Attenborough
> 
> “Well, a crime has been committed,” Attenborough, 95, replied. “And it so happens that, I’m of such an age, that I was able to see it beginning.”
> “It isn’t that I enjoy saying: ‘Doom, doom, doom,’” he continued. “On the contrary, I’d much rather [say]: ‘Enjoy, take thrill, excitement, pleasure, joy, joy, joy, joy.’ But if you’ve got any sense of responsibility, you can’t do that.”
> 
> The documentarian’s comments come amid ongoing and increasingly dire warnings from the planet’s scientists that climate change is largely continuing unabated. A report released last month by the Environmental Protection Agency detailed a disturbing shift in the United States caused by a warming world: The destruction of permafrost in Alaska, a spike in heat waves nationwide and longer-lasting wildfire and pollen season.
> 
> In his book and documentary, Attenborough pointed to existing technology that could help greatly alleviate the threat of climate change, primarily an immediate shift away from fossil fuels and an effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.
> The threat, he concluded, has grown so large as to be beyond the burden of any one nation.
> “I would say that the time has come to put aside national ambitions and look for an international ambition of survival,” he said. He later added: “What good does it do to say, “Oh, to hell with it, I don’t care.’ You can’t say that. Not if … you love your children. Not if you love the rest of human― how can you say that?”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah....China is about to experience a rapid decline in population so much so they have lifted their one child policy and now want 3......
> 
> Climate change is a scam....the planet changes climate without any help......and anyone who is telling you to give them money and power to save the planet is selling you BS....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Bullshit.  And the ocean is a toilet bowl.
> 
> But, these Green companies will be the new industries.  I have a battery powered bike.  My girlfriend just bought a home and purchased a battery powered lawn mower.
> 
> We need to pay taxes to hire people to go clean out the oceans of all the plastic you stupid conservatives are really ignorant.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> lol batteries are toxic where do you think they go when used up?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nonsense.  Venice is moving to battery boats.  Clean up the air, water and noise pollution.
> 
> View attachment 498293
> Don't hate.
> 
> You think it'd be better for me to be riding around on a gas powered moped than my battery bike?
> 
> Where does everything go when we are done with them?  In the trash.  Recyle?  It's amazing what we are doing today.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah......Italy is truly a world leader......in what, we don't know......but that boat looks cute...
> 
> Meanwhile, the U.S. protects europe, Asia, and provides advanced tech and medical innovation for the world.....
> 
> You go girl...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I miss you Republicans back when you were at least pushing for more nuclear power.  What happened to that?  Are you hell bent on keeping the coal and gas business' going?  Lobbyists?  Votes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I wish I could say I miss the days the Left cared about the environment.  But there’s never been one of those days. Your killing of nuclear energy proves my point.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And you hate windmills, batteries and solar panels.  Why?  Why are you guys always against going green?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I installed and owned solar panels on my last home. Only because I knew I had fossil fueled electricity as a backup.
> Keep trying more lies to attack me.
Click to expand...

It's his only approach to discourse. He guesses/imagines/lies then tries to pretend his responding to his own strawman is a valid 'argument.'  Doesn't even realize he's doing it most of the time. He's just plain stupid.


----------



## Rigby5

Weatherman2020 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Attenborough Says Climate Change Is A ‘Crime’ Humanity Has Inflicted On The Planet
> 
> 
> The documentarian reiterated his grief that society has destroyed large swaths of the natural world, but said humanity is “not beyond redemption.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare is smarter than David Attenborough
> 
> “Well, a crime has been committed,” Attenborough, 95, replied. “And it so happens that, I’m of such an age, that I was able to see it beginning.”
> “It isn’t that I enjoy saying: ‘Doom, doom, doom,’” he continued. “On the contrary, I’d much rather [say]: ‘Enjoy, take thrill, excitement, pleasure, joy, joy, joy, joy.’ But if you’ve got any sense of responsibility, you can’t do that.”
> 
> The documentarian’s comments come amid ongoing and increasingly dire warnings from the planet’s scientists that climate change is largely continuing unabated. A report released last month by the Environmental Protection Agency detailed a disturbing shift in the United States caused by a warming world: The destruction of permafrost in Alaska, a spike in heat waves nationwide and longer-lasting wildfire and pollen season.
> 
> In his book and documentary, Attenborough pointed to existing technology that could help greatly alleviate the threat of climate change, primarily an immediate shift away from fossil fuels and an effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.
> The threat, he concluded, has grown so large as to be beyond the burden of any one nation.
> “I would say that the time has come to put aside national ambitions and look for an international ambition of survival,” he said. He later added: “What good does it do to say, “Oh, to hell with it, I don’t care.’ You can’t say that. Not if … you love your children. Not if you love the rest of human― how can you say that?”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A. The world is far from being overpopulated. You can fit the entire world population in Texas and give ever family a quarter of an acre home.
> 
> B. Only science deniers think the climate of today is optimum and believe that for the first time since time began the climate must stop changing.
Click to expand...


Except that they would all quickly die of thirst, starvation, and pollution if tucked into such a small space.
The whole point of spreading out is then we each gain more resource availability.
And the problem is we have saturated the globe.

Normal climate change cycles are 110,000 years from warm to ice age.  
We have accelerated it to a period of only about 400 years.
Everyone will have to move, as coasts go under the 250 feet increase in oceans from melting ice water, and as current farmland turns to desert.
Sure new places current uninhabitable will become habitable, but the cost will be enourmous.
And the oceans will not do well.
Ever notice all the main fishing is near the poles?
Ocean life does better in colder climates.


----------



## Unkotare

Fertility rate: 'Jaw-dropping' global crash in children being born
					

Nearly every country will see their populations fall as the world has fewer babies.



					www.bbc.com


----------



## Rigby5

2aguy said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Attenborough Says Climate Change Is A ‘Crime’ Humanity Has Inflicted On The Planet
> 
> 
> The documentarian reiterated his grief that society has destroyed large swaths of the natural world, but said humanity is “not beyond redemption.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare is smarter than David Attenborough
> 
> “Well, a crime has been committed,” Attenborough, 95, replied. “And it so happens that, I’m of such an age, that I was able to see it beginning.”
> “It isn’t that I enjoy saying: ‘Doom, doom, doom,’” he continued. “On the contrary, I’d much rather [say]: ‘Enjoy, take thrill, excitement, pleasure, joy, joy, joy, joy.’ But if you’ve got any sense of responsibility, you can’t do that.”
> 
> The documentarian’s comments come amid ongoing and increasingly dire warnings from the planet’s scientists that climate change is largely continuing unabated. A report released last month by the Environmental Protection Agency detailed a disturbing shift in the United States caused by a warming world: The destruction of permafrost in Alaska, a spike in heat waves nationwide and longer-lasting wildfire and pollen season.
> 
> In his book and documentary, Attenborough pointed to existing technology that could help greatly alleviate the threat of climate change, primarily an immediate shift away from fossil fuels and an effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.
> The threat, he concluded, has grown so large as to be beyond the burden of any one nation.
> “I would say that the time has come to put aside national ambitions and look for an international ambition of survival,” he said. He later added: “What good does it do to say, “Oh, to hell with it, I don’t care.’ You can’t say that. Not if … you love your children. Not if you love the rest of human― how can you say that?”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah....China is about to experience a rapid decline in population so much so they have lifted their one child policy and now want 3......
> 
> Climate change is a scam....the planet changes climate without any help......and anyone who is telling you to give them money and power to save the planet is selling you BS....
Click to expand...



When fossil fuels run out, food production will reduce by 75%.
If we do not reduce the population by 75%, there will then be massive starvation.

The normal climate change cycle of warm to ice age and back is about 110,000 years.
We have not only accelerated it to only about 400 years, but have piggy backed a second warming on top of an existing warm period already.
This could push the planet into a positive feedback loop where enough water vapor then get added to the atmosphere to create a permanent, positive feedback, race condition.  This may have happened before, in the Paleozoic era, but that was before there was any creatures on land.  And land creatures likely would not survive.


