Do you think overpopulation is a problem and what is your so

Page 3 of 5 [ 66 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

AstroGeek
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Jan 2011
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,582

12 Mar 2012, 9:23 pm

androbot2084 wrote:

I think if running out of land is the problem then we should colonize Mars.

How on (or off, rather) Earth do you propose that we get all of our potential millions or billions of excess people to Mars?

Last edited by AstroGeek on 12 Mar 2012, 10:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

simon_says
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Jan 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,075

12 Mar 2012, 9:26 pm

Quote:

I think if running out of land is the problem then we should colonize Mars.

Digging out tunnels here, or living under the sea, or colonizing Antarctica would be cheaper.

Better to put them on "rockets" that we say are going to Mars and then cook them and eat them. Assuming it get's bad enough, or if we just want a laugh.

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

12 Mar 2012, 9:58 pm

Do what they did in Logan's Run, and have everyone reaching age thirty die for public amusement!
(No, not really)

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 115,260
Location: the island of defective toy santas

13 Mar 2012, 12:39 am

it is a serious game of good cop/bad cop, where the enlightened among us mere mortals will figure out a way to get the rest of us to stop having so damned many babies, or if this fails, then the earth will take care of things in a ruthless manner that nobody will like. either way, our overpopulation problem will be addressed.

MissConstrue
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 17,052
Location: MO

13 Mar 2012, 12:50 am

androbot2084 wrote:

I think if running out of land is the problem then we should colonize Mars.

I'm most likely going to be criticized and called crazy for this but I've often thought of this option. Fact is we're running out of resources and global warming IS happening and population is on the rise. But the biggest problem is both the cost and the fact that Mars cannot support life....that we know of yet.

_________________
I live as I choose or I will not live at all.
~Delores O’Riordan

Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

13 Mar 2012, 12:55 am

MissConstrue wrote:

androbot2084 wrote:

I think if running out of land is the problem then we should colonize Mars.

I'm most likely going to be criticized and called crazy for but I've always thought this idea wasn't so bad. Fact is we're running out of resources and global warming IS happening and population is on the rise. But the biggest problem is both the cost and the fact that Mars cannot support life....that we know of yet.

I don't think it is crazy of you to think that at all. A lot of very intelligent people support Mars colonization. Much of the space industry really. Neil Armstrong supported the "one-way trip" idea for Mars exploration, where the first astronauts lay the groundwork for a permanent presence. Eventually we can engineer the planet to be Earth-like

_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do

Declension
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Jan 2012
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,807

13 Mar 2012, 4:17 am

enrico_dandolo wrote:

With two children, world population will stabilize, not shrink.

I wasn't assuming that everyone would be in one of these couples.

enrico_dandolo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Nov 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 866

13 Mar 2012, 5:44 am

Declension wrote:

enrico_dandolo wrote:

With two children, world population will stabilize, not shrink.

I wasn't assuming that everyone would be in one of these couples.

Oops. True.

Pandora_Box wrote:

My belief is the very same belief of the natural world, a deer population is overpopulated, they starve, they strip the land, they get more disease, and they die. Now either they die and that naturally cuts the population into a more balanced situation or they completely die off. I feel like we should be allowing this to occur as well. And stop sending aid for those populations that are facing those problems. We need to stop playing a "God" whom can change the course of the natural world. Because the natural rules and laws will come back and we'll have worse shocks becuase of it.

So because there are too many people somewhere, we should let them die and suffer until the population regulates itself?

There is no need to "play God". Everything will eventual stabilize itself no matter what we do by changes in fertility, all within a few generations; indeed it has happened in the West, and natality already decreases elsewhere too. However, letting people starve, suffer and die as a method of population regulation is still letting them starve, suffer and die. Isn't the point of fighting overpopulation exactly to avoid starvation, suffering and death?

This idea is especially bizarre when said starvation, suffering and death is concentrated in certain areas, whereas others live in plenty. Like, you know... Europe. North America. Australia and New Zeeland. Besides, some of the overpopulated areas are just too populated for their level of infrastructure and development.

