Political Crossfire Forums

[Luigidel]

I wonder if they could engineer a virus that targets only people that think like him. :think:

[Headrattle]

First, I love how it is instantly assumed that this is typical of the Left. How so? it is interesting that those on the right use extreme examples to judge the other side. Does that mean that the Right is made up of Racist Creationists who bomb Abortion Clinics?

Yeah, didn't think so.

Demonic Spoon wrote: WE ARE FAR FROM OVERPOPULATED. The whole world's population could live in the state of Texas, with a lot of room left over.
If we were to do that the population density would be about the same as New York City. Not a pretty site. Texas... looking like New York City.

Still, while it is true that that many people could live together that close, the real problem is the amount of land and resources needed to support those people. While scientific advances are helping (modified foods for example) there will of course be a point where we aren't able to consume the amount of resources that we require.

Still, that guy is a kook. Why pay attention to him?

[Demonic Spoon]

no, we have plenty of resources. We are just not tapping them as well as we could.

[The Impeacher]

:lol:

you guys talk about "efficiency" as if its the second coming of jesus... and its likely as mythic.

did it ever occur to you that the system is already pretty efficient, especially at any given momnent its at least as efficient as it isand that then there is too much famine and war due in lage part to regional overpopulation relatave to ACTUAL "efficiency"?


i think 6.3 billion people is enough. i'd rather it was around 4b or under...

[Headrattle]

Demonic Spoon wrote: no, we have plenty of resources. We are just not tapping them as well as we could.

We have plenty... for now. Resources are important. But a drastic increase in population would require more resources. There is a point where we won't be able to feed the population should that population grow too big. And given current technology, that max population might not be as big as you think.

It would be wise to be careful.

[perdidochas]

Headrattle wrote: Demonic Spoon wrote: no, we have plenty of resources. We are just not tapping them as well as we could.

We have plenty... for now. Resources are important. But a drastic increase in population would require more resources. There is a point where we won't be able to feed the population should that population grow too big. And given current technology, that max population might not be as big as you think.

It would be wise to be careful.

In the 1960s and 1970s, they said that max population was about 4 billion. We are way past that now, and hunger in the poor nations is no worse than it was in the 1960s.

[Headrattle]

perdidochas wrote: Headrattle wrote: Demonic Spoon wrote: no, we have plenty of resources. We are just not tapping them as well as we could.

We have plenty... for now. Resources are important. But a drastic increase in population would require more resources. There is a point where we won't be able to feed the population should that population grow too big. And given current technology, that max population might not be as big as you think.

It would be wise to be careful.

In the 1960s and 1970s, they said that max population was about 4 billion. We are way past that now, and hunger in the poor nations is no worse than it was in the 1960s.

Yes, that is true. But it was because of scientific advances in food production. However, there is a point where scientific advances won't work. That is what I am talking about.

But then I am getting off of the subject of how crazy the dude is. I was only pointing out that the stating that just because the entire population of Earth can fit in Texas with the same population density of New York City, that doesn't mean that it is a good thing. Nor does it mean that the entire planet can handle that. There has got to be a point where Earth can not sustain the people on it. I don't know where it is, but logically there is a point.

[Leon Czolgosz]

don't worry, plagues always have a way of curing overpopulation by popping up throughout history when technology and science get outpaced by population

[ReelBigSpikey]

This guy's speech wasn't CALLING for human extermination. It was saying that a mass pandemic that could kill up to 90% of the population was POSSIBLE.

William Dembski, another "scinetist," started this riot by grossly misinterpreting his speech. Not suprising given Dembski's record in science.

[Demonic Spoon]

Quote:
We have plenty... for now. Resources are important. But a drastic increase in population would require more resources. There is a point where we won't be able to feed the population should that population grow too big. And given current technology, that max population might not be as big as you think.

It would be wise to be careful.

I beg to differ. The advancing field of genetics is helping a LOT in this matter.

