U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 04-28-2009, 05:44 PM
 
Location: Prepperland
13,116 posts, read 9,202,467 times
Reputation: 8988

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by RebeccaLeigh View Post
You learn in a basic enviromental studies class that there is a limit to how much life can be supported in a given area. Once you reach that threshold life starts to die. Resources are limited and once you do not have the resources to sustain the population, then yes it is over-populated.
Who defines the limit?
Which type of society?
Hunter-gatherer?
Agrarian?
High density agricultural?
Massively modified terrain?
Humans have adapted some of the most unsuitable land to fulfill their needs. Are they wrong for making terraced mountainsides? Rice paddies? Fish ponds?
They are "destroying" the natural environment so should they be prevented?

Quote:
Originally Posted by RebeccaLeigh View Post
Georgia has a major drought problem, as do other states, therefore they have reached a point where they can not really sustain an increase and in all honestly probably have to many people, using too much of the available resources.
So we should disregard the success of people in arid regions, who conserve water, and still generate prodigious crops and support growing populations?
Focus on Israel: Israel's Agriculture in the 21st Century

Quote:
Originally Posted by RebeccaLeigh View Post
And just because humans do inhabit every section of the earth does not mean that therer is still plenty of room. We do inhabit the earth alone.
If that is what you're being taught, you are being indoctrinated with disinformation.

In terms of logistical support for humans, the Earth has plenty of "room". It may require engineering and adaptation, but it can support billions more.
Short sighted people have used the argument of "Living Room" to underpin their conquest of other people's land.

Don't fall for propaganda.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-28-2009, 06:13 PM
 
Location: TX and NM on the border of the Great Southwest.
11,769 posts, read 15,792,846 times
Reputation: 22428
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
The whole issue comes down to Carying Capacity and Regulating Factor, both of which are pretty well-understood scientific principles not very seriously challenged.
In the case of wildlife, carrying capacities can be fairly predictable. However, in the case of humans who possess intelligence and technology, predicting carrying capacities can be extremely complex. Take for example skyscrapers which allow people to live on less area, dams that allows for water storage during droughts, refrigeration that allows for food storage, farm equipment that can plow/cultivate every square inch of a field, as well as genetic engineering in new agricultural crops. You and I could add many more. New technologies come on board every day and these add to the complexity of calculating carrying capacity for humans. In short, anyone who says they can easily predict human carrying capacities is being less than truthful.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2009, 06:15 PM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,668 posts, read 71,538,289 times
Reputation: 35864
Consider this: Humans are the only species that manipulates the environment in such a way as to make room for more of them. We don't adapt ourselves to environments, we adapt environments to us. We seem to be blindly driven by an urge to overpopulate.

The underlying philosophical fallacy is the Work Ethic. We have created machines, but we do not use the machines to make constant productivity with less work, we use them to make more productivity with constant work. Americans are not contented until our economy creates a need for more labor than what exists, which then demands that we reproduce that labor. A century ago, it took one adult with one job to support a family of six. Now, it takes two adults with two jobs to support a family of three. Where does that trend lead?

Over population can come from two directions. Too many people for the available land, or the existing people making too high demands on the land. We're burning the candle at both ends.

High_plains, there is still a carrying capacity for humans, it is just more difficult to calculate because it depends on anticipating future technology.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2009, 06:16 PM
 
Location: Norwood, MN
1,828 posts, read 3,279,635 times
Reputation: 871
Quote:
Originally Posted by subsound View Post
OMG, we are all going to die! Everyone run for the canned goods, bullets, and farm land!

People have spouted over population and doom every year for 30 years, maybe one year they'll be right if people say it long enough.
If you go anywhere in sub-saharan Africa, many places in South Asia. or large parts of South and Central America, you will see that doom, in the form of starvation, and utter exploitation and misery, has arrived a long time ago.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2009, 06:17 PM
 
Location: southern california
55,237 posts, read 72,402,860 times
Reputation: 47449
no just lots of people that will not feed themselves or stop having babies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2009, 06:29 PM
 
Location: TX and NM on the border of the Great Southwest.
11,769 posts, read 15,792,846 times
Reputation: 22428
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
High_plains, there is still a carrying capacity for humans, it is just more difficult to calculate because it depends on anticipating future technology.