----------



## Weatherman2020

Rigby5 said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Attenborough Says Climate Change Is A ‘Crime’ Humanity Has Inflicted On The Planet
> 
> 
> The documentarian reiterated his grief that society has destroyed large swaths of the natural world, but said humanity is “not beyond redemption.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare is smarter than David Attenborough
> 
> “Well, a crime has been committed,” Attenborough, 95, replied. “And it so happens that, I’m of such an age, that I was able to see it beginning.”
> “It isn’t that I enjoy saying: ‘Doom, doom, doom,’” he continued. “On the contrary, I’d much rather [say]: ‘Enjoy, take thrill, excitement, pleasure, joy, joy, joy, joy.’ But if you’ve got any sense of responsibility, you can’t do that.”
> 
> The documentarian’s comments come amid ongoing and increasingly dire warnings from the planet’s scientists that climate change is largely continuing unabated. A report released last month by the Environmental Protection Agency detailed a disturbing shift in the United States caused by a warming world: The destruction of permafrost in Alaska, a spike in heat waves nationwide and longer-lasting wildfire and pollen season.
> 
> In his book and documentary, Attenborough pointed to existing technology that could help greatly alleviate the threat of climate change, primarily an immediate shift away from fossil fuels and an effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.
> The threat, he concluded, has grown so large as to be beyond the burden of any one nation.
> “I would say that the time has come to put aside national ambitions and look for an international ambition of survival,” he said. He later added: “What good does it do to say, “Oh, to hell with it, I don’t care.’ You can’t say that. Not if … you love your children. Not if you love the rest of human― how can you say that?”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A. The world is far from being overpopulated. You can fit the entire world population in Texas and give ever family a quarter of an acre home.
> 
> B. Only science deniers think the climate of today is optimum and believe that for the first time since time began the climate must stop changing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Except that they would all quickly die of thirst, starvation, and pollution if tucked into such a small space.
> The whole point of spreading out is then we each gain more resource availability.
> And the problem is we have saturated the globe.
> 
> Normal climate change cycles are 110,000 years from warm to ice age.
> We have accelerated it to a period of only about 400 years.
> Everyone will have to move, as coasts go under the 250 feet increase in oceans from melting ice water, and as current farmland turns to desert.
> Sure new places current uninhabitable will become habitable, but the cost will be enourmous.
> And the oceans will not do well.
> Ever notice all the main fishing is near the poles?
> Ocean life does better in colder climates.
Click to expand...

Dear Lord, can’t you people even grasp an analogy?

BTW- speaking of rapid climate change - just 12,000 years the Great Lakes didn’t exist.
I blame Fred Flinstone’s SUV.



 Now please don’t lecture me that cavemen didn’t have vehicles, you Leftards have zero sense of humor or ability to grasp abstract ideas.


----------



## Unkotare

Rigby5 said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Everyone will have to move, as coasts go under the 250 feet increase in oceans from melting ice water,....
Click to expand...


You know 'experts' have been declaring this for around 40 years now, right? "I'm telling you," "I guarantee," "I promise!" for decade after decade and my city is still not underwater. The guy down by the train station who walks around every day wearing a sandwich board that says "The End is Near!" WANTS the world to end because he'll accept that if it means he's finally right. The Weeping Polar Bear Club is of exactly of the same mindset.













That guy is still pacing back and forth in front of the train station.........................


----------



## Rigby5

Unkotare said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sure, a declining population especially.
> Unfortunately, it is a biological instinct for species to increase population if under any sort of stress, .....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Instinct or not, the wheels are in motion. A global population decline is coming. Just a matter of time.
Click to expand...


That would save us if it would happen I think.
We just have to change the way religions were based on creating armies thousands of years ago.


----------



## Weatherman2020

Rigby5 said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Attenborough Says Climate Change Is A ‘Crime’ Humanity Has Inflicted On The Planet
> 
> 
> The documentarian reiterated his grief that society has destroyed large swaths of the natural world, but said humanity is “not beyond redemption.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare is smarter than David Attenborough
> 
> “Well, a crime has been committed,” Attenborough, 95, replied. “And it so happens that, I’m of such an age, that I was able to see it beginning.”
> “It isn’t that I enjoy saying: ‘Doom, doom, doom,’” he continued. “On the contrary, I’d much rather [say]: ‘Enjoy, take thrill, excitement, pleasure, joy, joy, joy, joy.’ But if you’ve got any sense of responsibility, you can’t do that.”
> 
> The documentarian’s comments come amid ongoing and increasingly dire warnings from the planet’s scientists that climate change is largely continuing unabated. A report released last month by the Environmental Protection Agency detailed a disturbing shift in the United States caused by a warming world: The destruction of permafrost in Alaska, a spike in heat waves nationwide and longer-lasting wildfire and pollen season.
> 
> In his book and documentary, Attenborough pointed to existing technology that could help greatly alleviate the threat of climate change, primarily an immediate shift away from fossil fuels and an effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.
> The threat, he concluded, has grown so large as to be beyond the burden of any one nation.
> “I would say that the time has come to put aside national ambitions and look for an international ambition of survival,” he said. He later added: “What good does it do to say, “Oh, to hell with it, I don’t care.’ You can’t say that. Not if … you love your children. Not if you love the rest of human― how can you say that?”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A. The world is far from being overpopulated. You can fit the entire world population in Texas and give ever family a quarter of an acre home.
> 
> B. Only science deniers think the climate of today is optimum and believe that for the first time since time began the climate must stop changing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Except that they would all quickly die of thirst, starvation, and pollution if tucked into such a small space.
> The whole point of spreading out is then we each gain more resource availability.
> And the problem is we have saturated the globe.
> 
> Normal climate change cycles are 110,000 years from warm to ice age.
> We have accelerated it to a period of only about 400 years.
> Everyone will have to move, as coasts go under the 250 feet increase in oceans from melting ice water, and as current farmland turns to desert.
> Sure new places current uninhabitable will become habitable, but the cost will be enourmous.
> And the oceans will not do well.
> Ever notice all the main fishing is near the poles?
> Ocean life does better in colder climates.
Click to expand...

Oh, BTW - the ocean has risen 0.78 inches in the past 1,800 years.
That’s why Obama bought a mansion on the beach, he knows it’s bullshit.


----------



## Unkotare

Rigby5 said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sure, a declining population especially.
> Unfortunately, it is a biological instinct for species to increase population if under any sort of stress, .....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Instinct or not, the wheels are in motion. A global population decline is coming. Just a matter of time.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That would save us if it would happen I think.
> We just have to change the way religions were based on creating armies thousands of years ago.
Click to expand...

It's not about religion, it's about economics, equality, and the nature of demographics.


----------



## Weatherman2020

Rigby5 said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sure, a declining population especially.
> Unfortunately, it is a biological instinct for species to increase population if under any sort of stress, .....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Instinct or not, the wheels are in motion. A global population decline is coming. Just a matter of time.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That would save us if it would happen I think.
> We just have to change the way religions were based on creating armies thousands of years ago.
Click to expand...

We have such a surplus we burn food for fuel


----------



## 2aguy

Rigby5 said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You make some good points in that improved technology can reduce emissions, take less space, make medical breakthroughs, etc.
> However, there are 2 main reasons you are wrong.
> 
> One is that which made Malthus wrong was all fossil fuel based, and that is going to run out.
> Fossil fuels powered the miracle that created the fertilizers that increased farming production by more than a factor of 4, and allow such wider food distribution that our grocery store have fresh produce from all over the world.
> Solar and wind are awful because then you need some means of energy storage.
> Fission and fusion are not sustainable either, since we have limited fissile material and will produce lots of radioactive wastes.
> There is no energy solution I know of, and no one has suggested one.
> 
> The other is that there are many limits to how much of the earth we have to leave alone.  Not only are we dependent upon things like birds to eat insects and pollinators, but the oxygen we breath itself has to be regenerated on about a 200 year cycle.  We dump lots of wastes into the ocean, and eventually that has to bite us as well.  And we need a lot more trees.  They not only produce oxygen, but reduce erosion, provide habitat, create shade, and change weather.  There is so much we do not even know about or take for granted.  Even fresh water could well become a limiting resource very soon.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It would be a contradiction to assume that improving techniques, technology, and a declining global population can’t mitigate the above.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sure, a declining population especially.
> Unfortunately, it is a biological instinct for species to increase population if under any sort of stress, so "Soylent Green" is more likely.
Click to expand...



"Soylent Green," tastes like chicken.......or so I am told......


----------



## Rigby5

Weatherman2020 said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Attenborough Says Climate Change Is A ‘Crime’ Humanity Has Inflicted On The Planet
> 
> 
> The documentarian reiterated his grief that society has destroyed large swaths of the natural world, but said humanity is “not beyond redemption.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare is smarter than David Attenborough
> 
> “Well, a crime has been committed,” Attenborough, 95, replied. “And it so happens that, I’m of such an age, that I was able to see it beginning.”
> “It isn’t that I enjoy saying: ‘Doom, doom, doom,’” he continued. “On the contrary, I’d much rather [say]: ‘Enjoy, take thrill, excitement, pleasure, joy, joy, joy, joy.’ But if you’ve got any sense of responsibility, you can’t do that.”
> 
> The documentarian’s comments come amid ongoing and increasingly dire warnings from the planet’s scientists that climate change is largely continuing unabated. A report released last month by the Environmental Protection Agency detailed a disturbing shift in the United States caused by a warming world: The destruction of permafrost in Alaska, a spike in heat waves nationwide and longer-lasting wildfire and pollen season.
> 
> In his book and documentary, Attenborough pointed to existing technology that could help greatly alleviate the threat of climate change, primarily an immediate shift away from fossil fuels and an effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.
> The threat, he concluded, has grown so large as to be beyond the burden of any one nation.
> “I would say that the time has come to put aside national ambitions and look for an international ambition of survival,” he said. He later added: “What good does it do to say, “Oh, to hell with it, I don’t care.’ You can’t say that. Not if … you love your children. Not if you love the rest of human― how can you say that?”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A. The world is far from being overpopulated. You can fit the entire world population in Texas and give ever family a quarter of an acre home.
> 
> B. Only science deniers think the climate of today is optimum and believe that for the first time since time began the climate must stop changing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Except that they would all quickly die of thirst, starvation, and pollution if tucked into such a small space.
> The whole point of spreading out is then we each gain more resource availability.
> And the problem is we have saturated the globe.
> 
> Normal climate change cycles are 110,000 years from warm to ice age.
> We have accelerated it to a period of only about 400 years.
> Everyone will have to move, as coasts go under the 250 feet increase in oceans from melting ice water, and as current farmland turns to desert.
> Sure new places current uninhabitable will become habitable, but the cost will be enourmous.
> And the oceans will not do well.
> Ever notice all the main fishing is near the poles?
> Ocean life does better in colder climates.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Dear Lord, can’t you people even grasp an analogy?
> 
> BTW- speaking of rapid climate change - just 12,000 years the Great Lakes didn’t exist.
> I blame Fred Flinstone’s SUV.
> View attachment 498323 Now please don’t lecture me that cavemen didn’t have vehicles, you Leftards have zero sense of humor or ability to grasp abstract ideas.
Click to expand...