Also, our population growth is predicted to be leveling off relatively soon.


By the time we are so overpopulated that we can't support ourselves, we will be well beyond Earth and tapping resources in other places.

[connermt]

lucidnightmare wrote: Not surprised,self hate is part of the lefts character.So is drawing equivalence between nonequivalent things,ie endangered gnats and humans,or Americans in the trade towers and terrorist.

I try to understand them but I always fail.I just end up shaking my head and moving on. :lol:

What does 'the left' have to do with a crazy man? They are everywhere, left, right, middle....

[connermt]

lucidnightmare wrote: Oh please.Radical environmentalism.

Well that's fair. The entire right is all paranoid of change so I can see where you are coming from....... :roll:
Paranoid much?

[Infinite911911]

Demonic Spoon wrote:
By the time we are so overpopulated that we can't support ourselves, we will be well beyond Earth and tapping resources in other places.

What else does your crystal ball tell you? Does it tell you the Lottery numbers for the New Jersey State lottery tonight?

[lucidnightmare]

connermt wrote: lucidnightmare wrote: Oh please.Radical environmentalism.

Well that's fair. The entire right is all paranoid of change so I can see where you are coming from....... :roll:
Paranoid much?

Change is the only constant,it happens.The nature of the change is the question.

And I don't see much of a need to prove that radical environmentalism is a part of leftist politics.

[Demonic Spoon]

Quote:
What else does your crystal ball tell you? Does it tell you the Lottery numbers for the New Jersey State lottery tonight?



No, but look at history. Our knowledge has been growing exponentially. A hundred years ago, cars were very slow, and a very new invention. They were state of the art.

Today, we have planes that can fly at supersonic speeds...in fact, a plane that does not need fuel is being researched.


There is no way in hell we will run out of resources in the next few hundred years. Science is making the tapping of resources far more efficient. And our population growth is leveling out, so none of this is really an issue.

[ReelBigSpikey]

Again, I state: THIS STORY IS COMPLETELY FABRICATED.

This guy's speech wasn't CALLING for human extermination. It was saying that a mass pandemic that could kill up to 90% of the population was POSSIBLE.

William Dembski, another "scinetist," started this riot by grossly misinterpreting his speech. Not suprising given Dembski's record in science

[ieatfood]

Firstly, the earth can support a lot more ppl than are living today. There is plenty of food for everyone--the problem is one of distribution, not one of supply.

Secondly, there is NO evidence that ANY critical natural resource is running low.

Thirdly, most population experts predict the the earth's population will pleateau in the relative near future.

So don't worry all you naiive idiots.


Don't worry.

[Phædrus]

ieatfood wrote: Firstly, the earth can support a lot more ppl than are living today. There is plenty of food for everyone--the problem is one of distribution, not one of supply.

Secondly, there is NO evidence that ANY critical natural resource is running low.

Thirdly, most population experts predict the the earth's population will pleateau in the relative near future.

So don't worry all you naiive idiots.

Don't worry.

perhaps, but it is the waste that is the problem though ... just like bacteria humans live in their own waste, and just like bacteria they will die when the level of poisons reaches a critical point ... when and how this will take place remains to be seen, but it is pretty much inevitable now

[Phædrus]

Demonic Spoon wrote: [...]

By the time we are so overpopulated that we can't support ourselves, we will be well beyond Earth and tapping resources in other places.

If we had wanted to do this we would have done it already.

If instead of dedicating so much R&D to perfecting the automobile, humanity had concentrated of space exploration, then there would already be mines in the asteroid belt.

[ieatfood]

Phædrus wrote:

perhaps, but it is the waste that is the problem though ... just like bacteria humans live in their own waste, and just like bacteria they will die when the level of poisons reaches a critical point ... when and how this will take place remains to be seen, but it is pretty much inevitable now

but the levels of waste have been decreasing--in america, water and air are cleaner than ever

inevitable? i say it is inevitable that wastes will decrease as GDP increases.