|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger



Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 13 days
|
|
Quote:
thissongis said: Exchange fucked up pharm/illicit drug policies for control of how many kids I can have, Im down.
Yep, because that is how governmental policies are put in place.
--------------------
If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger



Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 13 days
|
Re: Birth control? [Re: MoxyOx]
#14477020 - 05/19/11 05:52 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
MoxyOx said: More complex lifeforms like us... well we are drastically fucked. There is no way the resources we have remaining can last us longer then a century or two.
Prophet of the future and ultimate authority on resources and their utilization on the global scale, all rolled up into one. I definitely trust your opinion.
--------------------
If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
Solomon Ash
Nudibranch

Registered: 05/16/11
Posts: 149
Last seen: 12 years, 4 months
|
|
Do you really not understand how population growth can lead to collapse?
Saying that population growth is necessarily a sign of social or ecological health is like saying the spread of cancer in a body is a sign of good physical health.
Excessive growth in the short term can lead to extinction in the long term, in some cases.
Population growth and population decline can both be bad signs. You have to look at the other factors and the context.
Its just like cells in a body. Cells dying off can be a bad sign, but so can excessive cell growth.
|
Doc_T
Random Dude




Registered: 03/06/09
Posts: 42,395
Loc: Colorado
|
|
Excessive growth is excessive. Healthy growth is healthy. Humans have always expanded, it's what we do. It's our niche.
-------------------- You make it all possible. Doesn't it feel good?
|
johnm214


Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
|
|
Quote:
Solomon Ash said: Do you really not understand how population growth can lead to collapse?
Did he say this? Why are you incredulous as something you just made up?
Quote:
Excessive growth in the short term can lead to extinction in the long term, in some cases.
Does this not just beg the question? Calling it 'excessive' is to allready presume its problematic- not helpful.
|
Solomon Ash
Nudibranch

Registered: 05/16/11
Posts: 149
Last seen: 12 years, 4 months
|
Re: Birth control? [Re: johnm214]
#14477333 - 05/19/11 07:55 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
"And the population is still increasing because we are fucked?
See my Thread: Increasing and Decreasing Population Both Being Bad Signs. "
If you read the thread he was referring to, he seems to be suggesting that it is illogical to say that both population growth and population decline can be bad signs for humanity.
But as I pointed out, both can be bad depending on the context.
|
MushroomTrip
Dr. Teasy Thighs



Registered: 12/02/05
Posts: 14,794
Loc: red panda village
Last seen: 2 years, 10 months
|
|
Quote:
Solomon Ash said: Do you really not understand how population growth can lead to collapse?
Saying that population growth is necessarily a sign of social or ecological health is like saying the spread of cancer in a body is a sign of good physical health.
Excessive growth in the short term can lead to extinction in the long term, in some cases.
Population growth and population decline can both be bad signs. You have to look at the other factors and the context.
Its just like cells in a body. Cells dying off can be a bad sign, but so can excessive cell growth.
Sure, only that you measure excessive cell growth and then prove it. I suggest you do the same regarding population growth.
--------------------
   All this time I've loved you And never known your face All this time I've missed you And searched this human race Here is true peace Here my heart knows calm Safe in your soul Bathed in your sighs
|
Solomon Ash
Nudibranch

Registered: 05/16/11
Posts: 149
Last seen: 12 years, 4 months
|
|
"Sure, only that you measure excessive cell growth and then prove it. I suggest you do the same regarding population growth."
I am sorry I can not understand what this means. Can you rephrase it please?
|
topdog82
Death Spirit


Registered: 07/16/10
Posts: 7,992
Loc: California
Last seen: 5 months, 3 days
|
|
Quote:
OrgoneConclusion said:
Quote:
I can see with my own eyes that the earth is dying
Whatever that means. In the previous 500 discussions on this subject, not one proponent could explain with any clarity.
I live in California, where weather as far as I can remember, has never dipped below 65, especially in spring Last winter, it snowed in some of the upper mountains the world is changing for the worst, and people are the cause
Im not saying we shouldn't live, I'm saying that if people are gonna live the way we do, in certain countries, a "two-child" rule should be emplyoed
Expanding our population isn't our niche, it's something that all species try to do, and we have succeded in. Im not gonna sit here type up an explination on the purpose of the universe, but I am going to say that the rate at which we are expanding and that other species are decreasing, are abnormal
Edited by topdog82 (05/19/11 05:58 PM)
|
Doc_T
Random Dude




Registered: 03/06/09
Posts: 42,395
Loc: Colorado
|
Re: Birth control? [Re: topdog82]
#14480002 - 05/19/11 05:57 PM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
topdog82 said: I live in California, where weather as far as I can remember, has never dipped below 65, especially in spring
I grew up in San Diego, it would get into the 40's every winter, sometimes we'd have frost.
Don't mistake your impressions of the world with facts.
-------------------- You make it all possible. Doesn't it feel good?
|
topdog82
Death Spirit


Registered: 07/16/10
Posts: 7,992
Loc: California
Last seen: 5 months, 3 days
|
Re: Birth control? [Re: Doc_T]
#14480019 - 05/19/11 06:00 PM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
my bad, I meant at this time of the year, I expect it to be hot or at least warm now when I look at the weather it'll read around 60 for the whole week
|
johnm214


Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
|
|
Quote:
topdog82 said:
Quote:
OrgoneConclusion said:
Quote:
I can see with my own eyes that the earth is dying
Whatever that means. In the previous 500 discussions on this subject, not one proponent could explain with any clarity.
I live in California, where weather as far as I can remember, has never dipped below 65, especially in spring Last winter, it snowed in some of the upper mountains the world is changing for the worst, and people are the cause
Im not saying we shouldn't live, I'm saying that if people are gonna live the way we do, in certain countries, a "two-child" rule should be emplyoed
Expanding our population isn't our niche, it's something that all species try to do, and we have succeded in. Im not gonna sit here type up an explination on the purpose of the universe, but I am going to say that the rate at which we are expanding and that other species are decreasing, are abnormal
How is this anything but confirmation bias? What was you methodology of study? Could it have been falsified? Was it established before the fact? These kind of antecdotes typically aren't helpful as they simply are spurious research: there's no way the hypothesis could have been falsified, hence its meaningless. You've not established what novel low temperatures has to say about the subject anyways, so it seems to have several problems.
What right does anyone have to punish me for conceiving more than two children or a woman for having more than two children?
Quote:
Solomon Ash said: "Sure, only that you measure excessive cell growth and then prove it. I suggest you do the same regarding population growth."
I am sorry I can not understand what this means. Can you rephrase it please?
She's suggesting you use some methodology that is capable of establishing that the population growth is excessive just as the researcher establishes the cell growth is excessive or not via a methodology able to determine such.
Your post seemed to beg the question.
|
Solomon Ash
Nudibranch

Registered: 05/16/11
Posts: 149
Last seen: 12 years, 4 months
|
Re: Birth control? [Re: johnm214]
#14481218 - 05/19/11 09:35 PM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Some Words on human population growth:
"Population Growth:
Foremost among the root causes of the global crisis is the problem of human population growth. The exploding number of human beings is directly related to the exhaustion of natural resources such as oil and fresh water and the erosion of habitats and ecosystems. More human beings means more demand placed on limited supplies and a larger load on the Earth’s basic carrying capacity. David Korten argues that the rapid upsurge in human numbers has already exceeded the Earth’s ability to sustain, pointing out that “somewhere around 1980, we humans crossed an evolutionary threshold: the burden we place on the life support systems of the planet passed beyond the sustainable limit. The figures are sobering. Just since 1950, in barely more than fifty years, the global human population more than doubled from 2.6 billion persons in 1950 to 6.4 billion in 2005” (Korten 59).
Jeffrey Sachs predicts that the population boom will continue, and “the global population will rise… to 9.2 billion in 2050” (22-23). As a result of this population growth, combined with the increasing material demands placed on the earth by each individual person, Sachs predicts that by 2050 humanity’s overall impact on the planet Earth will be six times what it is today. This is essentially an apocalyptic scenario, because “the human impact on the environment today is already unsustainable” and therefore “a six fold impact would be a devastating… environmental catastrophe” (30).
The truth is that the world is simply not large enough to sustain present and predicted human populations. When the numbers of a species exceed the carrying capacity of their supporting ecosystem, this is called a state of overshoot. According to “the calculations of the Living Planet Index, we humans have been in ecological overshoot since roughly 1970” (Ibid 61). As a result of rapid population growth combined with rising consumption patterns, “by 2002, humans were consuming food, materials and energy at a rate of about 1.2 Earth-equivalent planets” (Ibid 59). This already dire situation is poised to become much worse, as “the United Nations projects that the world population will continue to grow from the current 6.4 billion to 8.9 billion in 2050” (Ibid 67).
Normally a species in overshoot is subjected to population adjustment in the form of die-offs which result from ecological feedback mechanisms. For example, if wolves become too numerous and consume too many deer, they will run out of food and many will starve, restoring the balance. However, humans have so far been able to avoid a massive die-back to sustainable numbers, largely because of technological innovations such as advances in agriculture. Nevertheless, the consequences of population overshoot are inescapable, and “the difference between human consumption and the regenerative capacity of Earth is made up by depleting the natural capital of the planet- both non-renewable capital, like minerals and fossil fuels, and renewable capital like forests, fisheries, soil, water and climatic systems. The consequence is to extract a temporary and unsustainable subsidy from Earth to support current consumption at the expense of our children and their children for generations to come” (Ibid).
The dangers inherent in unrestrained population growth have been known since 1798 when the “economist and demographer Thomas Malthus argued that human population growth would tend to outrun the growth of food production…because population growth proceeds exponentially while food production increases only arithmetically” (Sachs 312). As a result “a population will tend to consume all available food and never leave a surplus unless population growth itself is halted” (312). Such a halting can be voluntary and intentional, as in the case of widespread birth control use and child limitation policies, but more often it is in the form of an uncontrolled ecological feedback resulting in mass deaths from poverty and hunger as geometric population growth outstrips the arithmetical (and limited) growth of food.
Malthusian logic suggests that the unrestrained explosion of human populations within the confines of a finite and already overtaxed world must lead to a massive population rebalancing before much longer. Even with abundant fossil fuels and the high-yield agriculture they make possible the Earth would struggle to provide for the nearly 9 billion people we expect to inhabit this planet by 2050. Yet as we have seen, those enormous hydrocarbon inputs are now jeopardized by peak oil and the decline of existing reserves and rates of supply, even as the natural abundance of forests and oceans is depleted by biodiversity loss. As such, humans are in a double bind, and the likely result is that “Earth is poised to (teach us ) a traumatic lesson in the…systems principle that infinite growth cannot be sustained in a finite system and the cybernetic principle that failure to take timely action to restore system equilibrium results in overshoot and collapse” (Ibid 61). This collapse could take the form of widespread famine, a virulent pandemic or a world-war, each of which could dramatically reduce the human population."
For your consideration
|
|