theweatheroutlook

Remove ads from site

Saint Snow
27 January 2020 15:17:19


I could just go away, but I still stand by my point, in that talk of 'over population' always seems to come from those whose own existence and well-being is assured and well catered for. The world is big and bountiful enough for everyone and more and you or MM do not get to decide that it isn't. The real problem is how the collective 'we' manage this world we are given. 


Originally Posted by: Chunky Pea 


 


To be fair to GtW and others, I've not seen anyone call for a cull. Just a more responsible approach to reproduction and population growth. A max of one offspring per person (so 2 for couples) would be fine.


 


 


Martin
Home: St Helens (26m asl) Work: Manchester (75m asl)
A TWO addict since 14/12/01
"How can wealth persuade poverty to use its political freedom to keep wealth in power? Here lies the whole art of Conservative politics."
Aneurin Bevan
Gandalf The White
27 January 2020 15:45:43


 


 


'Maybe you EE'? I'm not quite sure what that means.


But..


(1) It wasn't a point you were making, but something a little more pointless than that. 


(2) You are always have a gripe, especially when interacting with moi. But no matter.


(3) You didn't say I had no basis for making it either. You basically said nothing at all. 


I could just go away, but I still stand by my point, in that talk of 'over population' always seems to come from those whose own existence and well-being is assured and well catered for. The world is big and bountiful enough for everyone and more and you or MM do not get to decide that it isn't. The real problem is how the collective 'we' manage this world we are given. 


Originally Posted by: Chunky Pea 


Sorry, CP, that was bl**dy autocorrect changing what I typed. It was supposed to say 'maybe you need to....'


I think we'll leave it there rather than let you derail another thread.

Location: South Cambridgeshire
130 metres ASL
52.0N 0.1E


Chunky Pea
27 January 2020 15:48:30


To be fair to GtW and others, I've not seen anyone call for a cull. Just a more responsible approach to reproduction and population growth. A max of one offspring per person (so 2 for couples) would be fine.


Originally Posted by: Saint Snow 


I never suggested otherwise, but a culls by proxy was hinted at. Whatever about the rest of the world though, Europe is doing OK with regard birth rates, though to the point where some now see this as a problem:


https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-51118616


 

Current Conditions
https://t.ly/MEYqg 

"You don't have to know anything to have an opinion"
--Roger P, 12/Oct/2022
Chunky Pea
27 January 2020 15:54:31


 


Sorry, CP, that was bl**dy autocorrect changing what I typed. It was supposed to say 'maybe you need to....'


 


Originally Posted by: Gandalf The White 


I am shocked that you, of all peeps, even use auto-correct. 

Current Conditions
https://t.ly/MEYqg 

"You don't have to know anything to have an opinion"
--Roger P, 12/Oct/2022
Saint Snow
27 January 2020 15:56:50


 


I never suggested otherwise, but a culls by proxy was hinted at. Whatever about the rest of the world though, Europe is doing OK with regard birth rates, though to the point where some now see this as a problem:


https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-51118616


 


Originally Posted by: Chunky Pea 


 


With increased automation, the tasks that humans *need* to do should easily be able to be handled by a smaller and declining workforce.


The problem is that our culture and society is geared to the corporate-capitalist system, so the aim of production is to generate sales and profit. That's why we have advertisements trying to convince people to buy stuff they don't actually need.


As a species, we could thrive with a contracted aggregate of the hours worked by people. We just need a radically different approach to life, working, who owns/controls the means of production, and what the aim of production is.


 


Martin
Home: St Helens (26m asl) Work: Manchester (75m asl)
A TWO addict since 14/12/01
"How can wealth persuade poverty to use its political freedom to keep wealth in power? Here lies the whole art of Conservative politics."
Aneurin Bevan
Roger Parsons
27 January 2020 15:57:37


 


I never suggested otherwise, but a culls by proxy was hinted at. Whatever about the rest of the world though, Europe is doing OK with regard birth rates, though to the point where some now see this as a problem:


https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-51118616


 


Originally Posted by: Chunky Pea 


This could be my fault, CP.  I used "culling" as a turn of phrase that was not intended to suggest the deliberate killing of anyone, but the process by which an epidemic may kill off  proportion of the population. I was actually saying the epidemics are NOT a good means of achieving population control. I wrote to MM:


... pandemics are an imprecise way of "capping" population. The riskier your own existence, the more likely you will have more offspring - it's playing the odds and preparing for your old age. "Culling by disease" simply means that humans will be selected for their ability to show or develop immunity. If the infecting agent loses virulence, that too will make it less effective...


