overpopulation?

Discussion in 'Earth Science' started by Mouse88, Jan 4, 2010.

  1. Baron Max Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,053
    Hardly exists at all? Bangladesh is not overpopulated? Mexico City is not overpopulated? Mumbai? Hong Kong? Bejing?

    Solve itself in a short time? Huh? When has that ever occured for you to have such confidence in it happening again?

    Your logic is terribly confusing, Enmos, and I think it's becuase you don't like to stick to the topic ...you seem to ramble or something.

    Baron Max
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Enmos Staff Member

    Messages:
    43,184
    Would you repeat your definition of overpopulation then?
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Syzygys As a mother, I am telling you Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,671
    Definition, schmefinition. We are overpopulated, end of story...

    Why do we have a thread on this anyway, unless possible solution searching?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Enmos Staff Member

    Messages:
    43,184
    Well, Max has his own definition: "More people than the available resources can support."
    Obviously, that will solve itself in a very short timespan.
     
  8. Syzygys As a mother, I am telling you Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,671
    What Max didn't realize that even by his definition the earth is overpopulated...
     
  9. Scaramouche Registered Member

    Messages:
    432
    Well, the reality is, if there are any more people than me plus 30,000 gorgeous women who actually dig me, the planet is overpopulated.
     
  10. Michael 歌舞伎 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,285
    RE: OP

    Yes, I think there are too many people on the Earth. The USA would be fine at 150 million tops. We simply don't need a 1 trillion humans.
     
  11. Blindman Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,425
    The problem in this thread.

    1:There is no clear definition of overpopulation.

    2: There is no economic method that can reduce human population without a massive decrease in the quality of human life.

    From wiki
    The UN Human Development Report of 1997 states: "During the last 15-20 years, more than 100 developing countries, and several Eastern European countries, have suffered from disastrous growth failures. The reductions in standard of living have been deeper and more long-lasting than what was seen in the industrialised countries during the depression in the 1930s

    3: The fact that the greatest population growth rates are in areas of low population, and economic status. (there are a few exceptions)

    4: Humans tend to congregate in cities and areas that provide a better quality of life, depopulating areas that are in need of more humans.

    5: There is no account for the increased carrying capacity of the world due to technology.
     
  12. krazedkat IQ of "Highly Gifted"-"Genius" Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    262
    Genocide seems so tempting now... (kidding!)
     
  13. matthew809 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    480
    Overpopulation is like overeating- an unintended but inevitable outcome of successful natural selection. Our instinct is to seek out, horde, and devour food as quickly as possible. We have no built-in trigger which tells us to stop eating(other than the instinct to momentarily end an act of eating in order to not explode our stomachs). The same is with reproduction. And just as one must take responsibility, and overcome the incredible desire to consume- we must also overcome the desire to bear children. To be a mother or father- we must realize that this is a selfish act disguised as a noble one. Nothing can be more selfish than adding another life into this world simply to satisfy one's own primitive urge of parenthood, or rationalized sense of fitting in.

    As a global community we need to take control of our expansion- strategically and thoughtfully. But let's face it- this will never happen voluntarily. But it really doesn't matter anyway. We've passed the point of no return. Matters are being handled way above our pay grade.

    Rest assured- overpopulation will soon not be a problem...
     
  14. Syzygys As a mother, I am telling you Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,671
    Haiti update: There are about 200 thousands dead because of the earthquake. 100 years ago this number would have been less than 10K...

    Nature with its natural way takes care of the problem. Oh yes, the loss in population for the Earth was made up in 1 day.
     
  15. sly1 Heartless Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    692
    I would say there are too many humans on the planet to maintain a healthy/livable environment given our current societal structure.

    ~6.5 billion is huge if you take into account the natural resources we consume. However under a different set of living standards and social structure I could see 6.5 bill being perfectly fine but it would require a bit less of a material consumer society and more of a simple spiritual society. By spiritual I DO NOT mean religion or god, more like philosophy or understanding.

    As my favorite comedian said The planet will be fine. I'ts the people who are fucked. Or life in general. heh
     
  16. Blindman Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,425
    Come on now someone at least give some form of evidence that we are over populated. Something in the line of a direct threat to us humans. Not global warming or any of that greeny nonsense. Something like as we grow a greater percentage of us starve to death.

    Why would most governments in the world encourage growth if it was bad for us???
     
  17. Enmos Staff Member

    Messages:
    43,184
    Is that your argument?
    Maybe because of economic reasons? People tend to go for instant gratification no matter the future consequences.
     
  18. Blindman Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,425
    And the future consequences are?????? its a guessing game here. I know that population decline is very bad for us humans.
     
  19. sly1 Heartless Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    692

    Eh? You ask for evidence saying population increase is bad then say population decline is bad withought providing any of that evidence stuff you like so much.

    As far as the the future consiquences of population increase, IT IS a guessing game and any and ALL things involving the future is a guessing game...no?

    I can't read the future and I also can't think of anything "good" coming from MORE people who live the American consumer lifestyle we soooo love to promote around the planet. Good for humans at least.

    Bottom line is this:

    When is enough enough? 7 bill? 8bill? 500 billion? Unless something tragic happens that will knock population down significantly its only going to get worse. It may not be in our life times or any time soon but it WILL not stop unless something intereferes with the process of reproduction.

    I think people are waiting for a natural form of genocide to make things here more comfortable. That or no one really has the balls to talk openly to the public about a man-made version of population control.

    Maybe its a problem which the solutions are all too inhuman for consideration leaving us in denial.

    regardless of definition population or wether or not were overpopulated now, population WILL get to extremes at its current rate.

    Its hard to say what the perfect population is I don't think anyone knows or can have enough credentials to make such a jugement that would effect anyone else.

    Ive seen and started several threads on this topic and interestingly enough people aren't even at the solution stage yet as they are still arguing on wether or not there is a problem to solve in the first place.
     
  20. Blindman Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,425
    Population decline leads inevitable to negative growth and recession. Recession leads to loss of jobs, income, and wealth. All of which impact negativity on human health.

    We all bask in a system that promotes growth yet the majority seem to think its wrong. Im glad to hear you accept growth is not inherently bad.
     
  21. Blindman Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,425
    Oh no when I was in high school i was told about the mass starvation and the terrible human state when we reach 6B. The doom sayers never get it right.. How bad is it that teachers tell young kids that we are doomed. Resources are limited but still vastly under utilized by humanity.
     
  22. sly1 Heartless Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    692
    The System is a double edged sword then. As it encourages population growth in materialistic here and now terms but is shortsighted as far as long term effects.

    Seems like a lose lose situation with our current societial structure. Population increase will inevitably lead to more resources used than are available then everyone will be in a bad way, there will just be ALOT of them.

    there has to be a balance to it all. Who? What? will draw that line and enforce/regulate it? I have a hard time accepting that anyone or any group of people have that kind of power.
     
  23. Blindman Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,425
    We will draw our own line. We are near it now. Most developed nations rely on immigration to sustain growth. The more affluent we become the less likely to reproduce. Top end carrying capacity projections for Earth is 1 trillion. The UN is worried we wont make 10B.

    Mark my words when we are all old population decline due to nothing more then affluents will be our greatest threat...
     

Share This Page