Not even World War III will stop over population

[Rodmantheman]

Global population has risen so fast over the past century that roughly 14% of all the human beings that have ever existed are still alive today.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/greenpolitics/population/11191749/Even-World-War-III-could-not-stop-rising-population.html

[HitandRun Reggie]

What do you suggest? Mother Nature keeps trying to reduce the population of Asia and Africa but westerners keep foiling her plan.

And these people don't have the balls or good sense to kill each other off on the scale of Europeans and North Americans. joking of course

[Draz]

What do you suggest? Mother Nature keeps trying to reduce the population of Asia and Africa but westerners keep foiling her plan.

And these people don't have the balls or good sense to kill each other off on the scale of Europeans and North Americans. joking of course
::roll:

[BigBoss]

World population=7 billion

Chinese=1.35 billion
Indian= 1.21billion

:biggums:

Wrap it up god damn it

[HitandRun Reggie]

World population=7 billion

Chinese=1.35 billion
Indian= 1.21billion

:biggums:

Wrap it up god damn it

Well China did try and give America 10-15 million of their women because they couldn't feed them but Nixon turned them down.

[TonyMontana]

What do you suggest? Mother Nature keeps trying to reduce the population of Asia and Africa but westerners keep foiling her plan.

And these people don't have the balls or good sense to kill each other off on the scale of Europeans and North Americans. joking of course

Prior to WW2(So late 1930s) Russia had the same amount of people as all of sub-Sahara Africa. Based on current population and projections by the year 2090 Russia will have around 2.5% the population of sub-saharan Africa.

There was a reason nearly an entire continent had only the population of one country(a very big one nontheless). Mother Nature, and survival of the fittest. In the postwar era we have taken several measures to cheat Mother Nature....which will be to the detriment of the Earth. The only reason these third world countries are allowed to survive and mass reproduce are because of first world aid.

If there is to be population increases, they should be from the countries that have made significant contributions to humanity, but it is the exact opposite that is happening. How people think this is a good thing for nature is beyond me.

[poido123]

Prior to WW2(So late 1930s) Russia had the same amount of people as all of sub-Sahara Africa. Based on current population and projections by the year 2190 Russia will have around 2.5% the population of sub-saharan Africa.

There was a reason nearly an entire continent had only the population of one country(a very big one nontheless). Mother Nature, and survival of the fittest. In the postwar era we have taken several measures to cheat Mother Nature....which will be to the detriment of the Earth. The only reason these third world countries are allowed to survive and mass reproduce are because of first world aid.

If there is to be population increases, they should be from the countries that have made significant contributions to humanity, but it is the exact opposite that is happening. How people think this is a good thing for nature is beyond me.

You make a good point Tony :applause:

[GimmeThat]

it IS good that the sober voice does not manipulate morale

[tomtucker]

fukking asians and africans ruining our earth..........:banghead: .........no room for nature and animals anymore, :mad:

[Draz]

More pussie tho

[NZStreetBaller]

they could drop the make up and plastic surgery industries.... although bitshes wud be ugly as *** i still think males wud just lower the standard to be honest.

[Theoo]

there are plenty of space in iceland come here guys

[Dresta]

Tony is right in that the largest thing fuelling increased population is our desire to sustain all life, no matter how parasitical it may be. We continue to do this despite its quite evident disutility, and then complain about the overpopulation it has produced. Culture develops slowly, and you can't jump straight from neolithic age to modern global civilisation without creating vast imbalances.

Hence how charity weakens and causes the degeneration of the human race, at least if it is taken as a whole. Christian morality was always self-destructive and anti-life.

[GimmeThat]

Tony is right in that the largest thing fuelling increased population is our desire to sustain all life, no matter how parasitical it may be. We continue to do this despite its quite evident disutility, and then complain about the overpopulation it has produced. Culture develops slowly, and you can't jump straight from neolithic age to modern global civilisation without creating vast imbalances.

Hence how charity weakens and causes the degeneration of the human race, at least if it is taken as a whole. Christian morality was always self-destructive and anti-life.


you know, the beauty of playing the piano.

is that you are using 5 fingers per hand at one time



and that is how I feel about culture.


a snap shot of balance, which creates the absolute perfection of

disutility

[DCL]

there's some conspiracy theory that the masterminds of our planet are designing diseases, and the only cure would be a drug that results in infertility, which would reduce birth rates and kill off huge populations. pretty f--ked up scenarios. it might be far-fetched fantasy, but when overpopulation really becomes an urgent issue and they're looking for desperate solutions, i don't know, man...

[Trollsmasher]

Prior to WW2(So late 1930s) Russia had the same amount of people as all of sub-Sahara Africa. Based on current population and projections by the year 2090 Russia will have around 2.5% the population of sub-saharan Africa.

There was a reason nearly an entire continent had only the population of one country(a very big one nontheless). Mother Nature, and survival of the fittest. In the postwar era we have taken several measures to cheat Mother Nature....which will be to the detriment of the Earth. The only reason these third world countries are allowed to survive and mass reproduce are because of first world aid.