Its a terrible analogy.
Why do you think cavemen walked all the way from Africa to South America, and Columbus risked his life to find the Americas?
Its because quality of life depends on availability of natural resources.
The closer you are to natural resource, the less expensive they are,
TX was a terrible analogy because they already have a dropping water table that is going to make people have to start leaving TX.


----------



## Unkotare

2aguy said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You make some good points in that improved technology can reduce emissions, take less space, make medical breakthroughs, etc.
> However, there are 2 main reasons you are wrong.
> 
> One is that which made Malthus wrong was all fossil fuel based, and that is going to run out.
> Fossil fuels powered the miracle that created the fertilizers that increased farming production by more than a factor of 4, and allow such wider food distribution that our grocery store have fresh produce from all over the world.
> Solar and wind are awful because then you need some means of energy storage.
> Fission and fusion are not sustainable either, since we have limited fissile material and will produce lots of radioactive wastes.
> There is no energy solution I know of, and no one has suggested one.
> 
> The other is that there are many limits to how much of the earth we have to leave alone.  Not only are we dependent upon things like birds to eat insects and pollinators, but the oxygen we breath itself has to be regenerated on about a 200 year cycle.  We dump lots of wastes into the ocean, and eventually that has to bite us as well.  And we need a lot more trees.  They not only produce oxygen, but reduce erosion, provide habitat, create shade, and change weather.  There is so much we do not even know about or take for granted.  Even fresh water could well become a limiting resource very soon.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It would be a contradiction to assume that improving techniques, technology, and a declining global population can’t mitigate the above.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sure, a declining population especially.
> Unfortunately, it is a biological instinct for species to increase population if under any sort of stress, so "Soylent Green" is more likely.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "Soylent Green," tastes like chicken.......or so I am told......
Click to expand...

Do chickens think chicken tastes like human?


----------



## Unkotare

Rigby5 said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...Columbus risked his life to find the Americas?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> .....
Click to expand...

That's not why Columbus risked his life (and the lives of many others).


----------



## 2aguy

Unkotare said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You make some good points in that improved technology can reduce emissions, take less space, make medical breakthroughs, etc.
> However, there are 2 main reasons you are wrong.
> 
> One is that which made Malthus wrong was all fossil fuel based, and that is going to run out.
> Fossil fuels powered the miracle that created the fertilizers that increased farming production by more than a factor of 4, and allow such wider food distribution that our grocery store have fresh produce from all over the world.
> Solar and wind are awful because then you need some means of energy storage.
> Fission and fusion are not sustainable either, since we have limited fissile material and will produce lots of radioactive wastes.
> There is no energy solution I know of, and no one has suggested one.
> 
> The other is that there are many limits to how much of the earth we have to leave alone.  Not only are we dependent upon things like birds to eat insects and pollinators, but the oxygen we breath itself has to be regenerated on about a 200 year cycle.  We dump lots of wastes into the ocean, and eventually that has to bite us as well.  And we need a lot more trees.  They not only produce oxygen, but reduce erosion, provide habitat, create shade, and change weather.  There is so much we do not even know about or take for granted.  Even fresh water could well become a limiting resource very soon.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It would be a contradiction to assume that improving techniques, technology, and a declining global population can’t mitigate the above.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sure, a declining population especially.
> Unfortunately, it is a biological instinct for species to increase population if under any sort of stress, so "Soylent Green" is more likely.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "Soylent Green," tastes like chicken.......or so I am told......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do chickens think chicken tastes like human?
> 
> View attachment 498328
Click to expand...



Here is one I thought of.....

If you eat an egg salad sandwich aren't you really eating a Chicken salad sandwich?


----------



## Weatherman2020

Rigby5 said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Attenborough Says Climate Change Is A ‘Crime’ Humanity Has Inflicted On The Planet
> 
> 
> The documentarian reiterated his grief that society has destroyed large swaths of the natural world, but said humanity is “not beyond redemption.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare is smarter than David Attenborough
> 
> “Well, a crime has been committed,” Attenborough, 95, replied. “And it so happens that, I’m of such an age, that I was able to see it beginning.”
> “It isn’t that I enjoy saying: ‘Doom, doom, doom,’” he continued. “On the contrary, I’d much rather [say]: ‘Enjoy, take thrill, excitement, pleasure, joy, joy, joy, joy.’ But if you’ve got any sense of responsibility, you can’t do that.”
> 
> The documentarian’s comments come amid ongoing and increasingly dire warnings from the planet’s scientists that climate change is largely continuing unabated. A report released last month by the Environmental Protection Agency detailed a disturbing shift in the United States caused by a warming world: The destruction of permafrost in Alaska, a spike in heat waves nationwide and longer-lasting wildfire and pollen season.
> 
> In his book and documentary, Attenborough pointed to existing technology that could help greatly alleviate the threat of climate change, primarily an immediate shift away from fossil fuels and an effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.
> The threat, he concluded, has grown so large as to be beyond the burden of any one nation.
> “I would say that the time has come to put aside national ambitions and look for an international ambition of survival,” he said. He later added: “What good does it do to say, “Oh, to hell with it, I don’t care.’ You can’t say that. Not if … you love your children. Not if you love the rest of human― how can you say that?”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A. The world is far from being overpopulated. You can fit the entire world population in Texas and give ever family a quarter of an acre home.
> 
> B. Only science deniers think the climate of today is optimum and believe that for the first time since time began the climate must stop changing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Except that they would all quickly die of thirst, starvation, and pollution if tucked into such a small space.
> The whole point of spreading out is then we each gain more resource availability.
> And the problem is we have saturated the globe.
> 
> Normal climate change cycles are 110,000 years from warm to ice age.
> We have accelerated it to a period of only about 400 years.
> Everyone will have to move, as coasts go under the 250 feet increase in oceans from melting ice water, and as current farmland turns to desert.
> Sure new places current uninhabitable will become habitable, but the cost will be enourmous.
> And the oceans will not do well.
> Ever notice all the main fishing is near the poles?
> Ocean life does better in colder climates.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Dear Lord, can’t you people even grasp an analogy?
> 
> BTW- speaking of rapid climate change - just 12,000 years the Great Lakes didn’t exist.
> I blame Fred Flinstone’s SUV.
> View attachment 498323 Now please don’t lecture me that cavemen didn’t have vehicles, you Leftards have zero sense of humor or ability to grasp abstract ideas.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Its a terrible analogy.
> Why do you think cavemen walked all the way from Africa to South America, and Columbus risked his life to find the Americas?
> Its because quality of life depends on availability of natural resources.
> The closer you are to natural resource, the less expensive they are,
> TX was a terrible analogy because they already have a dropping water table that is going to make people have to start leaving TX.
Click to expand...

Are you a Leftist because you don’t grasp simple things, or visa versa?


----------



## Rigby5

Unkotare said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Everyone will have to move, as coasts go under the 250 feet increase in oceans from melting ice water,....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You know 'experts' have been declaring this for around 40 years now, right? "I'm telling you," "I guarantee," "I promise!" for decade after decade and my city is still not underwater. The guy down by the train station who walks around every day wearing a sandwich board that says "The End is Near!" WANTS the world to end because he'll accept that if it means he's finally right. The Weeping Polar Bear Club is of exactly of the same mindset.
> 
> That guy is still pacing back and forth in front of the train station.........................
Click to expand...


No one ever suggested the problem would happen in 40 years.
More like 400 years.
But it is a slow cycle that can't be stopped after a certain point, so it has be avoided ahead of time.
It may be too late already.
Carbon in the atmosphere does not settle out of decompose.
The only thing that can reduce it is plant photosynthesis.