Roger

RogerP
West Lindsey district of Lincolnshire
Everything taken together, here in Lincolnshire are more good things than man could have had the conscience to ask.
William Cobbett, in his Rural Rides - c.1830
Saint Snow
27 January 2020 15:59:11

To add an aside, my idea of bliss is the life lived by the passengers on the starliner Axiom.


 


 


Martin
Home: St Helens (26m asl) Work: Manchester (75m asl)
A TWO addict since 14/12/01
"How can wealth persuade poverty to use its political freedom to keep wealth in power? Here lies the whole art of Conservative politics."
Aneurin Bevan
Chunky Pea
27 January 2020 16:40:27


To add an aside, my idea of bliss is the life lived by the passengers on the starliner Axiom.


Originally Posted by: Saint Snow 


 


With a bit snow of course, of which it is doing quite heavily here at the moment. First of the season! 

Current Conditions
https://t.ly/MEYqg 

"You don't have to know anything to have an opinion"
--Roger P, 12/Oct/2022
Chunky Pea
27 January 2020 16:44:19


 


This could be my fault, CP.  I used "culling" as a turn of phrase that was not intended to suggest the deliberate killing of anyone, but the process by which an epidemic may kill off  proportion of the population. I was actually saying the epidemics are NOT a good means of achieving population control. I wrote to MM:


... pandemics are an imprecise way of "capping" population. The riskier your own existence, the more likely you will have more offspring - it's playing the odds and preparing for your old age. "Culling by disease" simply means that humans will be selected for their ability to show or develop immunity. If the infecting agent loses virulence, that too will make it less effective...


Roger


Originally Posted by: Roger Parsons 


Not at all Roger. I specifically focused in on MM's disturbingly clinical assessment of humanity and the 'balance of nature'. 

Current Conditions
https://t.ly/MEYqg 

"You don't have to know anything to have an opinion"
--Roger P, 12/Oct/2022
Brian Gaze
27 January 2020 16:46:51

Death toll now at 81. Tentative signs this won't be the apocalypse?


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-51259649


 

Brian Gaze
Berkhamsted
TWO Buzz - get the latest news and views 
"I'm not socialist, I know that. I don't believe in sharing my money." - Gary Numan
Heavy Weather 2013
27 January 2020 16:52:07


Death toll now at 81. Tentative signs this won't be the apocalypse?


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-51259649


 


Originally Posted by: Brian Gaze 


You need to be paying attention to the growth in cases and death rate. That suggests this is far from finished. The low number of cases worldwide will grow significantly in the next 14 days as those who not currently symptomatic start showing symptoms

Mark
Beckton, E London
Less than 500m from the end of London City Airport runway.
Roger Parsons
27 January 2020 16:54:03


Not at all Roger. I specifically focused in on MM's disturbingly clinical assessment of humanity and the 'balance of nature'. 


Originally Posted by: Chunky Pea 


That's ok then CP - thought I'd better check. The test of such debates is to see if the debater refers to humans as they and not us! R.

RogerP
West Lindsey district of Lincolnshire
Everything taken together, here in Lincolnshire are more good things than man could have had the conscience to ask.
William Cobbett, in his Rural Rides - c.1830
Maunder Minimum
27 January 2020 16:59:10


 I could just go away, but I still stand by my point, in that talk of 'over population' always seems to come from those whose own existence and well-being is assured and well catered for. The world is big and bountiful enough for everyone and more and you or MM do not get to decide that it isn't. The real problem is how the collective 'we' manage this world we are given. 


Originally Posted by: Chunky Pea 


Except it isn't. Population pressure is degrading the environment, leading to loss of habitats and species and is cluttering the world with refuse. Naturally, we need to behave smarter, but part of behaving smarter is to inhibit population growth, preferably via education and birth control.


Naturally, I get to decide nothing about this, I am simply voicing my Malthusian opinion. At the end of the day, the world is finite and with finite resources, so if we don't modify our behaviour and population, nature will invariably do it for us, one way or another.

