socharlie
Active Member
well, they do not accept abortions, contraceptive, gay lifestyle, LGBT, did not care about GW, e.t.c.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Overpopulation?
- Thread starter robocop (actually)
- Start date
QuestioningMind
Well-Known Member
Are you suggesting that killing off innocent people is the best solution for the overpopulation problem?
What does that have to do with what I posted?
People deciding that the right thing to do, under the circumstances, is not to have kids has nothing to do with your vague conspiracy theory. The one about "they" "created" low sperm count in Western peoples.
Breeding is simply not the same as it was a thousand years ago, morally. Things are dramatically different today. Breeding, when you can't provide the essentials of a solid upbringing, isn't a moral choice. It's immoral. I don't really care what you think that God thinks about that.
Tom
socharlie
Active Member
Not at all. I am very disturbed and sad that it happens. Education and improving living conditions - should be the way.
Do you think that makes it morally acceptable?
Tom
socharlie
Active Member
a lot, GW is invented to redistribute wealth and spook people into not having children, it works, in sum it works - population trending down.
I do not mind if Earth population decreases because of better education and living standards.
socharlie
Active Member
murder is not acceptable.
socharlie
Active Member
I did my research of population issue, I am not ignorant of what is going on. As I said, I have no issue with humane depopulation methods , abortions and bombing civilians and outright deceptions is not what I advocate.
No it isn't.
That's simply wrong, and the stats are available to find for yourself. Population is still growing.
Tom
Then what point was the to your post? The one I quoted?
Tom
You don't even know the basics. Population growth has slowed down but it's still growing. And there's no particular reason to think it will stop any time soon.
Tom
socharlie
Active Member
yes, it may take 50-100 years. In some countries it is happening , e.g. Japan, 10 + countries in Europe.
Ukraine: 0.8% natural decrease annually; 28% total population decrease by 2050
Russia: -0.6%; -22%
Belarus: -0.6%; -12%
Bulgaria: -0.5%; -34%
Latvia: -0.5%; -23%
Lithuania: -0.4%; -15%
Hungary: -0.3%; -11%
Romania: -0.2%; -29%
Estonia: -0.2%; -23%
Moldova: -0.2%; -21%
Croatia: -0.2%; -14%
Germany: -0.2%; -9%
Czech Republic: -0.1%; -8%
Japan: 0%; -21%
Poland: 0%; -17%
Slovakia: 0%; -12%
Austria: 0%; 8% increase
Italy: 0%; -5%
Slovenia: 0%; -5%
Greece: 0%; -4%
Last edited:
Human overpopulation is one facet of the broader issue of human impacts on this planet. It's better to think of it using the I=PAT equation, which was developed by environmental ethicists in the 70s. In simple terms, human impact "I" on the biosphere is the multiplicative product of "P" (human population), "A" (affluence, or consumption per unit of population), and "T" (technology, or resource-intensiveness of consumption). Accounting for all three components is required to successfully lower human impacts. All of these factors are well-established drivers of environmental issues, and I'd suggest cruising to your local public library to check out some works on it if you're truly interested.
It's worth remembering that part of the point of these equations is to remember that the planet is not just about humans. Human growth has come at the expense of the rest of the world; we basically operate like an invasive species. Human impacts on this planet have caused mass-scale ecocide and a sixth mass extinction event (see Accelerated modern human–induced species losses: Entering the sixth mass extinction - for a good summary paper on this that was published recently), which is abominable regardless of the ramifications this has for humans. Anyway, I digress.
A few resources on human overpopulation specifically (really, there is a ton of stuff out there - visit your local public library):
- As usual, Wikipedia - Human overpopulation - Wikipedia - does a decent job of a summary article of the entire issue.
- Life on the Brink - Environmentalists Confront Overpopulation (I haven't actually read this book, but since it has schmoggle previews, it's something accessible right now)
- Human Population Growth and Extinction (has the most depressing graph ever, plus other pages beyond this one that explore the issue)
- Ecological Society of America Forum (perspectives of various scientists on the issue of human population and the issues it poses; available in total as a PDF)
Birth rates are not population growth rates.
Wikipedia has a good explanation of why population continues to grow, while birth rates have leveled off. Reducing child mortality rates is a mixed blessing.
Tom
socharlie
Active Member
birth rates are down death rates are down too but far from to be equal to birth rate drop, population grows rate is going down and will turn negative as I Japan. India - Population growth rate - Historical Data Graphs per Year
Check major countries like China, India, Mexico...you see the trend.
There is approximately .75 square miles of living area per person taking just the farmland available and not taking into account that people live on mountains, high rises than allow multiple families living in just one building, desserts etc, etc. etc. if my calculations are correct.
My understanding is that people are basically having about two children per family so that's good. I am following the thread.
Ponder This
Well-Known Member
Generally speaking, populations grow to fit their environment. Concern about overpopulation is largely hyped up to be more than it is.
Maybe you are thinking: "But, there is a limit to the number of people we can sustain on this planet."
And, of course, that's exactly the point. The reason the population has continued to increase is precisely because we haven't reached the limit to the number of people this planet can sustain. Raw population values are a red herring, whether it is 3 billion, 7 billion, 11 billion, or even 18 billion.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." - attributed to Benjamin Disraeli by Mark Twain
We can't predict at what point our population will stabilize. Anybody who says he can, is selling something... probably eco-friendly advice. Take good advice, but ignore bad mathematics.
Maybe you are thinking: "But, there is a limit to the number of people we can sustain on this planet."
And, of course, that's exactly the point. The reason the population has continued to increase is precisely because we haven't reached the limit to the number of people this planet can sustain. Raw population values are a red herring, whether it is 3 billion, 7 billion, 11 billion, or even 18 billion.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." - attributed to Benjamin Disraeli by Mark Twain
We can't predict at what point our population will stabilize. Anybody who says he can, is selling something... probably eco-friendly advice. Take good advice, but ignore bad mathematics.
Behavioral sink - Wikipedia
This was a fascinating experiment tested in the 60-70's. That test the effects of overpopulation. Before anyone gets upset rats are not the same as humans of course. But you can see some correlation in today's world, with what happened in the behavioral sink experiment, that are similar.
This was a fascinating experiment tested in the 60-70's. That test the effects of overpopulation. Before anyone gets upset rats are not the same as humans of course. But you can see some correlation in today's world, with what happened in the behavioral sink experiment, that are similar.