Could we survive world peace?

[B17Skull12]

World peace is justa WW3 waiting to happen.

[Shuckins]

If steps are not taken to reduce the world's population growth we will end up eating each other.

Certain "experts" over the years have said that the earth is capable of sustaining a much larger population if the resources are properly utilized.  That may be so but at what cost to the environment?  Must we reach the point where the only land areas not under the plow are on the mountain peaks?

The current standard of living of the United States will become unsustainable if our own population continues to grow and we cannot control the immigration problem.

The Chinese government has policies in place limiting families to having only one child.  The methods used to enforce these policies have been condemned as violations of human rights...but what measures will other governments take as the world's human population climbs toward 10 billion?

A world-wide population control plan might be one step...but there are many nations that would refuse to cooperate.

So what solutions are viable?

[TweetyBird]

The rapid developement of China is going to test us very soon.
Within 5 years their consumption of world resources is expected to equal that of the United States.

Edit BTW - I went to fact check that 5 year thing ( I remember it from a documetary I saw on the industrialization of China) but you would be suprised how little information is available on the net regarding individual coutries consumption of world resources.
If anyone finds a good source/link - please post it.

[Toad]

Originally posted by Shuckins
we will end up eating each other.

We already do that.  

[Toad]

Oh, yah... back on topic.

The end is near! The end is near!  Repent! Repent!

We're dooooooooooooooooooooOOOOOOOO OOoooooooomed!

DOOMED I say! DOOMED!

and, uh....

The sky is falling! The SKY is FALLING!


There, continue.

[TweetyBird]

Yea, Toad, that added much:aok

I feel blessed

I bet that position saves you a lot of work :0

Heck, you could use that iron clad rebuttle on  subjects such as antibiotic resistant bacteria,  mercury poisoning, ageing infrastucture, insane litigation, and a decline in educational standards. Hell - you never have to read another book!

You go Toad!

[Toad]

Nah, you go! Etch.

And when you get there and figure out just how you're going to handle this "CHINA IS GONNA SUCK UP THE ENTIRE WORLD'S RESOURCES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" problem, do post the answer.

See, I figure when the asteroid is about to hit the earth we'll either figure out how to deal with that (well, Bruce Willis will probably solve the problem) or we'll all die. But MY worrying about it now won't change the asteroid's course and won't provide a solution.

But I have full confidence in YOUR ability to worry about an energy-gobbling China, antibiotic resistant bacteria, mercury poisoning, ageing infrastucture, insane litigation, and a decline in educational standards right now. So, you go ahead and do the worrying for both of us.

Thanks!

[Toad]

Oh, and don't forget to expense your worrying on your 1040!

[TweetyBird]

>>So, you go ahead and do the worrying for both of us. <<

Worrying is a useless expense of energy. Discussing is not. So - what are ya doing? - oh thats right - demonstrating you are incapable of discussing. That's ok - you do have games

[FUNKED1]

This just in.  Malthus still wrong.

[streakeagle]

Mother nature will do her job.

Population outgrows resources... catastrophe will trim population down.

Of course mother nature is never pleasant about the way she works. She even frequently allows species to become extinct.

Darwin quoted her once, something about "survival of the fittest".

If we don't balance our resources through logical and rational means, the forces of nature will do it for us

But simply reducing the population would never work. It has only taken us only a few thousand years to get into this situation. Humanity has to fundamentally change its goals and means of achieving them. History tells me that such a change is very unlikely whereas extinction is very likely.

Will humans beat the odds? I doubt it. My only hope is that I don't see the magic bubble the USA allows me to live in collapse before I die. Recent events make me question whether even that will be possible.

[Wotan]

Originally posted by streakeagle
Mother nature will do her job.

Population outgrows resources... catastrophe will trim population down.

Of course mother nature is never pleasant about the way she works. She even frequently allows species to become extinct.

Darwin quoted her once, something about "survival of the fittest".

If we don't balance our resources through logical and rational means, the forces of nature will do it for us

But simply reducing the population would never work. It has only taken us only a few thousand years to get into this situation. Humanity has to fundamentally change its goals and means of achieving them. History tells me that such a change is very unlikely whereas extinction is very likely.

Will humans beat the odds? I doubt it. My only hope is that I don't see the magic bubble the USA allows me to live in collapse before I die. Recent events make me question whether even that will be possible.

Funked addressed all that

This just in. Malthus still wrong.

Technology will find away to address to problems of resources, that’s well under way now. The problems of regional competition over resources by the 3rd world and those nations who don't have the technology and capital to develop new resources will always remain in conflict.

[AKS\/\/ulfe]

The only balance technology will bring is through mass extermination. Our best form of environmentalism is still extremely damaging to our atmosphere and land - recycling.
-SW

[Wotan]

"Environmentalism" is yet fully understood.

All the kooky doomsday theories about global warming and the like are just scare tactics used by certain groups to maintain funding.

Technology is advancing and it’s just a matter of time before the effects of industrialization are reversed.

[AKS\/\/ulfe]

Oh yeah Wotan, I agree - especially about global warming. I'm sure you know about the Ice Age cycle and how there is a gradual warming before it begins, and we're about due for one. That could very well debunk the whole global warming due to CFCs deal.

But, technology can only do so much. Today the world is at its highest in terms of population and it is growing exponentially every years. Now, we are seeing anti-biotics failing against diseases and seeing more diseases immune to our medicines. Also, diseases appear to be mutating at a higher rate than before (influenza for example).

Its just interesting that perhaps theres a natural fall back to over population, in that things are kept in check despite all of our technology.

Just an opinion of course.
-SW