Ideal population (Denver, Colorado Springs, Fort Collins: 2009, attorneys, houses)

[jazzlover]

Originally Posted by Josseppie

Lol

Typical reaction from you (a three-letter response in text-message language used by pimple-faced 13-year-olds to communicate with one another while they are failing to be educated in school) to the writing of person with a doctorate in physics who is widely considered a preeminent world expert in the field about which he writes.

[Josseppie]

Originally Posted by jazzlover

Typical reaction from you (a three-letter response in text-message language used by pimple-faced 13-year-olds to communicate with one another while they are failing to be educated in school) to the writing of person with a doctorate in physics who is widely considered a preeminent world expert in the field about which he writes.

You might want to look again I added more...

[jkanderson521]

Jazz, unfortunately all of your claimed education can not free you from the limits of your ideological zealotry. A closed mind is a closed mind, no matter how great ones purported education is (of course this is a internet forum where anyone can claim anything about their background with no way to prove or disprove your claim).

Again, all the examples provided only prove my point about static analysis locked in the limitations of current knowledge and understanding. There really is no point in trying to convince you as zealots are rarely converted and have already assured themselves of the infallibility of their own arguments bolstered by profound smugness and self righteousness.

Thomas Malthus first made the same predictions as Ehrlich (who was an apostle of the same dark Malthusian ideology) all the back to the 1700's. The truth is today's technology and frontiers of knowledge would be as alien and "magical" to someone of 1700's as will technologies years from now not yet seen nor conceived of to many of today's modern Malthusian acolytes. The difference between then and now is that if the developed world keeps marching to the Malthusian drumbeat, the developing world, which does not share in the dark vision will overtake and move forward while those dark acolytes become numerically insignificant.

You see, other than Nazi like "solutions" through force, you will not succeed in completing your dark quest. Unfortunately, those who look backward have a great deal of power and will inflict enormous suffering on others with their consciences soothed by the deception of their own self righteousness.

It is my hope that those who wish to truly create a better world for all by the expansion of knowledge, creativity, innovation, and freedom, will triumph over those who wish to bring darkness, suffering, regression, and death.

[jazzlover]

Originally Posted by jkanderson521

Jazz, unfortunately all of your claimed education can not free you from the limits of your ideological zealotry. A closed mind is a closed mind, no matter how great ones purported education is (of course this is a internet forum where anyone can claim anything about their background with no way to prove or disprove your claim).

Again, all the examples provided only prove my point about static analysis locked in the limitations of current knowledge and understanding. There really is no point in trying to convince you as zealots are rarely converted and have already assured themselves of the infallibility of their own arguments bolstered by profound smugness and self righteousness.

Thomas Malthus first made the same predictions as Ehrlich (who was an apostle of the same dark Malthusian ideology) all the back to the 1700's. The truth is today's technology and frontiers of knowledge would be as alien and "magical" to someone of 1700's as will technologies years from now not yet seen nor conceived of to many of today's modern Malthusian acolytes. The difference between then and now is that if the developed world keeps marching to the Malthusian drumbeat, the developing world, which does not share in the dark vision will overtake and move forward while those dark acolytes become numerically insignificant.

You see, other than Nazi like "solutions" through force, you will not succeed in completing your dark quest. Unfortunately, those who look backward have a great deal of power and will inflict enormous suffering on others with their consciences soothed by the deception of their own self righteousness.

It is my hope that those who wish to truly create a better world for all by the expansion of knowledge, creativity, innovation, and freedom, will triumph over those who wish to bring darkness, suffering, regression, and death.

The "developing" world has done so only by following the same soon-to-fail example of the "developed" world--exploiting at an ever greater rate the supplies of non-renewable resources. In fact, the fastest "developing" countries are those that have figured out how to produce those resources most quickly. It is a loser's game, but one that short-sighted people and societies play more and more. I find it hilarious that you wish for the expansion of freedom, when every scrap of historical evidence shows that overpopulation destroys it. Do you not find it interesting that the peoples with the most freedom live in the countries with the smallest populations relative to their land areas and domestic natural resources?

