-7
Things like genocide and cancer are not as bad as people make them out to be. Yeah, it sucks for one individual, but it's actually good for society. We're over populated. What are we gonna do, take over the moon, another planet, and then what? Death is apart of life, humans need to quit trying to play God. Everytime we try to fix things, it ends up worse. We think we've found a cure, but we just make another problem. In the grand scheme of things, a single life is but a blimp on the cosmic ma... amirite?
A part, not apart. Overpopulated is generally one word.
Populations will even out at roughly ten billion people (and may begin to decline) due to the continuing industrialization of countries, or Warren Thompson's demographic transition model. In other words, overpopulation is not the problem, sustainability and an unequal distribution of resources is.
scientists have talked about moving to Mars. We'll live underground and build.factories to build.an atmosphere. And then what? There's no reason for the population to stop at 10 bil, and we're only 3 bil away, not unless the govn't puts a ban on how many children you.can have like some Asian countries. Death happens. It's ok. It's sat, but not sad forever. We WILL run out of resources, and we're almost there. We've got the technology to move to a nearby planet or clean ourselves up. Personally, I would chose to clean earth because moving to other planets would ruin our chance to observe their natural state.
Live underground? Where are you getting this idea from; can you cite your sources? I can't see a single purpose for that, but by all means prove me wrong if you can find something.
There is a reason for the population to stop at ten billion. Again, the demographic transition model. Literally every country is progressing through or has already progressed through it, and the world is also undergoing it on a much slower level, due to the countries still in stages one and two. As counties become more and more developed, their rate of natural increase decreases- America's is already at the perfect replacement rate of 2.1, for example, and the rates of natural increase in Japan, Russia, and a few European countries are actually declining.
The reason for this is that as countries develop, citizens become less concerned with having children to take care of them when they're older, due to longer life expectancy and a lower infant mortality rate, eliminating the need to have more children in case some die and/or are not able to take care of the parent in their old age. In addition, women in developed countries tend to be more focused on careers than children, again decreasing the >
general size of families and amount of children they have. Going back to Russia as an example, they've even had to incorporate a 'make a baby day' in order to make up for their declining population.
Again, overpopulation won't be a problem so long as industrialization (particularly in Africa) continues. We could work on being much more eco-friendly and sustainable, yes, and some of the more developed countries (America in particular) are hoarding more than their fair share of resources, but there's no reason for us to sit by and watch fucking genocide and cancer take people's lives in fear of overpopulation (which is, again, not a problem).
Sources, if you'd like them:
http://cnre.vt.edu/lsg/3104/Ove...phicTrans.html
http://www.nssgeography.com/wor...on%20Model.htm
http://www.marathon.uwc.edu/geo...ns/demtran.htm
http://geographyfieldwork.com/D...Transition.htm
I didn't read all that. The reason we would live underground is to protect ourselves fro
Solar storms, source: my physics teacher. J quit reading after that cud I really don't care.
I found some websites on the possibility of solar flares and needing to protect ourselves by taking shelter underground ( http://www.naturalnews.com/0335...er_plants.html and http://www.solarstormwarning.com /), but the only mention of population is that a very small fraction of the world would be able to survive under the circumstances (about 1/100).
So let me get this straight: You're saying that in order to ensure that there are enough people for our species to survive after a nuclear flare, we should stop trying to prevent genocide and cure cancer?
Does that even sound coherent to you? Those two subjects are completely unrelated.
If anything, these articles only seem to say that we need to rely less on nuclear power due to the possibility of a solar flare knocking out out nuclear power plants, which brings us back to my point on the problem being a lack of sustainability. How does overpopulation even begin to play into this?
Imagine if the millions of people who died in the holocaust lived and reproduced ans how much.more.over crowded we be if they dis.
Did I ever suggest they deserved it? I'm pretty sure the whole world is trying to take care of itssf finnalciy. And yes, if more people were part of the populations, we'd need to worry more about rhw population.
People.die. people go power crazy. Like you said, let nature take it's course. People die and Its a part of life. That doesn't justify genocide, that doesn't mean people.with cancer deserve it. But that's how it is and that's how its meant to be.
Map
Until you watch a loved one die from cancer, don't talk about 'a single life is but a blimp on the cosmic map'.
my dad died of lung cancer and my uncle killed.himself because he was dying.of.liver and heart problems.
lol. No. I'm ok with them dying and think they should have died, how is that self.pity?
Lol I'm sorry I'm learning how to use a kindle.and.was confuses.
lol. No. I'm ok with them dying and think they should have died, how is that self.pity?