Just read our current carbon output into the atmosphere:
{...
The runaway train that is climate change is about to blow past another milestone: global fossil-fuel carbon dioxide emissions will reach yet another record high. Driven by rising natural gas and oil consumption, levels of CO2 are expected to hit 36.8 billion metric tons (40.6 billion U.S. tons) this year, according to new estimates from the Global Carbon Project, an initiative led by Stanford University scientist Rob Jackson.
...}








						Global carbon emissions increase | Stanford News
					

Coal use is down dramatically in the United States and the European Union, and renewable energy is gaining traction. But rising natural gas and oil use in 2019 increased the world's carbon dioxide emissions modestly for a third straight year.




					news.stanford.edu
				




That is over a 30% increase in carbon from what is normally was over 100 years ago.
And carbon in the atmosphere changes the frequency of the energy from photonic to vibratory.  
Which means it then can't escape back out into space as much.
The amount of accumulating energy increases.
And if it continues like it does on Venus, then the temperature of the earth's surface can become that of molten lead, with no life.
Once it gets hot enough to start evaporating the oceans, there is no stopping it.
The only hope then is that the increased cloud cover will slow it back down by a higher reflective albedo.
But who wants to live with 20 degree higher temperatures and there always being perpetual clouds?


----------



## Rigby5

Weatherman2020 said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sure, a declining population especially.
> Unfortunately, it is a biological instinct for species to increase population if under any sort of stress, .....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Instinct or not, the wheels are in motion. A global population decline is coming. Just a matter of time.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That would save us if it would happen I think.
> We just have to change the way religions were based on creating armies thousands of years ago.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We have such a surplus we burn food for fuel
Click to expand...


No, we burn field corn, which is not food.  And that is just government glitch.


----------



## sealybobo

Weatherman2020 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Attenborough Says Climate Change Is A ‘Crime’ Humanity Has Inflicted On The Planet
> 
> 
> The documentarian reiterated his grief that society has destroyed large swaths of the natural world, but said humanity is “not beyond redemption.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare is smarter than David Attenborough
> 
> “Well, a crime has been committed,” Attenborough, 95, replied. “And it so happens that, I’m of such an age, that I was able to see it beginning.”
> “It isn’t that I enjoy saying: ‘Doom, doom, doom,’” he continued. “On the contrary, I’d much rather [say]: ‘Enjoy, take thrill, excitement, pleasure, joy, joy, joy, joy.’ But if you’ve got any sense of responsibility, you can’t do that.”
> 
> The documentarian’s comments come amid ongoing and increasingly dire warnings from the planet’s scientists that climate change is largely continuing unabated. A report released last month by the Environmental Protection Agency detailed a disturbing shift in the United States caused by a warming world: The destruction of permafrost in Alaska, a spike in heat waves nationwide and longer-lasting wildfire and pollen season.
> 
> In his book and documentary, Attenborough pointed to existing technology that could help greatly alleviate the threat of climate change, primarily an immediate shift away from fossil fuels and an effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.
> The threat, he concluded, has grown so large as to be beyond the burden of any one nation.
> “I would say that the time has come to put aside national ambitions and look for an international ambition of survival,” he said. He later added: “What good does it do to say, “Oh, to hell with it, I don’t care.’ You can’t say that. Not if … you love your children. Not if you love the rest of human― how can you say that?”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah....China is about to experience a rapid decline in population so much so they have lifted their one child policy and now want 3......
> 
> Climate change is a scam....the planet changes climate without any help......and anyone who is telling you to give them money and power to save the planet is selling you BS....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Bullshit.  And the ocean is a toilet bowl.
> 
> But, these Green companies will be the new industries.  I have a battery powered bike.  My girlfriend just bought a home and purchased a battery powered lawn mower.
> 
> We need to pay taxes to hire people to go clean out the oceans of all the plastic you stupid conservatives are really ignorant.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> lol batteries are toxic where do you think they go when used up?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nonsense.  Venice is moving to battery boats.  Clean up the air, water and noise pollution.
> 
> View attachment 498293
> Don't hate.
> 
> You think it'd be better for me to be riding around on a gas powered moped than my battery bike?
> 
> Where does everything go when we are done with them?  In the trash.  Recyle?  It's amazing what we are doing today.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah......Italy is truly a world leader......in what, we don't know......but that boat looks cute...
> 
> Meanwhile, the U.S. protects europe, Asia, and provides advanced tech and medical innovation for the world.....
> 
> You go girl...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I miss you Republicans back when you were at least pushing for more nuclear power.  What happened to that?  Are you hell bent on keeping the coal and gas business' going?  Lobbyists?  Votes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I wish I could say I miss the days the Left cared about the environment.  But there’s never been one of those days. Your killing of nuclear energy proves my point.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well it doesn't sound safe does it to you?
> 
> Instead of plastic straws we want to move to bio degradable paper straws and you guys fight us.  You love plastic coal and gas why?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yeah, great move! Chop down trees for grocery bags and straws!
Click to expand...

Trees grow back.  Do it right.


----------



## sealybobo

2aguy said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Attenborough Says Climate Change Is A ‘Crime’ Humanity Has Inflicted On The Planet
> 
> 
> The documentarian reiterated his grief that society has destroyed large swaths of the natural world, but said humanity is “not beyond redemption.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare is smarter than David Attenborough
> 
> “Well, a crime has been committed,” Attenborough, 95, replied. “And it so happens that, I’m of such an age, that I was able to see it beginning.”
> “It isn’t that I enjoy saying: ‘Doom, doom, doom,’” he continued. “On the contrary, I’d much rather [say]: ‘Enjoy, take thrill, excitement, pleasure, joy, joy, joy, joy.’ But if you’ve got any sense of responsibility, you can’t do that.”
> 
> The documentarian’s comments come amid ongoing and increasingly dire warnings from the planet’s scientists that climate change is largely continuing unabated. A report released last month by the Environmental Protection Agency detailed a disturbing shift in the United States caused by a warming world: The destruction of permafrost in Alaska, a spike in heat waves nationwide and longer-lasting wildfire and pollen season.
> 
> In his book and documentary, Attenborough pointed to existing technology that could help greatly alleviate the threat of climate change, primarily an immediate shift away from fossil fuels and an effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.
> The threat, he concluded, has grown so large as to be beyond the burden of any one nation.
> “I would say that the time has come to put aside national ambitions and look for an international ambition of survival,” he said. He later added: “What good does it do to say, “Oh, to hell with it, I don’t care.’ You can’t say that. Not if … you love your children. Not if you love the rest of human― how can you say that?”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A. The world is far from being overpopulated. You can fit the entire world population in Texas and give ever family a quarter of an acre home.
> 
> B. Only science deniers think the climate of today is optimum and believe that for the first time since time began the climate must stop changing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Some like to assert that everybody on *Earth could* be *fit* into the State of *Texas*, using logic as follows. The area of *Texas* is about 262,000 mi2. Dividing this figure by the current human *population* of 7 billion leaves each person with less than 100 square meters, a small plot the size of a big room about 10 m x 10 m.
> 
> One third of Earth's surface is desert which supports very few people.
> 
> Without going into the fact that almost half the State is desert, notice we have not allowed for any roads, shopping malls, schools, hospitals, football stadiums, prisons, sewage plants, rivers, lakes, reservoirs, golf courses, parks, and what else? How much land does it take to support a human being?
> 
> Right now China, USA, Mexico, India, Europe, Canada, Australia, are all putting up too many toxic fumes.  We need to stop.  We are destroying the planet.  THat's the scientific consensus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Math rule #1: don’t mix units of measurement.
> Assumption: 7.6B population
> Texas = 268,820 sq miles = 7,494,271,488,000 sq ft
> 
> That means ever human on earth could live in Texas and have 3,944 sq ft. Family of 4 gives them .09 acres, which is standard suburban lot size.
> 
> As far as climates, many people live in deserts by choice. Most of the planet is covered by water and a third of our underground is filled with water. Much of the earth is covered in ice. Assuming that melts, we gain livable land.
> 
> For anyone who travels, they know the earth is far from being overpopulated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yea that's why cities out west want to take our great lakes water and we say no because once the water goes there it never comes back.
> 
> It's funny you cons refuse to admit this planet is fucked up.  Too many of us.  And yet at the same time you don't want to let any immigrants into the country because you know there are too many of us.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No....we don't want illegal aliens into the country because we have laws that have to be followed to become citizens....too many people at one time and they do not assimilate American values, and then their crappy values from the hell holes they are fleeing become the policies of the democrat party.....
> 
> If they follow the law, enter legally, assimilate and love this country they are more than welcome to come in to this country...you doofus...
Click to expand...

Even your reasoning is off.


----------



## Unkotare

2aguy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You make some good points in that improved technology can reduce emissions, take less space, make medical breakthroughs, etc.
> However, there are 2 main reasons you are wrong.
> 
> One is that which made Malthus wrong was all fossil fuel based, and that is going to run out.
> Fossil fuels powered the miracle that created the fertilizers that increased farming production by more than a factor of 4, and allow such wider food distribution that our grocery store have fresh produce from all over the world.
> Solar and wind are awful because then you need some means of energy storage.
> Fission and fusion are not sustainable either, since we have limited fissile material and will produce lots of radioactive wastes.
> There is no energy solution I know of, and no one has suggested one.
> 
> The other is that there are many limits to how much of the earth we have to leave alone.  Not only are we dependent upon things like birds to eat insects and pollinators, but the oxygen we breath itself has to be regenerated on about a 200 year cycle.  We dump lots of wastes into the ocean, and eventually that has to bite us as well.  And we need a lot more trees.  They not only produce oxygen, but reduce erosion, provide habitat, create shade, and change weather.  There is so much we do not even know about or take for granted.  Even fresh water could well become a limiting resource very soon.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It would be a contradiction to assume that improving techniques, technology, and a declining global population can’t mitigate the above.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sure, a declining population especially.
> Unfortunately, it is a biological instinct for species to increase population if under any sort of stress, so "Soylent Green" is more likely.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "Soylent Green," tastes like chicken.......or so I am told......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do chickens think chicken tastes like human?
> 
> View attachment 498328
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Here is one I thought of.....
> 
> If you eat an egg salad sandwich aren't you really eating a Chicken salad sandwich?
Click to expand...