New world order coming.
Chunky Pea
27 January 2020 17:22:18


 


Except it isn't. Population pressure is degrading the environment, leading to loss of habitats and species and is cluttering the world with refuse. Naturally, we need to behave smarter, but part of behaving smarter is to inhibit population growth, preferably via education and birth control.


Naturally, I get to decide nothing about this, I am simply voicing my Malthusian opinion. At the end of the day, the world is finite and with finite resources, so if we don't modify our behaviour and population, nature will invariably do it for us, one way or another.


Originally Posted by: Maunder Minimum 


I've heard it said that if all peoples of the world were gather in one spot, they would fill up an area no more the size of decent sized city. That is a hell of a lot of world to go around for everyone, but corrupt, self serving politics and philosophies will ensure that that will never happen. 

Current Conditions
https://t.ly/MEYqg 

"You don't have to know anything to have an opinion"
--Roger P, 12/Oct/2022
DEW
  • DEW
  • Advanced Member
27 January 2020 19:53:43


 


I've heard it said that if all peoples of the world were gather in one spot, they would fill up an area no more the size of decent sized city. That is a hell of a lot of world to go around for everyone, but corrupt, self serving politics and philosophies will ensure that that will never happen. 


Originally Posted by: Chunky Pea 


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand_on_Zanzibar


The primary engine of the novel's story is overpopulation and its projected consequences.[2] The title refers to an early twentieth-century claim that the world's population could fit onto the Isle of Wight—which has an area of 381 square kilometres (147 sq mi)—if they were all standing upright. Brunner remarked that the growing world population now required a larger island; the 3.5 billion people living in 1968 could stand together on the Isle of Man (area 572 square kilometres (221 sq mi)), while the 7 billion people who he (correctly) projected would be alive in 2010 would need to stand on Zanzibar (area 1,554 square kilometres (600 sq mi)).[4] Throughout the book, the image of the entire human race standing shoulder-to-shoulder on a small island is a metaphor for a crowded world.

War does not determine who is right, only who is left - Bertrand Russell

Chichester 12m asl
Northern Sky
27 January 2020 20:33:02


 


Except it isn't. Population pressure is degrading the environment, leading to loss of habitats and species and is cluttering the world with refuse. Naturally, we need to behave smarter, but part of behaving smarter is to inhibit population growth, preferably via education and birth control.


Naturally, I get to decide nothing about this, I am simply voicing my Malthusian opinion. At the end of the day, the world is finite and with finite resources, so if we don't modify our behaviour and population, nature will invariably do it for us, one way or another.


Originally Posted by: Maunder Minimum 


I don't agree with this. Overpopulation isn't the problem the problem is the mismanagement of resources - largely associated with the quest for short term profit.


As I said in an earlier post the arguments about overpopulation were exactly the same a thousand years ago when they applied to much fewer Humans. At some point we may reach a final point but no one knows where that is. Saying that point is just around the corner is exactly what Malthusians have been saying for hundreds of years and every time they have been wrong. 

Bugglesgate
27 January 2020 20:38:30


 


I don't agree with this. Overpopulation isn't the problem the problem is the mismanagement of resources - largely associated with the quest for short term profit.


As I said in an earlier post the arguments about overpopulation were exactly the same a thousand years ago when they applied to much fewer Humans. At some point we may reach a final point but no one knows where that is. Saying that point is just around the corner is exactly what Malthusians have been saying for hundreds of years and every time they have been wrong. 


Originally Posted by: Northern Sky 


What has  been happening is the day of reckoning has been repeatedly  delayed by  technology -  fine.  The problem is that technology  has  meant  using unsustainable fossil fuel resources and  destroying ever greater swathes of the environment for cities, roads, factories  and the like.  The seas are full of plastic, the Amazon is being burned off for food  and palm oil.  Ever greater volumes of CO2 are being released into the atmosphere and you reckon we can go on expanding  the world population !


