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.
So with all of these people that the earth can sustain would you be happy if the entire world looked like NYC? Again, it may be able to sustain more people but comfortably? WHat about California...they are running out of water as we speak. The more people we have the faster our resources will become depleted. People don't care about taking care of the earth as it is, can you imagine what it would look like with that many more people? The movie Wall-E comes to mind.
The way we're going, the world is going to look like one apartment building in nyc, or tokyo...
People are looking at this the wrong way, and it's actually prettg selfish, nature has always had way in keeping populations in check, the problems is we screw it up by bri ging plants and animals where they don't belong, expanding our arez past where they should be. Some one said we as americans populate only a small percentange of the overall land- that is selfish talk without regard to the other life on this planet, and with the land we do occuppy we occupy more than what was intended when the cites and towns were built. We have the largest amount of victorian homes in the country, and not all of them are in old louisville, only a large majority of them, most of them(almost all.of them) that were single family homes, are apartments, does this not speak of over crowding, in nyc they are selling what should be storage closets as efficancy apartments. Our scientist are trying to make everybody immortal, and colonize space, and every planet with a solid surface. No one needs to live forever, and we don't need to be rotting out every planet, and moon we can, or will be abke to reach.
I don't even know if I should even continue, because the premise of people needing to die so we as a species can live is above most peoples comprehension.
People are looking at this the wrong way, and it's actually prettg selfish, nature has always had way in keeping populations in check, the problems is we screw it up by bri ging plants and animals where they don't belong, expanding our arez past where they should be. Some one said we as americans populate only a small percentange of the overall land- that is selfish talk without regard to the other life on this planet, and with the land we do occuppy we occupy more than what was intended when the cites and towns were built. We have the largest amount of victorian homes in the country, and not all of them are in old louisville, only a large majority of them, most of them(almost all.of them) that were single family homes, are apartments, does this not speak of over crowding, in nyc they are selling what should be storage closets as efficancy apartments. Our scientist are trying to make everybody immortal, and colonize space, and every planet with a solid surface. No one needs to live forever, and we don't need to be rotting out every planet, and moon we can, or will be abke to reach.
I don't even know if I should even continue, because the premise of people needing to die so we as a species can live is above most peoples comprehension.
You are 100% correct! The problem is a large majority think differently which is why we are headed in the direction we are. It easy to convince everyone that technology is the reason why we can press on at this rate but unfortunately the one reason we have to rely on technology is because we are unable to sustain life as we are without it. If we have to rely on technology to sustain life, the Earth actually isn't sustaining life anymore. Nature has its own form of population control but we are always finding ways to beat it.
You are 100% correct! The problem is a large majority think differently which is why we are headed in the direction we are. It easy to convince everyone that technology is the reason why we can press on at this rate but unfortunately the one reason we have to rely on technology is because we are unable to sustain life as we are without it. If we have to rely on technology to sustain life, the Earth actually isn't sustaining life anymore. Nature has its own form of population control but we are always finding ways to beat it.
If you think about, all the worlds problems- for tye most part is because there is too many people, whether it be jobs, housing, gas prices, food, just about any problem(1st world places anyway) has the true answer of too many people. Natures main way of trying to control our popukation is via diseases, ya know, uncuribke ones.
I don't think some of you truly grasp just how enormous the Earth is. It was created to house billions of people and last millions of years. It's not going anywhere and neither are it's resources. Find a new topic to worry about.
The Earth was not created to house billions of people. Unlike other animals, we create more waste than the earth can process.
So far it's been a slow one in terms of technological achievement.
So far it's been a slow one in terms of technological achievement.
Totally and utterly false. Base your perceptions with facts and you will see a brighter future.
We have more access to information than ever before.
Computers are far less expensive and far more powerful every six to 12 months.
There are more people with access to medicine, water and education than ever before.
3 billion NEW people are expected to be online, joining the global conversation having access to information
People living in Poverty in the US still have TV, Cell Phones, Cars and air conditioning. (They just need mentorship and opportunity)
Race and Sexual orientation are limiting less people because of awareness
Technology is on a unprecedented exponential curve. Take a look at all the science in the past couple years!
Advancements in particle physics, robotics, space exploration, spaceports for civilians, private companies supplying the space station.
For everyone in the world to have the same standard of living as Westerners do we would need something on the order of 3-5x as many resources just to sustain that level of development. Overpopulation is only a problem insofar as people are consuming resources for goods and services that aren't essential to life.
There is enough oil and gas to last to 2050 and enough coal to last other 100 years.
So consumption of fossil fuels is not problem now. But by 2050 or in 100 years from now they would need some thing else.
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.
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.