Depends on how old the sandwich is.


----------



## Rigby5

Weatherman2020 said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Attenborough Says Climate Change Is A ‘Crime’ Humanity Has Inflicted On The Planet
> 
> 
> The documentarian reiterated his grief that society has destroyed large swaths of the natural world, but said humanity is “not beyond redemption.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare is smarter than David Attenborough
> 
> “Well, a crime has been committed,” Attenborough, 95, replied. “And it so happens that, I’m of such an age, that I was able to see it beginning.”
> “It isn’t that I enjoy saying: ‘Doom, doom, doom,’” he continued. “On the contrary, I’d much rather [say]: ‘Enjoy, take thrill, excitement, pleasure, joy, joy, joy, joy.’ But if you’ve got any sense of responsibility, you can’t do that.”
> 
> The documentarian’s comments come amid ongoing and increasingly dire warnings from the planet’s scientists that climate change is largely continuing unabated. A report released last month by the Environmental Protection Agency detailed a disturbing shift in the United States caused by a warming world: The destruction of permafrost in Alaska, a spike in heat waves nationwide and longer-lasting wildfire and pollen season.
> 
> In his book and documentary, Attenborough pointed to existing technology that could help greatly alleviate the threat of climate change, primarily an immediate shift away from fossil fuels and an effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.
> The threat, he concluded, has grown so large as to be beyond the burden of any one nation.
> “I would say that the time has come to put aside national ambitions and look for an international ambition of survival,” he said. He later added: “What good does it do to say, “Oh, to hell with it, I don’t care.’ You can’t say that. Not if … you love your children. Not if you love the rest of human― how can you say that?”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A. The world is far from being overpopulated. You can fit the entire world population in Texas and give ever family a quarter of an acre home.
> 
> B. Only science deniers think the climate of today is optimum and believe that for the first time since time began the climate must stop changing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Except that they would all quickly die of thirst, starvation, and pollution if tucked into such a small space.
> The whole point of spreading out is then we each gain more resource availability.
> And the problem is we have saturated the globe.
> 
> Normal climate change cycles are 110,000 years from warm to ice age.
> We have accelerated it to a period of only about 400 years.
> Everyone will have to move, as coasts go under the 250 feet increase in oceans from melting ice water, and as current farmland turns to desert.
> Sure new places current uninhabitable will become habitable, but the cost will be enourmous.
> And the oceans will not do well.
> Ever notice all the main fishing is near the poles?
> Ocean life does better in colder climates.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh, BTW - the ocean has risen 0.78 inches in the past 1,800 years.
> That’s why Obama bought a mansion on the beach, he knows it’s bullshit.
Click to expand...


This says the ocean level has risen 10" in the last 140 years.


----------



## Unkotare

Rigby5 said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Everyone will have to move, as coasts go under the 250 feet increase in oceans from melting ice water,....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You know 'experts' have been declaring this for around 40 years now, right? "I'm telling you," "I guarantee," "I promise!" for decade after decade and my city is still not underwater. The guy down by the train station who walks around every day wearing a sandwich board that says "The End is Near!" WANTS the world to end because he'll accept that if it means he's finally right. The Weeping Polar Bear Club is of exactly of the same mindset.
> 
> That guy is still pacing back and forth in front of the train station.........................
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No one ever suggested the problem would happen in 40 years.
> ......
Click to expand...

Oh yes they did. I was assured that 20 years AGO my entire city would be underwater. Those doing the assuring made a shit load of money for so assuring.


----------



## Natural Citizen

I wouldnlt say we're operpopulated, per se. You could probably fit the entre population into a state the size of Texas.

We have entirely too many dumb people, though. 

Hopefully they all just killed their reproductive systems with that intrusive medical procedure they all just underwent. We'll know in about ten years or so.

I suppose that sometimes propaganda has its plus side.


----------



## 2aguy

Unkotare said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Everyone will have to move, as coasts go under the 250 feet increase in oceans from melting ice water,....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You know 'experts' have been declaring this for around 40 years now, right? "I'm telling you," "I guarantee," "I promise!" for decade after decade and my city is still not underwater. The guy down by the train station who walks around every day wearing a sandwich board that says "The End is Near!" WANTS the world to end because he'll accept that if it means he's finally right. The Weeping Polar Bear Club is of exactly of the same mindset.
> 
> That guy is still pacing back and forth in front of the train station.........................
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No one ever suggested the problem would happen in 40 years.
> ......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh yes they did. I was assured that 20 years AGO my entire city would be underwater. Those doing the assuring made a shit load of money for so assuring.
Click to expand...



And obama and the other high priests of global warming keep buying mansions on the water for some reason...........as they fly hither and yon in private jets....

A skeptical person might think they don't believe in the BS they are selling....


----------



## sealybobo

Unkotare said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Everyone will have to move, as coasts go under the 250 feet increase in oceans from melting ice water,....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You know 'experts' have been declaring this for around 40 years now, right? "I'm telling you," "I guarantee," "I promise!" for decade after decade and my city is still not underwater. The guy down by the train station who walks around every day wearing a sandwich board that says "The End is Near!" WANTS the world to end because he'll accept that if it means he's finally right. The Weeping Polar Bear Club is of exactly of the same mindset.
> 
> That guy is still pacing back and forth in front of the train station.........................
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No one ever suggested the problem would happen in 40 years.
> ......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh yes they did. I was assured that 20 years AGO my entire city would be underwater. Those doing the assuring made a shit load of money for so assuring.
Click to expand...

In a Dec. 14, 2009, speech at the Copenhagen Climate Conference, Gore suggested the possibility of the Arctic losing some or all of its ice in the summer months within five to seven years, citing researchers associated with the Naval Postgraduate School.

*Sea ice* in the *Arctic* has decreased dramatically since the late 1970s, particularly in summer and autumn. Since the satellite record began in 1978, the yearly minimum *Arctic sea ice* extent (which occurs in September) has decreased by about 40% 

The warming of the Atmosphere and the vertical heat fluxes from the *Ocean* are contributing to the *Arctic sea ice* rapid *decline*. A disappearance of *Arctic sea ice* in summer is predictable within 15 years.

It's happening.


----------



## sealybobo

2aguy said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Everyone will have to move, as coasts go under the 250 feet increase in oceans from melting ice water,....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You know 'experts' have been declaring this for around 40 years now, right? "I'm telling you," "I guarantee," "I promise!" for decade after decade and my city is still not underwater. The guy down by the train station who walks around every day wearing a sandwich board that says "The End is Near!" WANTS the world to end because he'll accept that if it means he's finally right. The Weeping Polar Bear Club is of exactly of the same mindset.
> 
> That guy is still pacing back and forth in front of the train station.........................
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No one ever suggested the problem would happen in 40 years.
> ......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh yes they did. I was assured that 20 years AGO my entire city would be underwater. Those doing the assuring made a shit load of money for so assuring.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> And obama and the other high priests of global warming keep buying mansions on the water for some reason...........as they fly hither and yon in private jets....
> 
> A skeptical person might think they don't believe in the BS they are selling....
Click to expand...

I've told you this a million times.  Every person in our government is rich.  They all have more than 1 home and they fly on private jets.  That doesn't mean shit.  You can fly on a private jet and still want to do something about man made climate change.  

If I fly on a plane does that make me a hypocrite?  Bullshit.


----------



## Weatherman2020

sealybobo said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Everyone will have to move, as coasts go under the 250 feet increase in oceans from melting ice water,....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You know 'experts' have been declaring this for around 40 years now, right? "I'm telling you," "I guarantee," "I promise!" for decade after decade and my city is still not underwater. The guy down by the train station who walks around every day wearing a sandwich board that says "The End is Near!" WANTS the world to end because he'll accept that if it means he's finally right. The Weeping Polar Bear Club is of exactly of the same mindset.
> 
> That guy is still pacing back and forth in front of the train station.........................
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No one ever suggested the problem would happen in 40 years.
> ......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh yes they did. I was assured that 20 years AGO my entire city would be underwater. Those doing the assuring made a shit load of money for so assuring.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> And obama and the other high priests of global warming keep buying mansions on the water for some reason...........as they fly hither and yon in private jets....
> 
> A skeptical person might think they don't believe in the BS they are selling....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I've told you this a million times.  Every person in our government is rich.  They all have more than 1 home and they fly on private jets.  That doesn't mean shit.  You can fly on a private jet and still want to do something about man made climate change.
> 
> If I fly on a plane does that make me a hypocrite?  Bullshit.
Click to expand...




sealybobo said:


> You can fly on a private jet and still want to do something about man made climate change.