We are mortgaged up to hilt environmentally speaking - something has to give  and I firmly believe that part of the solution is  to  curb population growth.  If we don't we will be running to stand still 

Chris (It,its)
Between Newbury and Basingstoke
"When they are giving you their all, some stagger and fall, after all it's not easy banging your heart against some mad buggers wall"
Arcus
27 January 2020 20:47:55
Some estimates saying infection rate is 2.9. Albeit the death rate is still low, given the asymptomatic infection it is clearly worrying for those with existing medical conditions.
Ben,
Nr. Easingwold, North Yorkshire
30m asl
Maunder Minimum
27 January 2020 20:58:06


 


What has  been happening is the day of reckoning has been repeatedly  delayed by  technology -  fine.  The problem is that technology  has  meant  using unsustainable fossil fuel resources and  destroying ever greater swathes of the environment for cities, roads, factories  and the like.  The seas are full of plastic, the Amazon is being burned off for food  and palm oil.  Ever greater volumes of CO2 are being released into the atmosphere and you reckon we can go on expanding  the world population !


We are mortgaged up to hilt environmentally speaking - something has to give  and I firmly believe that part of the solution is  to  curb population growth.  If we don't we will be running to stand still 


Originally Posted by: Bugglesgate 


Agreed. However, you missed another of the unfolding environmental catastrophes, this time caused by the quest to reduce CO2 emissions - the destruction of the Indonesian rainforest so that the land can be planted with the mono-culture which is Palm Oil - a massive and irrecoverable loss of bio-diversity.

New world order coming.
Northern Sky
27 January 2020 21:30:24


 


What has  been happening is the day of reckoning has been repeatedly  delayed by  technology -  fine.  The problem is that technology  has  meant  using unsustainable fossil fuel resources and  destroying ever greater swathes of the environment for cities, roads, factories  and the like.  The seas are full of plastic, the Amazon is being burned off for food  and palm oil.  Ever greater volumes of CO2 are being released into the atmosphere and you reckon we can go on expanding  the world population !


We are mortgaged up to hilt environmentally speaking - something has to give  and I firmly believe that part of the solution is  to  curb population growth.  If we don't we will be running to stand still 


Originally Posted by: Bugglesgate 


Again these are not problems of overpopulation they are problems caused primarily by the mismanagement of resources. The world population will decline when less developed countries become richer - and despite all the doom and gloom this is exactly what is happening.


What other solution do you propose to curb population growth?


Yes there are some serious environmental problems but it is absolutely within the capacity of Humanity to both solve them and grow at the same time.

Ulric
27 January 2020 21:31:08

Agreed. However, you missed another of the unfolding environmental catastrophes, this time caused by the quest to reduce CO2 emissions - the destruction of the Indonesian rainforest so that the land can be planted with the mono-culture which is Palm Oil - a massive and irrecoverable loss of bio-diversity.


Originally Posted by: Maunder Minimum 


Yes, all due to foreigners. Nothing to do with rich white people.

To doubt everything or to believe everything are two equally convenient solutions; both dispense with the necessity of reflection. - Henri Poincaré
Devonian
27 January 2020 21:49:08


 


Again these are not problems of overpopulation they are problems caused primarily by the mismanagement of resources. The world population will decline when less developed countries become richer - and despite all the doom and gloom this is exactly what is happening.


What other solution do you propose to curb population growth?


Yes there are some serious environmental problems but it is absolutely within the capacity of Humanity to both solve them and grow at the same time.


Originally Posted by: Northern Sky 


So, there are no problem with human population but, you conspicuously add, human population is going to decline. Humm, but surely that will be a failure because more people is good?


 

Ulric
27 January 2020 22:01:04
Don't worry, it can't get us.
We have control of our own borders.
To doubt everything or to believe everything are two equally convenient solutions; both dispense with the necessity of reflection. - Henri Poincaré
Northern Sky
27 January 2020 22:03:52


 


So, there are no problem with human population but, you conspicuously add, human population is going to decline. Humm, but surely that will be a failure because more people is good?


 


Originally Posted by: Devonian 


That's not what I'm saying. Obviously population cannot just continue to rise and at some point that would present unsurmountable problems. My view is that we are still some way off that number - at a guess I would say we need to see the population peak and then slowly decline at around 10 billion. That number of people will of course cause problems but in my view they can be solved by better land management and technological development.


Crucially though if you are worried about over population you have to provide a solution to it. My solution is the one that we are already seeing happen, which is that birth rates decline as wealth increases. The solution then is to increase wealth and for societies to manage resources in a better way. 


Of course (and to get back on topic) if a handy virus comes along and wipes half of us out some of those over population issues will be sorted in rapid fashion.

Remove ads from site

Ads