You decry Nazi-like "solutions" to overpopulation, but neglect to mention that severe natural resource shortages were a major impetus behind both Nazi Germany's militaristic expansionist attacks on its neighbors, as well as its savage treatment of many of Germany's own citizens. If you really don't want to see a repeat of Nazi-like brutality and mass-murder, you should pray for stabilized or declining populations that would decrease competition for depleting resources. Without population stabilization or decrease, the probability of widespread war, genocide, and totalitarianism is 100%.

Isaac Asimov made a great point about democracy not surviving overpopulation.

It's going to destroy it all. I use what I call my bathroom metaphor. If two people live in an apartment, and there are two bathrooms, then both have what I call freedom of the bathroom, go to the bathroom any time you want, and stay as long as you want to for whatever you need. And this to my way is ideal. And everyone believes in the freedom of the bathroom. It should be right there in the Constitution.

But if you have 20 people in the apartment and two bathrooms, no matter how much every person believes in freedom of the bathroom, there is no such thing. You have to set up, you have to set up times for each person, you have to bang at the door, aren't you through yet, and so on. And in the same way, democracy cannot survive overpopulation. Human dignity cannot survive it. Convenience and decency cannot survive it. As you put more and more people onto the world, the value of life not only declines, but it disappears. It doesn't matter if someone dies.

This is the broader point missed by the "growth apologists" who think technology will solve all of the problems caused by overpopulation. Technology may or may not totally fail us in the effort to accommodate overpopulation (I am inclined to believe that it will ultimately fail us), but our social, economic, and political institutions absolutely will fail us in an overpopulated world--and no amount of technology will save them.

[Sockeye]

What most folks don't realize is that natural resources (energy,water, etc.), and technology, ARE NOT interchangeable.

[Bob from down south]

Originally Posted by jkanderson521

Jazz, unfortunately all of your claimed education can not free you from the limits of your ideological zealotry. A closed mind is a closed mind, no matter how great ones purported education is (of course this is a internet forum where anyone can claim anything about their background with no way to prove or disprove your claim).

Again, all the examples provided only prove my point about static analysis locked in the limitations of current knowledge and understanding. There really is no point in trying to convince you as zealots are rarely converted and have already assured themselves of the infallibility of their own arguments bolstered by profound smugness and self righteousness.

Thomas Malthus first made the same predictions as Ehrlich (who was an apostle of the same dark Malthusian ideology) all the back to the 1700's. The truth is today's technology and frontiers of knowledge would be as alien and "magical" to someone of 1700's as will technologies years from now not yet seen nor conceived of to many of today's modern Malthusian acolytes. The difference between then and now is that if the developed world keeps marching to the Malthusian drumbeat, the developing world, which does not share in the dark vision will overtake and move forward while those dark acolytes become numerically insignificant.

You see, other than Nazi like "solutions" through force, you will not succeed in completing your dark quest. Unfortunately, those who look backward have a great deal of power and will inflict enormous suffering on others with their consciences soothed by the deception of their own self righteousness.

It is my hope that those who wish to truly create a better world for all by the expansion of knowledge, creativity, innovation, and freedom, will triumph over those who wish to bring darkness, suffering, regression, and death

What a crock of steamy, brown...well, you know.

It's so simple...exponential growth in a finite world is a certain path to ruin. We might be able to put off the day of "wreckoning" (sic) a tiny bit with our relatively puny advances in technology, but the staggering, overwhelming mathematical truth is undeniable, and it's particularly frightening when considering how the approach to the end-game goes south with unbelievable and exploding rapidity. That said, following a completely predictable exponential path to our destruction is not a foregone conclusion--unless idiots professing that "open mindedness" trumps mathematics/physics are allowed to prevail. We have the ability...and the responsibility...to throttle back of our own volition. And nature will step up to fill the gap if we don't...war, starvation, and disease are not just abstract concepts, they are time-proven logical conclusions when growth inevitably hits the wall of reality.

The period from the 1700s to today isn't even a blink on a geological time scale. Man's arrogance of self permits him to believe that anything which transcends the brief period of a human life span is of no consequence to him...and allows so many to believe that the accumulation of trillions of bad decisions borne of that arrogance don't matter to those who must later live in our shadow.