You mean force others to do without while you personally live like royalty.


----------



## Weatherman2020

sealybobo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Everyone will have to move, as coasts go under the 250 feet increase in oceans from melting ice water,....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You know 'experts' have been declaring this for around 40 years now, right? "I'm telling you," "I guarantee," "I promise!" for decade after decade and my city is still not underwater. The guy down by the train station who walks around every day wearing a sandwich board that says "The End is Near!" WANTS the world to end because he'll accept that if it means he's finally right. The Weeping Polar Bear Club is of exactly of the same mindset.
> 
> That guy is still pacing back and forth in front of the train station.........................
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No one ever suggested the problem would happen in 40 years.
> ......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh yes they did. I was assured that 20 years AGO my entire city would be underwater. Those doing the assuring made a shit load of money for so assuring.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In a Dec. 14, 2009, speech at the Copenhagen Climate Conference, Gore suggested the possibility of the Arctic losing some or all of its ice in the summer months within five to seven years, citing researchers associated with the Naval Postgraduate School.
> 
> *Sea ice* in the *Arctic* has decreased dramatically since the late 1970s, particularly in summer and autumn. Since the satellite record began in 1978, the yearly minimum *Arctic sea ice* extent (which occurs in September) has decreased by about 40%
> 
> The warming of the Atmosphere and the vertical heat fluxes from the *Ocean* are contributing to the *Arctic sea ice* rapid *decline*. A disappearance of *Arctic sea ice* in summer is predictable within 15 years.
> 
> It's happening.
Click to expand...

Great news!  The billions of acres under sheet ice can now be farmed. 
Call me when palm trees return to Alaska, that was the most prolific period for life on earth.


----------



## Unkotare

sealybobo said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If I fly on a plane does that make me a hypocrite?
Click to expand...


Yes.


----------



## 2aguy

sealybobo said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Everyone will have to move, as coasts go under the 250 feet increase in oceans from melting ice water,....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You know 'experts' have been declaring this for around 40 years now, right? "I'm telling you," "I guarantee," "I promise!" for decade after decade and my city is still not underwater. The guy down by the train station who walks around every day wearing a sandwich board that says "The End is Near!" WANTS the world to end because he'll accept that if it means he's finally right. The Weeping Polar Bear Club is of exactly of the same mindset.
> 
> That guy is still pacing back and forth in front of the train station.........................
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No one ever suggested the problem would happen in 40 years.
> ......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh yes they did. I was assured that 20 years AGO my entire city would be underwater. Those doing the assuring made a shit load of money for so assuring.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> And obama and the other high priests of global warming keep buying mansions on the water for some reason...........as they fly hither and yon in private jets....
> 
> A skeptical person might think they don't believe in the BS they are selling....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I've told you this a million times.  Every person in our government is rich.  They all have more than 1 home and they fly on private jets.  That doesn't mean shit.  You can fly on a private jet and still want to do something about man made climate change.
> 
> If I fly on a plane does that make me a hypocrite?  Bullshit.
Click to expand...



No...really, you can't......you can't tell us the world is going to end and then get several mansions on the coast...a coast they keep telling us is going to flood because I drive a car.......and then they fly private jets......while telling us if we don't buy a smart car we are killing the planet.......as they drive by in the 90,000 dollar fully loaded SUV....


----------



## Weatherman2020

Rigby5 said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Attenborough Says Climate Change Is A ‘Crime’ Humanity Has Inflicted On The Planet
> 
> 
> The documentarian reiterated his grief that society has destroyed large swaths of the natural world, but said humanity is “not beyond redemption.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare is smarter than David Attenborough
> 
> “Well, a crime has been committed,” Attenborough, 95, replied. “And it so happens that, I’m of such an age, that I was able to see it beginning.”
> “It isn’t that I enjoy saying: ‘Doom, doom, doom,’” he continued. “On the contrary, I’d much rather [say]: ‘Enjoy, take thrill, excitement, pleasure, joy, joy, joy, joy.’ But if you’ve got any sense of responsibility, you can’t do that.”
> 
> The documentarian’s comments come amid ongoing and increasingly dire warnings from the planet’s scientists that climate change is largely continuing unabated. A report released last month by the Environmental Protection Agency detailed a disturbing shift in the United States caused by a warming world: The destruction of permafrost in Alaska, a spike in heat waves nationwide and longer-lasting wildfire and pollen season.
> 
> In his book and documentary, Attenborough pointed to existing technology that could help greatly alleviate the threat of climate change, primarily an immediate shift away from fossil fuels and an effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.
> The threat, he concluded, has grown so large as to be beyond the burden of any one nation.
> “I would say that the time has come to put aside national ambitions and look for an international ambition of survival,” he said. He later added: “What good does it do to say, “Oh, to hell with it, I don’t care.’ You can’t say that. Not if … you love your children. Not if you love the rest of human― how can you say that?”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A. The world is far from being overpopulated. You can fit the entire world population in Texas and give ever family a quarter of an acre home.
> 
> B. Only science deniers think the climate of today is optimum and believe that for the first time since time began the climate must stop changing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Except that they would all quickly die of thirst, starvation, and pollution if tucked into such a small space.
> The whole point of spreading out is then we each gain more resource availability.
> And the problem is we have saturated the globe.
> 
> Normal climate change cycles are 110,000 years from warm to ice age.
> We have accelerated it to a period of only about 400 years.
> Everyone will have to move, as coasts go under the 250 feet increase in oceans from melting ice water, and as current farmland turns to desert.
> Sure new places current uninhabitable will become habitable, but the cost will be enourmous.
> And the oceans will not do well.
> Ever notice all the main fishing is near the poles?
> Ocean life does better in colder climates.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh, BTW - the ocean has risen 0.78 inches in the past 1,800 years.
> That’s why Obama bought a mansion on the beach, he knows it’s bullshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This says the ocean level has risen 10" in the last 140 years.
Click to expand...

From one of your fellow doomsdayer comrades in another thread:


 How they claim to measure sea level to the micro inch for the last 2500 years is beyond me, but it’s doomsdayer fodder.


----------



## sealybobo

Natural Citizen said:


> I wouldnlt say we're operpopulated, per se. You could probably fit the entre population into a state the size of Texas.
> 
> We have entirely too many dumb people, though.
> 
> Hopefully they all just killed their reproductive systems with that intrusive medical procedure they all just underwent. We'll know in about ten years or so.
> 
> I suppose that sometimes propaganda has its plus side.



*World Population Day* is an annual event, observed on July 11 every year, which seeks to raise awareness of global population issues. World Population Day aims to increase people's awareness on various population issues such as the importance of family planning, gender equality, poverty, maternal health and human rights.

1989 5 billion people.  The world population had reached 7,700,000,000 on year 2019.

Earth Overshoot Day marks the date when humanity’s demand for ecological resources and services in a given year exceeds what Earth can regenerate in that year.

Changes in carbon emissions, forest biocapacity and other factors that could impact global biocapacity or the Ecological Footprint from January 1 to Earth Overshoot Day 2021 were evaluated. The main drivers were the carbon Footprint (increased 6.6% from 2021) and a decrease in global forest biocapacity (reduced 0.5% from 2021).

July 29th is the date this year we use up more resources than we should.  Next year it will be July 25th.  The following year it will be July 20th.  Get it?


----------



## Weatherman2020

sealybobo said:


> Natural Citizen said:
> 
> 
> 
> I wouldnlt say we're operpopulated, per se. You could probably fit the entre population into a state the size of Texas.
> 
> We have entirely too many dumb people, though.
> 
> Hopefully they all just killed their reproductive systems with that intrusive medical procedure they all just underwent. We'll know in about ten years or so.
> 
> I suppose that sometimes propaganda has its plus side.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *World Population Day* is an annual event, observed on July 11 every year, which seeks to raise awareness of global population issues. World Population Day aims to increase people's awareness on various population issues such as the importance of family planning, gender equality, poverty, maternal health and human rights.
> 
> 1989 5 billion people.  The world population had reached 7,700,000,000 on year 2019.
> 
> Earth Overshoot Day marks the date when humanity’s demand for ecological resources and services in a given year exceeds what Earth can regenerate in that year.
> 
> Changes in carbon emissions, forest biocapacity and other factors that could impact global biocapacity or the Ecological Footprint from January 1 to Earth Overshoot Day 2021 were evaluated. The main drivers were the carbon Footprint (increased 6.6% from 2021) and a decrease in global forest biocapacity (reduced 0.5% from 2021).
> 
> July 29th is the date this year we use up more resources than we should.  Next year it will be July 25th.  The following year it will be July 20th.  Get it?
Click to expand...

Panic porn. You feed those addicted to Panic Porn.


