• 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!

The myth of overpopulation

Cooky

Veteran Member
Problem solved:

Singapore Wants to Build Massive Floating Suburbs | Hakai Magazine

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0029801818319875?via=ihub

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652619306900?via=ihub

Now with scientists from all over the world working on this, it might not be long before it becomes a reality.

What I think would be interesting, would be to see floating suburbs interconnected by underwater high speed trains.

Another interesting idea for building on under floaring suburbs:
images.jpeg.jpg

The new frontier for ultra-wealthy tourists? Underwater hotels and restaurants

The sea may truly become the new frontier, where possibilities seem endless.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Cooky

Veteran Member
Someone might want to jump in with some pessimism before I actually put something workable together here. ;):)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Stanyon

WWMRD?
I think they already have underwater hotel rooms with domes so you can see the marine life here in the states, I think it would be very relaxing.
 

Kangaroo Feathers

Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
Not that "overpopulation" is a function of people per square kilometer. Build all the floating cities you like. How are you going to feed the people in them? Get them clean water? Dispose of their waste?
 

Daemon Sophic

Avatar in flux
Living on or underwater is fine and dandy. The problem of overpopulation is the waste.
Feeding all of them and making sure their drinking water is clean......that’s something most of the planet is failing at already.
 

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Problem solved:

Singapore Wants to Build Massive Floating Suburbs | Hakai Magazine

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0029801818319875?via=ihub

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652619306900?via=ihub

Now with scientists from all over the world working on this, it might not be long before it becomes a reality.

What I think would be interesting, would be to see floating suburbs interconnected by underwater high speed trains.

Another interesting idea for building on under floaring suburbs:
View attachment 28815
The new frontier for ultra-wealthy tourists? Underwater hotels and restaurants

The sea may truly become the new frontier, where possibilities seem endless.
This thread is proudly sponsored by the United Association of Plumbers.
 

Erebus

Well-Known Member
Someone might want to jump in with some pessimism before I actually put something workable together here. ;):)

Okay ;)

What you're talking about, if it works, would be fantastic. It would help to provide extra living space for people. However, it doesn't solve overpopulation. At absolute best, it will delay the worst effects for a while.

Now one of the big issues with overpopulation isn't the physical space humans need for housing, but the resources they need to consume. The larger the population, the more resources consumed. For the sake of argument, let's say that humanity manages to entirely switch its consumption to sustainable resources. For food, we switch to vertical farming in order to take up less space and to allow for food production on the sea. In short, we make the absolute most of what space and resources we have.

None of that is especially likely to occur but even if it does, the planet still wouldn't be able to support a growing population indefinitely. Even if we use every last sliver of available space on the land, on the sea and underground, at some point the population will become unmanageable.

So, while I'm certainly in favour of new initiatives to more efficiently manage living space and resources, none of it ultimately addresses the underlying problems of constant growth. In addition, everything I've just discussed focuses solely on humanity. It assumes that the space and resources required for other living things are irrelevant. That's not an attitude that I personally agree with.
 
Last edited:

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
There are many aspects of overpopulation, not least among them the political challenges.

It is hardly a myth.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Frankly, I am flabbergasted that there are even people saying with a straight face that there might be no problem.

It is so darned obvious that there is.

Edited to add: since there is apparently a need to spell it out, here are some reasons why we must indeed attempt to reverse the current trends.

1. Human demographic problems are, by their very nature, politically difficult to handle and take literal generations to even attempt to address.

2. Human multiplication is, and has always been, geometric. Our ability to handle the resulting challenges most definitely does not grow geometrically, and even if it did, that would hardly be a free pass for neglecting those challenges.

3. Humans have been rather demanding of each other and of the environment, in several different ways - politically, economically, socially, and even by a purely cultural perspective. We have actually reached the time in history where there is actual hatred between competing narratives, and a stream of hope for destructive confrontation to "solve" those tensions feeding that hatred. Those are formidable, very tiring, very wasteful and demoralizing challenges that will not go away any time soon, and only become more difficult to address as population numbers rise.

4. The planet itself is very much a finite resource, and talk about going to other planets is ultimately a pipe dream. It is not like the resources for significant migration are even conceivable, nor would that be an actual solution for the demographic pressures in any case.

5. As significant numbers of various overlooked minorities grow, it becomes that much harder to even understand the actual challenges ahead of us, let alone solve them. And the actual measures used become that much more gross and destructive even when correctly chosen and implemented, as well.

6. One of the most dire aspects of the current trends is massive cultural and economic estrangement. Wealth distribution has become so loopsided that there is actual willingness to doubt the very existence of the empoverished masses. That is a very dangerous, very unstable situation.

7. While our cultures have become more ambitious and more specialized, there is always the need to sustain the weight of that ambition, both economically, socially and in the educational aspect. Every achievement needs a multitude of effort to support it. As populations grown without properly addressing the flaws and injustices in those support structures, those flaws become grimmer and more destructive.

8. In order to cope with the various forms of loss of quality of life, we have been increasingly more accepting of chemical dependence and other forms of alienation. That amounts to effectively giving up our own ability to accept reality and deal with each other. Both a result and an aggravator of the other problems caused by overpopulation.
 
Last edited:

Cooky

Veteran Member
Not that "overpopulation" is a function of people per square kilometer. Build all the floating cities you like. How are you going to feed the people in them? Get them clean water? Dispose of their waste?

one of the best parts of being 'on the water' is ease of shipping... Barges can be utilized to import meats, grains and vegetation from underdeveloped areas using modern techniques paid for by the ocean dwellers dollars. It would be a boost to the economies.

...More consumers, more money transfers.
 

Cooky

Veteran Member
Frankly, I am flabbergasted that there are even people saying with a straight face that there might be no problem.

It is so darned obvious that there is.

Maybe in 20,000 years... If we live that long.

When do you estimate it will become dire?
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Maybe in 20,000 years... If we live that long.

When do you estimate it will become dire?
It did, in 1914.

World War I was the testimonial of how unprepared to handle our own weapons technology and our own population levels we had become.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
So what in your opinion is the answer to the problem?
Serious social reform, with an emphasis on family planning, the phasing out of the nuclear family, and decisive focus on education and wealth redistribution.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Someone might want to jump in with some pessimism before I actually put something workable together here. ;):)
I felt a calling to enter this thread.
Weird, eh.

What constitutes over-population?
I see 2 competing meanings.....
1) Can't feed or house all the people we have.
2) We have so many people that our environment is degraded, eg,
seas being emptied of life, the anthropocene extinction, housing
becoming very expensive because of crowding, draining of ancient
aquifers for short term needs.

#1 doesn't apply.
But #2 is a clear & present thingie.
 
Top