It is my hope that those who wish to create a better world for all through recognition and respect of the physical limitations of the world around us, will triumph over self-professed zealots of "open-mindedness" that can't tell the difference between an episode of Star Trek and a real day on Planet Earth, and will prevent their denial and reckless lack of consideration of those limitations from thrusting us into darkness, suffering, regression, death and extinction.

[jkanderson521]

Bob, it has been fun to be sure but once again, you only prove the point. Today's "Star Trek" fantasy is tomorrow ordinary technology. Yesterday's "magic" and "wizardry" is tomorrows average reality. What would seem like fantasy and magic and is impossible today, will be routine tomorrow. The mathematical boundaries that you have drawn only reflect the level of your current understanding, the limits of your mind (we all have limits to our knowledge and understanding since we don't know everything). So I do appreciate why the future is so bleak and scary. However some people recognize they don't know everything and are open to possibilities not yet conceived of, yet some try to fit the world (universe) into a box of their creation. Like Malthus before you, the world was a zero sum game of an ever shrinking pie. The world was the confines of the limited box of knowledge contained without consideration that there is a whole world of knowledge with possibilities and wonders that you have never imagined. The world is defined by the box you have created and that box has limits so your ability to conceptualize, create, and innovate is already limited by the size of your box.

Copernicus and Galileo said the impossible too, they were rebuffed by other "scientists" of their time who had mathematics and physics to prove their case. These bold rebels saw what others could not see, they dreamed impossible ideas. They paid the price for not agreeing with those that only wished to hold power, and the instruments of regression were used to hold back impossible ideas. I have no doubt that the acolytes of radical conservationism will use the same tactics as the inquisitors before them to do what it takes to hold onto and grab power, it is human nature. Humanity survived the dark ages, though we may enter another one, I have hopes that we will emerge and see the light of possibility.

Those that that have truly bettered the world, made quantum leaps, understood that they did not know everything, they didn't bound the world by only what they knew at the time, their mind was open to limitless possibilities and opportunities. They turned magic and fantasy, the impossible, into reality. They ignored those who said it was "impossible" and "could never be done" and made bold leaps forward. I hope for the sake of humanity we do not lose that or for certain, we will regress into a dark age of reason where we are bound by those who will force others into their because they are incapable of thinking outside of that box. The ultimate end to that is political repression, subjugation, tyranny, and death.

I'm not trying to convince you, you've made up your mind. Those that imagine great things are never stopped by those who say, "its impossible", it only strengthens their resolve.

Have a great Mother's Day to all the wonderful mothers who do the "impossible" everyday After two kids I am still awed and humbled by the miracle of life!

[jazzlover]

I think we are entering a very dark and dangerous period in world history--probably the most dangerous period ever--and Colorado and the surrounding region, sadly, may play a significant part in it. We are at a point that the very survival of the US, at any resemblance of what we know today, is very uncertain. Our enemies, and they are many, are quietly--and often not-so-quietly--aligning against us. Our potential demise could take any of several forms--or a combination of them:

1. The US could simply relegated to irrelevancy by its near-complete dependence on imported resources and manufactured goods. We would be forced to surrender our national sovereignty just to have access to the bare necessities for survival.

2. Out-of-control immigration, legal or otherwise, could simply allow those with nationalistic or theocratic loyalties that are not to the United States to gain a majority in this country. By an initially democratic means, the US would become once again a group of colonies controlled by nations or despots with no concern for the welfare of this country's citizens.

3. Our enemies could increasingly develop or buy access (maybe with money we gave to them for resources and/or manufactured goods to support our spoiled lifestyle) to the weapons of mass destruction (nuclear, chemical, biological, etc.) in sufficient strength and quantity to successfully intimidate us into capitulation at best, or to outright defeat us at worst.

Take a look around the world right this minute--and anyone with eyes will be able to see that all three of these strategies all already in play. This is not wild-eyed paranoia. The "game"--a game of "last-man-standing" survival--has already begun.

Now, here is the ugly part. The US faces some very unpleasant options--all of which it will likely have to exercise, and probably very soon.