----------



## sealybobo

2aguy said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Everyone will have to move, as coasts go under the 250 feet increase in oceans from melting ice water,....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You know 'experts' have been declaring this for around 40 years now, right? "I'm telling you," "I guarantee," "I promise!" for decade after decade and my city is still not underwater. The guy down by the train station who walks around every day wearing a sandwich board that says "The End is Near!" WANTS the world to end because he'll accept that if it means he's finally right. The Weeping Polar Bear Club is of exactly of the same mindset.
> 
> That guy is still pacing back and forth in front of the train station.........................
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No one ever suggested the problem would happen in 40 years.
> ......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh yes they did. I was assured that 20 years AGO my entire city would be underwater. Those doing the assuring made a shit load of money for so assuring.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> And obama and the other high priests of global warming keep buying mansions on the water for some reason...........as they fly hither and yon in private jets....
> 
> A skeptical person might think they don't believe in the BS they are selling....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I've told you this a million times.  Every person in our government is rich.  They all have more than 1 home and they fly on private jets.  That doesn't mean shit.  You can fly on a private jet and still want to do something about man made climate change.
> 
> If I fly on a plane does that make me a hypocrite?  Bullshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No...really, you can't......you can't tell us the world is going to end and then get several mansions on the coast...a coast they keep telling us is going to flood because I drive a car.......and then they fly private jets......while telling us if we don't buy a smart car we are killing the planet.......as they drive by in the 90,000 dollar fully loaded SUV....
Click to expand...

Yes you can.  In the future those rich people will have to pay more to fly in that private jet.  And you will have to pay more taxes for your 2nd and 3rd home.  And if it doesn't have solar panels on it you will pay a higher taxes.

The rich will still have 4 homes and fly private jets in the future sorry but this isn't communism.

And their SUV's will be battery powered..


My buddy just bought an electric F150.


----------



## Unkotare

Unkotare said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Attenborough Says Climate Change Is A ‘Crime’ Humanity Has Inflicted On The Planet
> 
> 
> The documentarian reiterated his grief that society has destroyed large swaths of the natural world, but said humanity is “not beyond redemption.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare is smarter than David Attenborough
> 
> “Well, a crime has been committed,” Attenborough, 95, replied. “And it so happens that, I’m of such an age, that I was able to see it beginning.”
> “It isn’t that I enjoy saying: ‘Doom, doom, doom,’” he continued. “On the contrary, I’d much rather [say]: ‘Enjoy, take thrill, excitement, pleasure, joy, joy, joy, joy.’ But if you’ve got any sense of responsibility, you can’t do that.”
> 
> The documentarian’s comments come amid ongoing and increasingly dire warnings from the planet’s scientists that climate change is largely continuing unabated. A report released last month by the Environmental Protection Agency detailed a disturbing shift in the United States caused by a warming world: The destruction of permafrost in Alaska, a spike in heat waves nationwide and longer-lasting wildfire and pollen season.
> 
> In his book and documentary, Attenborough pointed to existing technology that could help greatly alleviate the threat of climate change, primarily an immediate shift away from fossil fuels and an effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.
> The threat, he concluded, has grown so large as to be beyond the burden of any one nation.
> “I would say that the time has come to put aside national ambitions and look for an international ambition of survival,” he said. He later added: “What good does it do to say, “Oh, to hell with it, I don’t care.’ You can’t say that. Not if … you love your children. Not if you love the rest of human― how can you say that?”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah....China is about to experience a rapid decline in population so much so they have lifted their one child policy and now want 3......
> 
> Climate change is a scam....the planet changes climate without any help......and anyone who is telling you to give them money and power to save the planet is selling you BS....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Bullshit.  And the ocean is a toilet bowl.
> 
> But, these Green companies will be the new industries.  I have a battery powered bike.  My girlfriend just bought a home and purchased a battery powered lawn mower.
> 
> We need to pay taxes to hire people to go clean out the oceans of all the plastic you stupid conservatives are really ignorant.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> lol batteries are toxic where do you think they go when used up?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nonsense.  Venice is moving to battery boats.  Clean up the air, water and noise pollution.
> 
> View attachment 498293
> Don't hate.
> 
> You think it'd be better for me to be riding around on a gas powered moped than my battery bike?
> 
> Where does everything go when we are done with them?  In the trash.  Recyle?  It's amazing what we are doing today.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah......Italy is truly a world leader......in what, we don't know......but that boat looks cute...
> 
> Meanwhile, the U.S. protects europe, Asia, and provides advanced tech and medical innovation for the world.....
> 
> You go girl...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I miss you Republicans back when you were at least pushing for more nuclear power.  What happened to that?  Are you hell bent on keeping the coal and gas business' going?  Lobbyists?  Votes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I wish I could say I miss the days the Left cared about the environment.  But there’s never been one of those days. Your killing of nuclear energy proves my point.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And you hate windmills, batteries and solar panels.  Why?  Why are you guys always against going green?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I installed and owned solar panels on my last home. Only because I knew I had fossil fueled electricity as a backup.
> Keep trying more lies to attack me.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's his only approach to discourse. He guesses/imagines/lies then tries to pretend his responding to his own strawman is a valid 'argument.'  Doesn't even realize he's doing it most of the time. He's just plain stupid.
Click to expand...

.


----------



## Weatherman2020

sealybobo said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Everyone will have to move, as coasts go under the 250 feet increase in oceans from melting ice water,....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You know 'experts' have been declaring this for around 40 years now, right? "I'm telling you," "I guarantee," "I promise!" for decade after decade and my city is still not underwater. The guy down by the train station who walks around every day wearing a sandwich board that says "The End is Near!" WANTS the world to end because he'll accept that if it means he's finally right. The Weeping Polar Bear Club is of exactly of the same mindset.
> 
> That guy is still pacing back and forth in front of the train station.........................
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No one ever suggested the problem would happen in 40 years.
> ......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh yes they did. I was assured that 20 years AGO my entire city would be underwater. Those doing the assuring made a shit load of money for so assuring.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> And obama and the other high priests of global warming keep buying mansions on the water for some reason...........as they fly hither and yon in private jets....
> 
> A skeptical person might think they don't believe in the BS they are selling....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I've told you this a million times.  Every person in our government is rich.  They all have more than 1 home and they fly on private jets.  That doesn't mean shit.  You can fly on a private jet and still want to do something about man made climate change.
> 
> If I fly on a plane does that make me a hypocrite?  Bullshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No...really, you can't......you can't tell us the world is going to end and then get several mansions on the coast...a coast they keep telling us is going to flood because I drive a car.......and then they fly private jets......while telling us if we don't buy a smart car we are killing the planet.......as they drive by in the 90,000 dollar fully loaded SUV....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes you can.  In the future those rich people will have to pay more to fly in that private jet.  And you will have to pay more taxes for your 2nd and 3rd home.  And if it doesn't have solar panels on it you will pay a higher taxes.
> 
> The rich will still have 4 homes and fly private jets in the future sorry but this isn't communism.
> 
> And their SUV's will be battery powered..
> 
> 
> My buddy just bought an electric F150.
Click to expand...

No, the future means middle and lower income people will be forced to ride the bus (assuming they’re not on strike) to get to work and buy groceries while the rich will still have 4 homes, 2 SUVs and fly private jets.
Think Castro went without?


----------



## sealybobo

Weatherman2020 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Everyone will have to move, as coasts go under the 250 feet increase in oceans from melting ice water,....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You know 'experts' have been declaring this for around 40 years now, right? "I'm telling you," "I guarantee," "I promise!" for decade after decade and my city is still not underwater. The guy down by the train station who walks around every day wearing a sandwich board that says "The End is Near!" WANTS the world to end because he'll accept that if it means he's finally right. The Weeping Polar Bear Club is of exactly of the same mindset.
> 
> That guy is still pacing back and forth in front of the train station.........................
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No one ever suggested the problem would happen in 40 years.
> ......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh yes they did. I was assured that 20 years AGO my entire city would be underwater. Those doing the assuring made a shit load of money for so assuring.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> And obama and the other high priests of global warming keep buying mansions on the water for some reason...........as they fly hither and yon in private jets....
> 
> A skeptical person might think they don't believe in the BS they are selling....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I've told you this a million times.  Every person in our government is rich.  They all have more than 1 home and they fly on private jets.  That doesn't mean shit.  You can fly on a private jet and still want to do something about man made climate change.
> 
> If I fly on a plane does that make me a hypocrite?  Bullshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No...really, you can't......you can't tell us the world is going to end and then get several mansions on the coast...a coast they keep telling us is going to flood because I drive a car.......and then they fly private jets......while telling us if we don't buy a smart car we are killing the planet.......as they drive by in the 90,000 dollar fully loaded SUV....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes you can.  In the future those rich people will have to pay more to fly in that private jet.  And you will have to pay more taxes for your 2nd and 3rd home.  And if it doesn't have solar panels on it you will pay a higher taxes.
> 
> The rich will still have 4 homes and fly private jets in the future sorry but this isn't communism.
> 
> And their SUV's will be battery powered..
> 
> 
> My buddy just bought an electric F150.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, the future means middle and lower income people will be forced to ride the bus (assuming they’re not on strike) to get to work and buy groceries while the rich will still have 4 homes, 2 SUVs and fly private jets.
> Think Castro went without?
Click to expand...

