6 billion and counting

God put animals here for humans to eat. Not eating animals, and going out of your way to preserve their environment (for no immediate human benefit) is contrary to the will of god.

Amazing isn't it? An attitude straight out of the nineteenth century. Completely ignorant of the concept of ecosystems, or any inkling of the idea that wilderness might be worth preserving both to save ecosystems, and because most humans prefer the idea of living on a world that still has wild areas.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Actually its not stupid....its practial and logical for them to live in areas close to work and family. Humans have always done this. Its just now instead of villages of a comfy 100 or 200 people its cities of millions.

See just like cancer there is a starting point from which it all began. What is the magic number 9 billion? 10 billion? 20 billion? before people say oh hey unregulated population growth is creating a problem.....for everyone!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I encounter imbeciles like Pronatalist almost everyday.. it gets depressing sometimes.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

What could be more natural, than the natural increase of humans?​

And what's wrong with cities of millions, if that's where people choose to live? People have to live somewhere.

"Unregulated" population growth? That's freedom.

I read somewhere that there's need for a new "paradigm." Okay, here's mine. As the world gains more people, not just countryside, but also cities should be encouraged as places where people may enjoy having their "traditionally very large" families.

There's still villages of a "comfy" 100s of people, but maybe even some of those 100 or 200 people villages have grown to 500 or 900 people. Or have they shrunk as people moved away drawn by the allure of the big cities?

Maybe what has grown more "like cancer," would be greedy corporations, or the spread of shoddy contaceptive potions and poisons. Whatever happened to the old traditional natural "unregulated" flow of human population? Let the human race "blossom" in size, so that far more people may experience life, and so, so many parents may go on enjoying having their precious darling babies that they were meant to have.

 

Sure, there can be "wild" areas, just not quite so much wild areas as before, as humans need their place too.​

And so what is your point? That all our 19th century ancestors were wrong or stupid or something, and now "we" are so smart? (Or more likely, they were smart, and we have become deluded by wayward secular "education.")

Wild areas may have some use, but not near as much use and value, as places filled with people.

I'm not saying that humans should "trample" every place they can, but simply that the natural flow of human life unhindered should be respected and welcomed, and accepted as a primal and fundamental and vital component of the "progress" of the human race.

 

Pronatalists are everywhere? Could that relate somehow to that the meek shall inherit the earth?​

Why? Wouldn't it be nice to live in a world, that will gladly "scoot over" a bit, or whatever's needed, to find or make some place for your children?

BTW, isn't it a bit strange, that so many population phobics seem to be male? Having never experienced the wondrous sensations of pregnancy, does that somehow make it harder to imagine an entire planet becoming "pregnant" with people?

If there's so many people out there as smart as me, what does that suggest about your misguided views?

 

Shove it up your ass..

 

He is the immovable object...lol many have tried all have failed..

Tut,tut,tut...so rude ,dude

 

Yea well, this guy gives me the creeps. I mean, really..

 

LOL I tried everything early on in this thread and got beat down to...
I can appreciate your frustration,but I respect him for standing by his belief so solidly, even though I can't accept his way working at all....
lol someone warned me to..

 

I have no respect for his psychotic mantras..

 

List of frustrating things about Pronatalist (and I'm new to this forum):

1. The way he puts that stupid title at the beginning of all his posts as though he is writing an article.
2. The way he HAS to write three posts at a time.
3. The way he uses the straw-man technique so consistently.
4. Lines like this...

"BTW, isn't it a bit strange, that so many population phobics seem to be male?"

You're worse that pharoahmoan for God's sake.

 

What about his arrogant tone ?

 

Are you guys saying that you actually read Pronatalist' posts, I mean novels?

 

I try not to, but sometimes I peek to see if one is a reply to me.

 

LOL....i'm chuckling to myself now...lol

'The Pronatalist reich stands strong' or should that be stiff..

 

lol :spank:

 

As Truman Capote said about Jack Kerouac, "That isn't writing at all, it's typing."

 

This isn't an "article?"​

Isn't the real purpose of a "title," both to summarize the focus of the article/post, and to allow a quick skimmer, to find which posts he/she wants to read first or more closely? I know that lots of long and many paragraphs, are hard to read by somebody in a hurry, or in a hurry to see what people are saying on other threads. So I try to make it more approachable and readible, as I would like for people to read and respond to my posts.

Also, some forums, such as this one, do have a "Title" field, and then strangely, the post title doesn't appear in some of the forums. One forum format has an "Outline" link, that displays an outline of the 1st line of all posts. Looks so much better when posts have short "titles."

Since most such posts are different replies to different people, the apparent alternative would be for me to check back on any threads into which I have posted, hourly. That's hardly a "reasonable" request. I have to do it, when I can get around to it, as like most people, I have to live in "the real world" too.

Huh? I didn't understand what you are saying here.

Did you perhaps misspell "pheromones?" If so, whatever are you talking about here?

But quite many of the scensationist population phobic scare-tactic, often largely discredited, authors, tend to be male. I was asking the question, why is that? Could it have anything to do with, that males don't get pregnant? Women who have become pregnant, or someday may become pregnant, may have those "maternal instincts" influencing them, to somewhat defend the natural right for people to become pregnant?

 

No Pharoahmoan is my housemate and must be suffering some problems on a mental level yet is too blind to see it, i'll give you a link to a thread of his then you can click on his name and check some of the other vomit he claims to be real perceptions of life...

This one he claims he himself in a previous lifetime has used the great pyramid as a stargate....lol...
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=80703&page=3

Or glance at this read from post 48 its almost a childlike view of how things are...even when he hypocracises himself he doesn't read peoples opinions on what he claims he just tries to cover up BS with Psycho babble but the smells the same
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=81181&page=4
lol and all his claims no matter how strange and off target are all described with the same descriptive linguistics Higher Frequencey, Higher vibrations etc (if you read a hand full of his thread starters you will get a picture)...