1. This country must begin at once to rebuild its domestic industrial base and produce at least the bare subsistence items needed for its survival. At the same time, it must rigorously pursue strict conservation of its remaining natural resources--energy, minerals, soil, water. Both of these actions will require Americans to accept a significantly diminished material standard of living that may likely be more or less permanent--say a century or more.

2. We must severely limit or stop altogether immigration--especially illegal immigration. US borders must be secured--period.

3. We must vigorously work to assure that our enemies are denied access to weapons of sufficient strength and number to wage a successful attack against the United States.

The danger is that all of the above measures will certainly be unpopular with the spoiled American public, but to delay their implementation will only ensure that one the two following outcomes will occur:

-That the US as we know it will cease to exist as a country and as a society.

-Or that the US will be forced to use its then only-remaining viable military capability to prevent complete defeat: both tactical and strategic nuclear weapons; possibly even having to use them in a "first-strike" scenario. This, then, is the Colorado connection--as Colorado and Wyoming are one of the major epicenters of control of these weapons. Quietly sitting under the quiet plains of Colorado, Wyoming, Nebraska, and the Dakotas, a bristling arsenal of nuclear missiles remain--with clean-cut young men and women with their "fingers on the button." Some years back, I lived just a couple of miles from one of those silos, and I have known some of those fine missileers--people like you and me. And I know that if the call comes, they WILL push the button. One can only imagine the havoc that would unleash, but I do not for one second discount the idea that it could happen. I'm quite that there are people in the Pentagon who have been running scenarios--probably for entire careers--of just such a first-strike strategy. Nor do I believe first-strike nuclear warfare is "unthinkable"--especially if the survival of the country is at stake.

So, if we are to avoid one or the other of the last two outcomes, we MUST embrace those unpleasant changes that have to be made in our lifestyle, living arrangement, and view of the world--otherwise the choices we will have to make will be horrific. The days of the luxury of pleasant choice and easy outcomes are long past. Regardless of what scenario eventually comes to pass, of this I am convinced: One way or another there are going to a lot less people inhabiting the world in just a relatively few years. The ONLY questions are how the population will be reduced (reduced birth rates or higher death rates), and which people or societies will be the survivors. I'm very unconvinced, that without changing our ways significantly, that we Americans will necessarily be in the "survivor" group.

Also, jkanderson talks a good story, but he forgets that virtually every major advancement in human technology has been first deployed and used as a method to kill other human beings. There are great things about technology, but there are many things it can not do--and never will be able to do; and it always has a darker, more sinister side that frequently manifests itself first.

From Einstein:

I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.

Technological progress is like an axe in the hands of a pathological criminal.

Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius -- and a lot of courage -- to move in the opposite direction.

[Josseppie]

Please I have been hearing "dooms day" sceneries like this since I was a kid and its not unique to our generation. Ever generation thinks we are special and this is the time life will "end as we know it". When in reality we are just like every generation before us and ever generation after us, living our little life and once we die and the next generation takes over they will say and do the same thing.

BTW something tells me that if Pueblo does manage to hit 1 million people in my life time the world will hardly notice let alone care! This is not a global issue but a local one, do we want our city to be more then it is now in our lifetimes or not. I, for one, want Pueblo to be all it can be.

[jazzlover]

Originally Posted by Josseppie

Please I have been hearing "dooms day" sceneries like this since I was a kid and its not unique to our generation. Ever generation thinks we are special and this is the time life will "end as we know it". When in reality we are just like every generation before us and ever generation after us, living our little life and once we die and the next generation takes over they will say and do the same thing.

BTW something tells me that if Pueblo does manage to hit 1 million people in my life time the world will hardly notice let alone care! This is not a global issue but a local one, do we want our city to be more then it is now in our lifetimes or not. I, for one, want Pueblo to be all it can be.

For some people in some places, life does "end as we know it." Like for 6 million Jews and other "enemies of the state" in Germany during World War II. And for the millions of others that died in that war. The fact that it hasn't happened en masse on US soil does not mean that it can not, nor that it is not becoming more likely. I really am hoping that "doomsday" does not come in my lifetime, but nearly everything we as humans are doing today--individually and collectively--is assuring that day will likely come sooner rather than later.