I hope it did not sound as though I believe humans are exempt from ecological concepts. There is indeed a carrying capacity for humans as we can certainly see in parts of the world where humans population growth is being restrained by regulating forces that go unfettered by intelligence or technology.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2009, 06:45 PM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,668 posts, read 71,538,289 times
Reputation: 35864
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huckleberry3911948 View Post
no just lots of people that will not feed themselves or stop having babies.
Spoiler alert: They cannot feed themselves because all the agricultural land in their country is owned by American and European corporations, who pay slave labor wages to the inhabitants to grow things like coffee, tea, cocoa, cotton, and various other things that have no nutritional value, so that you can buy them really, really cheap to indulge your selfish whims.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2009, 07:39 PM
 
Location: Prepperland
13,116 posts, read 9,202,467 times
Reputation: 8988
Quote:
Originally Posted by High_Plains_Retired View Post
In the case of wildlife, carrying capacities can be fairly predictable. However, in the case of humans who possess intelligence and technology, predicting carrying capacities can be extremely complex. Take for example skyscrapers which allow people to live on less area, dams that allows for water storage during droughts, refrigeration that allows for food storage, farm equipment that can plow/cultivate every square inch of a field, as well as genetic engineering in new agricultural crops. You and I could add many more. New technologies come on board every day and these add to the complexity of calculating carrying capacity for humans. In short, anyone who says they can easily predict human carrying capacities is being less than truthful.
Population Density figures

NATIONS:
ENGLAND: 1,015/sq mi
INDIA: 904/sq mi
GERMANY: 596/sq mi
SWITZERLAND: 479.8/sq mi
CHINA: 363/sq mi
FRANCE: 297/sq mi
PORTUGAL: 295/sq mi
USA: 81/ sq mi
RUSSIA: 21.5/sq mi
CITIES:
PARIS: 64,620 /sq mi
NEW YORK CITY: 27,147/sq mi
MOSCOW: 25,086.1/sq mi
SAINT PETERSBURG: 19,927.4/sq mi
LISBON: 16,493/sq mi
HONG KONG: 16,469/sq mi
ISTANBUL: 16,086.4/sq mi
LONDON: 12,331/sq mi
VIENNA: 10,388.4/sq mi
TORONTO: 10,287.4/sq mi
BERLIN: 9,946 /sq mi
LOS ANGELES: 8,205/sq mi
The earth has 197 million square miles in total surface area with 57 million square miles of land... 133 million square miles of ocean.

Current population of 6.6 billion people resolves to 116 people per square mile.

Subjective evaluation of the lifestyle and technological advantages notwithstanding, humans have a demonstrated capacity to engineer high population density solutions.

What may be a fascinating study - determining the characteristics of an "ideal" high population density environment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2009, 08:04 PM
 
Location: Connecticut
427 posts, read 1,210,566 times
Reputation: 351
[quote=jetgraphics;8559235]Who defines the limit? The environment.
Which type of society? All societies, at some point all will reach a limit at some point.
Hunter-gatherer? Both eventually seeing as how you can over hunt and over use the land.
Agrarian? Agriculture when done right can work well, however when pesticides and waste continues to be used eventually the land will be useless.
High density agricultural? Same. When land is over used eventually it is useless for long periods of time.
Massively modified terrain? Start messing with terrain to much and you start to mess with the ecosystem.
Humans have adapted some of the most unsuitable land to fulfill their needs. Are they wrong for making terraced mountainsides? Rice paddies? Fish ponds? If there are too many then yes. The rain forest is being cut down to make room for land for animals. Yes that meets some now needs, but will greatly hurt future generations.Just because we can does not mean that should.
They are "destroying" the natural environment so should they be prevented? To some extent yes, the rain forest should be left alone. the natural habits of endangered species, should be protected. the oceans should be better looked after.



So we should disregard the success of people in arid regions, who conserve water, and still generate prodigious crops and support growing populations?
Focus on Israel: Israel's Agriculture in the 21st Century The question is for how long. You can only conserve so much. There is a set amount of water. How about the areas where the desert is taking over. Where lands that once had water are now sand.



If that is what you're being taught, you are being indoctrinated with disinformation. I have never in my life been indoctrinated into anything. I fully believe that all things should be looked at from all angles and that the source should be considered.

In terms of logistical support for humans, the Earth has plenty of "room". It may require engineering and adaptation, but it can support billions more.
Short sighted people have used the argument of "Living Room" to underpin their conquest of other people's land. Yes we can take every available space, but what right exactly do humans have to push animals into extinction for our own benefit. There is a breaking point, there always is.

Don't fall for propaganda. I learned to recognize propaganda years ago. I could say that you have fallen for the propaganda that says there is plenty of room, and humans can continue to do whatever they want. Looking at science and history that shows patterns of what can happen from overpopulation is not propaganda.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2009, 08:25 PM
 
Location: Brooklyn, New York
4,116 posts, read 2,732,650 times
Reputation: 1517
OVERPOPULATED IS NOT THE WORD ANYMORE FOR THIS MADNESS GOING ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!

To many people have babies!!!! To many family members coming from other countries to VISIT? then they stay........
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top