However, I agree with not just giving food away, because it is not a solution. It disrupts the local market. Better to give tools, expertise, education -- and condoms.

puddingmouse
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Apr 2010
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,777
Location: Cottonopolis

13 Mar 2012, 6:19 am

enrico_dandolo wrote:

So because there are too many people somewhere, we should let them die and suffer until the population regulates itself?

And here we see who the real anti-humans are.

_________________
Zombies, zombies will tear us apart...again.

donnie_darko
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,981

13 Mar 2012, 7:28 am

I'm kind of surprised how almost everyone thinks overpopulation is a real (global) problem. Have you guys ever left the city? Even California, hell, even Japan, is still mostly wild land.

puddingmouse
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Apr 2010
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,777
Location: Cottonopolis

13 Mar 2012, 7:40 am

There is hardly any wild land at all in my country.

But more to the point, I'll say it one more time - overpopulation is in relation to resources, which are being depleted.

_________________
Zombies, zombies will tear us apart...again.

donnie_darko
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,981

13 Mar 2012, 7:45 am

puddingmouse wrote:

There is hardly any wild land at all in my country.

But more to the point, I'll say it one more time - overpopulation is in relation to resources, which are being depleted.

Where do you live, the UK? Yeah, true, that is kind of the exception to the rule though.

If there really are too many 'mouths to feed', then how come there are more people who are overweight than are hungry? Yes, certain resources, such as oil, are being depleted, but that has more to do with our excessive lifestyle and masses of people adopting it than it has to do with the population itself. And certain resources, such as forest land, are actually increasing in North America and Europe. Did you know that the United States has more forest today than it had in the year 1900?

puddingmouse
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Apr 2010
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,777
Location: Cottonopolis

13 Mar 2012, 7:50 am

I live in England.

Reforestation is great. Peak oil is not. We will have too many mouths to feed once we start running out of oil. Also, further climate changes will make it harder to feed as many people as we currently do.

I don't actually think the world is overpopulated right now, but I think it will be in the future unless fertility rates decline even more quickly in the developing world.

_________________
Zombies, zombies will tear us apart...again.

Oodain
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,022
Location: in my own little tamarillo jungle,

13 Mar 2012, 7:52 am

donnie_darko wrote:

puddingmouse wrote:

There is hardly any wild land at all in my country.

But more to the point, I'll say it one more time - overpopulation is in relation to resources, which are being depleted.

not at all,

denmark has a higher population density than the uk,
as do many other countries.

i would also like to say that anyone that thinks there are more over wheight people than hungry ones live in a delusional dreamworld.

look at population distribution and that becomes quite clear.

_________________
//through chaos comes complexity//

the scent of the tamarillo is pungent and powerfull,
woe be to the nose who nears it.

donnie_darko
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,981

13 Mar 2012, 7:57 am

puddingmouse wrote:

Not if we all start gardening!

I have done the math, you could probably feed the human population with the United States' farmland alone if it was farmed intensely and intelligently. Climate change will probably actually make MORE of the world farmable though it will also cause the weather to be more unpredictable. It wouldn't be on the kind of diet Westerners enjoy now, probably more of an Asian diet, but we will definitely be able to prevent starving if we are willing to work hard and change some of our habits imo. I would rather change my diet and lifestyle than make other people starve so I can continue to eat lots of meat regularly.

Yeah, um, I'm pretty sure our population will never exceed 10 billion. I'd say if it went far over that number, we might start having an overpopulation problem, but I don't think 9 billion vs 7 billion is that big a difference, after all the world only had 5 billion people in 1987 and even then people thought it was overpopulated.

Really the reason I'm not worried about the population rising is because it's already slowing down so much. It will never double again, if it was still doubling twice a century, I would definitely be worried, but the growth isn't exponential anymore thankfully. I guess my only concern is if the urbanization trend in the so-called developing world slows down or reverses.

donnie_darko
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,981

13 Mar 2012, 7:59 am

Oodain wrote:

i would also like to say that anyone that thinks there are more over wheight people than hungry ones live in a delusional dreamworld.

look at population distribution and that becomes quite clear.

I admit I was surprised too, but it's true.

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/49720.php

Page 3 of 5 [ 66 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next

Jump to:

Do you think overpopulation is a problem and what is your so Post Reply New Topic

Do you think overpopulation is a problem and what is your so