If there is to be population increases, they should be from the countries that have made significant contributions to humanity, but it is the exact opposite that is happening. How people think this is a good thing for nature is beyond me.
:applause:

[KyrieTheFuture]

World populatio probably won't surpass 10 billion. We can theoretically sustain about 30 with current technology.
What the **** are you talking about

[RidonKs]

Prior to WW2(So late 1930s) Russia had the same amount of people as all of sub-Sahara Africa. Based on current population and projections by the year 2090 Russia will have around 2.5% the population of sub-saharan Africa.

There was a reason nearly an entire continent had only the population of one country(a very big one nontheless). Mother Nature, and survival of the fittest. In the postwar era we have taken several measures to cheat Mother Nature....which will be to the detriment of the Earth. The only reason these third world countries are allowed to survive and mass reproduce are because of first world aid.

If there is to be population increases, they should be from the countries that have made significant contributions to humanity, but it is the exact opposite that is happening. How people think this is a good thing for nature is beyond me.
by the year 2090 :lol gimme a fking break

dunno what your source is for the first fact but nothing i've found on the subject validates it. there's always a distinct chance you're just making it up.

it's also downright ludicrous to claim high birth rates in sub sarahan africa are strictly due to first world aid. aren't you among the first to jump on sjw's who claim the only reason for islamic terrorism is western provocation? one would hope that for you at least, the analogy would be clear.

[Kungfro]

Hans Rosling has some cool talks about global population.

DON'T PANIC: THE TRUTH ABOUT POPULATION (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SBXYz0M2MIs)

[Trollsmasher]

by the year 2090 :lol gimme a fking break

dunno what your source is for the first fact but nothing i've found on the subject validates it. there's always a distinct chance you're just making it up.

it's also downright ludicrous to claim high birth rates in sub sarahan africa are strictly due to first world aid. aren't you among the first to jump on sjw's who claim the only reason for islamic terrorism is western provocation? one would hope that for you at least, the analogy would be clear.
high birth rates would be ok if they balanced themselves with high enough mortality rates

cue in the first world aid

[Godzuki]

i thought the worlds population was supposed to be declining in the future :confusedshrug:

since the baby boom generation America is supposed to go into a decline once they die off.

they're talking about a lot of azn countries might not even exist if their birth rates don't jump. particularly Korea and Japan....

granted the chinese, hispanics, etc. probably make up for them and then some but i don't think its that bleak.

[Loneshot]

Prior to WW2(So late 1930s) Russia had the same amount of people as all of sub-Sahara Africa. Based on current population and projections by the year 2090 Russia will have around 2.5% the population of sub-saharan Africa.

There was a reason nearly an entire continent had only the population of one country(a very big one nontheless). Mother Nature, and survival of the fittest. In the postwar era we have taken several measures to cheat Mother Nature....which will be to the detriment of the Earth. The only reason these third world countries are allowed to survive and mass reproduce are because of first world aid.

If there is to be population increases, they should be from the countries that have made significant contributions to humanity, but it is the exact opposite that is happening. How people think this is a good thing for nature is beyond me.


For many countries, they are only more well off as a result of stripping and robbing other countries due to their natural resources. Europe offers the world little outside of people in search of resources. While N.America is great for trading and farming, this place also had very little to offer outside of what was brought from other places, unless we're talking oil.

Its too easy to say how we should continue stepping on the people whose necks have been under our boot since we began "contributing" to the world.

[Budadiiii]

I haz secks wit women and ababy come out :coleman:

[KyrieTheFuture]

I don't know how I can be more clear....
Projected population=10 Billion or less
Sustainable population= more than 30 billion theoretically just with current technology
What in the world makes you think we have the resources to feed 30 billion people.

[knickballer]

It's not a problem of over population but a problem of how much resources the population use. People in the Western world consume alot of resources and create alot of pollution with all the technology and our high "standard of living". Families have multiple cars, everyone is taking showers daily, electricity on 24/7, all their phones, clothes, shoes, etc. Countries in the third world have a much higher population and population growth rate they consume much less than the average person in the West does. So if you want to blame anyone just look in the mirror with your own over consumption then to complain that Africa is overpopulated. The average African can probably survive on $1 a day and needs a very basic resource to survive while the same can not be said about Westerners. However, It will become a problem when countries like India and China continue to modernize leading to a higher "standard of living" and their societies will run similar to what we have in the West. So yeah, not a problem of overpopulation but how developed the population is.

BTW, the worlds population will decrease eventually and then the child birth rate will fall below replacement level which will alarm people(already happened in the West). I think it's gonna hit China and India hard too once their economies become "developed". The one child policy that China implemented in their cities are already causing huge social problems with a huge gender imbalance(families want male heirs) and an aging population in urban areas.

[IamRAMBO24]

Birthrates are declining per family, so it goes to reason the population will also in the future.

This is far reaching and just and excuse to advocate mass killings via more wars by the ruling elite.