Yea but if only the rich are flying planes and gas SUV's the planet will be good.  

You have to be able to afford to fly a plane.  If it were cheap everyone including you would do it.


----------



## AMart

The population of Africa will grow from 1.3 Billion to over 4 Billion, as long as Bill Gates does not sterilize them, by the end of the Century.


----------



## sealybobo

AMart said:


> The population of Africa will grow from 1.3 Billion to over 4 Billion, as long as Bill Gates does not sterilize them, by the end of the Century.


Wouldn't it be great if he did?









						The Most Endangered Animals in Africa – SafariBookings
					

Africa is blessed with a stunning variety of wildlife – However, sadly, with ever expanding human populations and their increasing demand for land, food and water, exacerbated by poaching, more and more species are becoming endangered. However, many of the most endangered animals in Africa are...




					www.safaribookings.com


----------



## AMart

sealybobo said:


> AMart said:
> 
> 
> 
> The population of Africa will grow from 1.3 Billion to over 4 Billion, as long as Bill Gates does not sterilize them, by the end of the Century.
> 
> 
> 
> Wouldn't it be great if he did?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Most Endangered Animals in Africa – SafariBookings
> 
> 
> Africa is blessed with a stunning variety of wildlife – However, sadly, with ever expanding human populations and their increasing demand for land, food and water, exacerbated by poaching, more and more species are becoming endangered. However, many of the most endangered animals in Africa are...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.safaribookings.com
Click to expand...

Nope. Look most of those now and that will be born are going to have to really rough lives compared to the West. Best to leave them alone. They have cities now that are 20 million and it is 95% slums. I am not some Bond villain that wants to depopulate to world.


----------



## Weatherman2020

sealybobo said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Everyone will have to move, as coasts go under the 250 feet increase in oceans from melting ice water,....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You know 'experts' have been declaring this for around 40 years now, right? "I'm telling you," "I guarantee," "I promise!" for decade after decade and my city is still not underwater. The guy down by the train station who walks around every day wearing a sandwich board that says "The End is Near!" WANTS the world to end because he'll accept that if it means he's finally right. The Weeping Polar Bear Club is of exactly of the same mindset.
> 
> That guy is still pacing back and forth in front of the train station.........................
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No one ever suggested the problem would happen in 40 years.
> ......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh yes they did. I was assured that 20 years AGO my entire city would be underwater. Those doing the assuring made a shit load of money for so assuring.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> And obama and the other high priests of global warming keep buying mansions on the water for some reason...........as they fly hither and yon in private jets....
> 
> A skeptical person might think they don't believe in the BS they are selling....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I've told you this a million times.  Every person in our government is rich.  They all have more than 1 home and they fly on private jets.  That doesn't mean shit.  You can fly on a private jet and still want to do something about man made climate change.
> 
> If I fly on a plane does that make me a hypocrite?  Bullshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No...really, you can't......you can't tell us the world is going to end and then get several mansions on the coast...a coast they keep telling us is going to flood because I drive a car.......and then they fly private jets......while telling us if we don't buy a smart car we are killing the planet.......as they drive by in the 90,000 dollar fully loaded SUV....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes you can.  In the future those rich people will have to pay more to fly in that private jet.  And you will have to pay more taxes for your 2nd and 3rd home.  And if it doesn't have solar panels on it you will pay a higher taxes.
> 
> The rich will still have 4 homes and fly private jets in the future sorry but this isn't communism.
> 
> And their SUV's will be battery powered..
> 
> 
> My buddy just bought an electric F150.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, the future means middle and lower income people will be forced to ride the bus (assuming they’re not on strike) to get to work and buy groceries while the rich will still have 4 homes, 2 SUVs and fly private jets.
> Think Castro went without?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yea but if only the rich are flying planes and gas SUV's the planet will be good.
> 
> You have to be able to afford to fly a plane.  If it were cheap everyone including you would do it.
Click to expand...

I can fly private coast to coast private just by chartering a flight.
But anyone who really believes in manmade global warming who flies private jets and owns mansions is still either a liar or evil. Or both.


----------



## there4eyeM

Apparently, the population  of thinking, reasoning humans is the tiny minority that should be deciding things, but isn't.


----------



## Unkotare

LaDexter said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, it is not.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are an emotionally charged science invalid who has no basis to even comment on this issue.   You do not understand the planet and the strains that are currently put on it.  You just parrot some liar on Sundays and will never develop the intellectual basis to break out of that religious paper bag over your head.
> 
> It starts with fresh water, and then gets worse very rapidly.
Click to expand...


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

Weatherman2020 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> With higher population densities, we see more car traffic, urban pollution, and viral infections ... .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we have actually seen in the real world is improved gas mileage and reduced emissions from cars over the past several decades, and increased use of public transportation. I already gave you an example of how urban pollution was worse over 100 years ago. As for viral infections, I gave you the most famous example, but we can look at the Bubonic Plague in comparison with 1918, 1957, 1959, 1965, etc. to see that viruses have always existed and over time our ability to mitigate the effects of them even in the face of a growing population has also improved over time. All of the things you want to point to as "proof"  of so-called overpopulation are things that have always existed, but our ability to deal with them has NEVER been better than it is now with the highest population in history. There simply is NO 'overpopulation.' Even at that, as you have been told several times now, we are moving toward a global population decline in any case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> “Overpopulation” is a RELATIVE term.
> This thread’s title asks our opinion.
> In some places, outside large urban areas, there is little “overpopulation”, But in many other areas of this planet, there is undisputed overpopulation.
> I know;  I have traveled myself to India, China, Indonesia, etc.  Have you?
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. You still fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The human species will fail Earth if it keeps screwing with Mother Nature.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Attenborough Says Climate Change Is A ‘Crime’ Humanity Has Inflicted On The Planet
> 
> 
> The documentarian reiterated his grief that society has destroyed large swaths of the natural world, but said humanity is “not beyond redemption.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare is smarter than David Attenborough
> 
> “Well, a crime has been committed,” Attenborough, 95, replied. “And it so happens that, I’m of such an age, that I was able to see it beginning.”
> “It isn’t that I enjoy saying: ‘Doom, doom, doom,’” he continued. “On the contrary, I’d much rather [say]: ‘Enjoy, take thrill, excitement, pleasure, joy, joy, joy, joy.’ But if you’ve got any sense of responsibility, you can’t do that.”
> 
> The documentarian’s comments come amid ongoing and increasingly dire warnings from the planet’s scientists that climate change is largely continuing unabated. A report released last month by the Environmental Protection Agency detailed a disturbing shift in the United States caused by a warming world: The destruction of permafrost in Alaska, a spike in heat waves nationwide and longer-lasting wildfire and pollen season.
> 
> In his book and documentary, Attenborough pointed to existing technology that could help greatly alleviate the threat of climate change, primarily an immediate shift away from fossil fuels and an effort to “rewild” large tracts of the planet, giving the natural world time to recover.
> The threat, he concluded, has grown so large as to be beyond the burden of any one nation.
> “I would say that the time has come to put aside national ambitions and look for an international ambition of survival,” he said. He later added: “What good does it do to say, “Oh, to hell with it, I don’t care.’ You can’t say that. Not if … you love your children. Not if you love the rest of human― how can you say that?”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A. The world is far from being overpopulated. You can fit the entire world population in Texas and give ever family a quarter of an acre home.
> 
> B. Only science deniers think the climate of today is optimum and believe that for the first time since time began the climate must stop changing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Some like to assert that everybody on *Earth could* be *fit* into the State of *Texas*, using logic as follows. The area of *Texas* is about 262,000 mi2. Dividing this figure by the current human *population* of 7 billion leaves each person with less than 100 square meters, a small plot the size of a big room about 10 m x 10 m.
> 
> One third of Earth's surface is desert which supports very few people.
> 
> Without going into the fact that almost half the State is desert, notice we have not allowed for any roads, shopping malls, schools, hospitals, football stadiums, prisons, sewage plants, rivers, lakes, reservoirs, golf courses, parks, and what else? How much land does it take to support a human being?
> 
> Right now China, USA, Mexico, India, Europe, Canada, Australia, are all putting up too many toxic fumes.  We need to stop.  We are destroying the planet.  THat's the scientific consensus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Math rule #1: don’t mix units of measurement.
> Assumption: 7.6B population
> Texas = 268,820 sq miles = 7,494,271,488,000 sq ft
> 
> That means ever human on earth could live in Texas and have 3,944 sq ft. Family of 4 gives them .09 acres, which is standard suburban lot size.
> 
> As far as climates, many people live in deserts by choice. Most of the planet is covered by water and a third of our underground is filled with water. Much of the earth is covered in ice. Assuming that melts, we gain livable land.
> 
> For anyone who travels, they know the earth is far from being overpopulated.
Click to expand...

What did you use for Earth's population? Current estimates are 7.8 billion, not 7.6 billion.


----------



## Unkotare

Governments everywhere need to be working on responses to the looming (and unlike the myth of 'overpopulation' real) challenges of a global population decline.


----------

