Global Population out of control (yet?)

So, the planet's population continues to explode: from 1 billion in 1820, to 2 billion in 1930, 3 billion in 1960, 4 billion in 1974, 5 billion in 1988, and 6 billion as of 2000.

I've been thinking; why does no other country, except (China), my understanding, have any active population controls? Our worldwide populace is only getting more massive by the decade - well over 6 billion to date; with the same amount of geo-space. That will never change! (remembering, only 29.2% of the world's surface is land.) So, what are the politicians really afraid of; i rarely hear it talked or debated from any political venue. Less people = more room, less poverty, consumerism, environmental damage/eco-footprint, healthier ecomomy. Meaning a greater quality of life for all countries, and its people. Voluntary of course, is always better, but very likely something of this (moral/controversial) scale would have to be government mandated. I think it's only a matter of time; maybe give it another decade or two. i know it's much harder to put into practice, but anything of real worth is more demanding... Either that, or start thinking about terraforming another planet..lol! (Really, what choice's do we have?)

"A number of studies suggest that humankind is consuming the Earth's resources at an unsustainably fast rate..."

(article) population/green priority

wow 2/3's! that would be alot all at once. World War III, a viral epidemic? ..i sure hope not.

LOL, well the moon's alot closer, but i think Mars is alot more user-friendly. Though who would make it there first is the big question. US, Russia, N. Korea, Canada, The UN? =)

Global populations..?? Ever know about the global genocide plans SCHILLER INSTITUTE


To me.. first fucking Americans then the rest of the world..

Death is good as long as it is happen to the other nations right!!..?

Fuck you..!

Hey, thanks for the interesting link, deivil ..will have to read the other articles, too. (i saw this docu on Indigo children not that long ago; fascinating topic!)

Malthusian crisis

One dude is already aware of this, it seems the population is just in denial of the truth.

overpopulation

In An Essay on the Principle of Population (first published in 1798), Thomas Malthus proposed that while resources tend to grow linearly, population grows exponentially. He argued that, if left unrestricted, human populations continue to grow until they would become too large to be supported by the food grown on available agricultural land, causing starvation which then controls population growth.

Thanks for the interesting links, and statistics, guys .. and the rice video, wow! "Of All The People In All The World." You don't quite realize til you can actually put it into some kind of perspective..!

In all actuality america isnt reproducing fast enough... when all the babyboomers die, we are going to be in trouble. People are too consumed these days with starting their own careers and having their own success. It is a rare thing to be a "stay at home" mom anymore here in america... People are too busy to raise their own kids, its sad really. We shouldnt have to worry about it too much with the government letting all the illegal immigrants over, they will do enough of the reproducing for us... white people are already the becoming the minority here in az.

Sorry that was a little off the topic, yes, overall we are in trouble with overpopulation...

it is kind of scary like global warning but you know how people like to cover up things . . .

this is a interesting thread, thanks for it !

you're welcome, cf ..yeah it is pretty scary when you see the statistics..

I have mixed feeling about global warming. Granted, i believe there probably is a healthy percentage of normal global change no matter what mankind does, and maybe this is even bigger than we realize. On the other hand, i believe 100's of years of man-made pollution needs to go somewhere. I also believe alot of the newer, more unusual health anomolies we are now seeing, are environmental/toxic related.. *and maybe even likely to get worse in the future, as the human bodie's own natural defenses are becoming more and more compromised, as in the MUCH steeper rise in respiratory illnesses, for example.

"The United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change predicts a global average rise of from 3.5 to 34 inches by 2100, with a central estimate of 19 inches. Depending upon how you slice or dice the data, the last century saw maybe six inches."

http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=4470<BR> Antarctic's ice 'melting faster' http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4228411.stm<BR>
I believe too, we are slaves to the oil/gas industry, always have been. And it's obvious how much thought is put into the job market, industry vrs what's best for the health of ourselves and the environment. It's a political monopoly with peoples health and pocket-books. ..At least half the vehicles on the roadways by now should be hybrids, until gradually we can be weaned off of oil for good.. Electricity is not only cleaner, but safer too. *but then again, strict regulation must include all oil-based industies/factories, etc.

yes mystic fish electric is cleaner and safer but dont forget how the electric is produced at the power plant......power plants are the number one source of air pollution not cars. 😢 hydrogen sounds better.....

Very interesting cj7, i hadn't really considered that.. You bring up a good point about alternative hydrogen fuel market. I guess nothing should be too knee-jerk. Only objective, honest research, try-outs, etc..

Which ever way is truly cleaner (all-around) in the end, for sure.. *hopefully too, the alternative(s) will be "much" cheaper for the actual consumer..lol i'm thinking & hoping too, there should be alot less middlemen, politics & greed involved when things finally clean-up. At any rate, will be interesting to see what the future brings..

"Fuel cell vehicles, powered by hydrogen, have the potential to revolutionize our transportation system. They are more efficient than conventional internal combustion engine vehicles and produce no harmful tailpipe exhaust?their only emission is water. Fuel cell vehicles and the hydrogen infrastructure to fuel them are in an early stage of development. The U.S. Department of Energy is leading government and industry efforts to make hydrogen-powered vehicles an affordable, environmentally friendly, and safe transportation option."

"Hydrogen can be used in two ways to power vehicles: either directly into a modified internal combustion engine, or via fuel cells."

"The fuel cell route - Major carmakers, on the other hand, are focusing on fuel cells, convinced they are even more efficient and cleaner than hydrogen internal combustion engines. Instead of burning fuel in an engine, fuel cells are more like batteries, using an electrochemical reaction between hydrogen and oxygen to create electricity."

-sources
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4563676/<BR> http://www.eere.energy.gov/afdc/vehicles/fuel_cell.html