Yes, I know this has probably been discussed to a limit that makes you want to hurl ur intestines out. Neways, I'm sure your not on this website to get utterly annoyed.(Plus I Wanted to get onto my topic and not dig around for dead ones) 1. Lets say in the next 10 years we face a problem with overpopulation What do can you do to prevent such a thing. 2. Not only are you faced with this problem You are faced with the rise of the AntiChrist.
National Geographic? I think that was it. At any rate, statistics in 1997, I believe, suggested that should humanity undertake the improbable venture of voluntarily limiting births to one child per family, the world population would decrease drastically over the course of fifty years. Consider: • 2 parents, 1 child: population -1 • 2 parents, 2 children: population +/- 0 • 2 parents, 3 children: population +1 • 3 parents, 2 children: population -0.5 ... and so on. In other words, responsible reproduction, or, at least, net-negative reproduction, would stave off the problem. To the other, though: I'm not worried about the AntiChrist. I doubt people will be able to tell the difference between one or the other era.
Tiassa, isn't it true that China has limited the number of children a couple could have to one? Pretty much what tiassa explained can prevent it. I'm not worried about the Antichrist.
We could possibly count on several global disasters, meteors hitting Earth, and countless holocausts. We could create a deadly virus and infect one-half of human life, send lots of people to the moon, or make parenting look un-trendy. Maybe humans are reproducing like rabbits because soon we will have a horrible Earthly disaster and we'll need as many living humans as possible to beat the odds of extinction.
::apple falls from tree and hits little OverTheStars on the head:: "Eureka! So that is the meaning of life!" :m: Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! :m: go to hell.
If women were to have an average of 2.1 children each, the population would remain stable. There's a whole chapter about in Edward O. Wilson's book The future of Life... I believe he said the current average is 2.6 or something like that, and that the number has been steadily decreasing. Let us hope that it keeps up... and that when things finally get to the point of decreasing population, it isn't too late. (It was a very good book, by the way; I highly recommend it.)
If every human soul on this planet was given 100 sq metres of land each they all would fit very easily into the US state of Oregon or the nation of Byelorussia and still have room for more . Over population is a myth created by wealthy nations to scare the shit out of its populations about ravenous hordes of dark skinned 3rd Worlders wanting over run our nations and steal our wealth .
As far as I know, that's still the rule. I haven't checked lately, though. Things like that tend to reach me through some sort of grapevine, though. As a general note, I should also mention that I think my math is faulty. I'll look around and see if I can find it. Nonetheless, the general idea still holds.
What if the problem turns out to be underpopulation? Not enough new consumers to feed the machine, and we die of bankruptcy. These days, if Christ comes back, we will kill him again as the Anti-Christ. Maybe this time his daddy will save him.
Overpopulation isn't about land, it's about resources. Drinking water, food, etc., are the things to worry about.
Given women more choices than marriage and children. In cultures where that has happened, girls/women tend to put off motherhood and have fewer children.
I have a better idea.. shoot some women .. say 30% .. then we loose alot of productivity in baby terms... and we get rid of the cause of all of men's problems in life eg. bitching , complaining , asking stupid questions.
By this logic then I believe we can conclude that over-population will not become a true threat until some time after the death of our current Pope. Let me explain myself. Although I do not believe it is written in revelations, I do think it goes without saying that the pope is going to have to challenge the anti-Christ to a boxing match, danceathon, or chilly cook-off, and currently our pope is too frail to make much of an attempt at any of these options.
"Tiassa, isn't it true that China has limited the number of children a couple could have to one?", Athelwulf That was true. Recently, China has relaxed that rule after observing some potential problems if it were to continue. The first is the fact that the younger generation becomes outnumbered by the older retired generation. Secondly, the rural areas, who have the least educated and were producing children the most rapidly, were least likely to have the one child rule enforced. That said, the one child rule in China was extremely successful. Many attribute this policy as directly related to the growning Chinese economy. Uncontrolled population growth has a tendency to stifle the economic growth of a nation. India needs to learn this lesson, but a democracy makes creating such a one child policy impossible.
When the murder rates skyrocket from the amount of horny jealous assholes there are fighting over the same bitches, then you will know why you made this sarcastic post. Seems much too destructive.
