How to save the planet: have fewer children?

[Terror_666]

soylent green that's the solution.

 

[nicholaxxx]

People should be having less kids anyway...[small]especially the idiots.[/small]

 

[JBarracudaL]

Save the world, make less stupid people, you know, the type that grow up to scream about socialism in town halls and think global warming is a lie created by liberals.

But stupid people will always be more inclined towards irresponsible, promiscuous behavior than intelligent people. So, there will always be more dumb and average people than bright, intelligent people.

 

[Insanum]

I fail to see how having fewer children is "barbaric." It doesn't seem like a bad idea.
As I'm not planning on having kids anyway, it doesn't really affect me personally.

Its genetics. Ugly people generally have ugly babies. Who grow up & repeat the process.

If guys were more selective (as a guy im allowed[/I] to say this) with who they seed, not just wherever they cant get it.

Are you suggesting that only females are "ugly"?
There are unattractive guys out there as well, so I'm not sure how your idea solves anything, or how it has anything to do with the topic.

No, im just saying us guys need to be more selective. The same goes for women obviously, But im in no position to say that.

 

[Erja_Perttu]

easy solution, colonise the moon!

 

[nicholaxxx]

It's not the number of people living on this earth that are creating problems for it, it's the quality of people and how we run our civilization that's doing it. But seriously over-population is not really a problem. You could take every single person in the world and setelt them in the state of Texas and we wouldn't fill the whole state up.

that's a good idea SEND EVERYONE TO TEXAS! make it manditory to have a gun and a 1 kill per day law, the world's population will decrease in a matter of hours, after about half a day, we can all go back to our normal countries

/end retardation

OT: less idiots having kids, the less idiot kids it's a win win and how exactly is using a condom barbaric? it's not like we're killing the childeren the day their born, we're just stopping the semen from fertilizing the egg, OH NOES A WASTE OF SEMEN CALL TEH WORLD POLICE WE'RE KILLING CREATURES THAT ONLY KNOW HOW TO MOVE, THOUSANDS OF WHICH WILL DIE BEFORE THEY GET A CHANCE TO FERTILIZE ANYWAY... man we are FUCKING cruel to those tiny little life forms that are barely aware of their own existence, huh?

 

[Fulax]

Voluntarily having less children is not barbaric. This is barbaric:

I completely agree with what people are saying here. There needs to be a child cap. One per couple. And it needs to be strictly enforced, at least for 10 years or so. In Larry Niven's Ringworld, people were implanted with a small device that releases chemicals that make it impossible to reproduce. When a couple wants to have a SINGLE child, they could have the device removed. It works, and it's fair. If people weren't having enough children then regulations could permit more pregnancies.

We could have programs like this, make them voluntary at first. Then once people warm up to the idea, require it.

I'm actually stunned.

When people are wandering through the streets looking for food and our cities are ablaze, you might have different opinions about what is barbaric. If things get that down right ugly, my "suggestion" will seem tame compared to what others propose. But by then, it will be far to late. We must do what we have to survive, everything else is secondary as long there is a future.

That's why you eco-fascists are so dangerous. You can justify anything you do because you believe its for the good of the planet.

like I said earlier

THIS IS AN INTERNET FORUM AND THE DESCRIPTION I OUTLINED WAS THAT OF A B-GRADE SCIFI NOVEL. STOP TAKING THIS SHIT SO SERIOUSLY. HOW DO YOU KNOW I'M NOT A TROLL?

I realise it isn't your idea, you said so in your first post. However, your posts clearly show that you share that view. Even if you are a troll, and for your sake I hope you are, there are many others who do support it.

Realistically, there is little to no chance of this scenario happening. So you don't need to worry.

I see why people don't like this, but I don't see why it's a fascist idea. If it was going to be required, there would be a vote. And if the majority thought that it was needed then it would be required. Not until then. Just because I said it doesn't make it real. It's not like there is a clause that requires you to skin and eat your children. A more realistic solution would be to simply provide tax breaks to smaller families.

There are too many people in the world. You can't deny that. Our planet was never designed to sustain 7 billion of the same species.

I see you're American. In the US I agree, there is little chance of this happening. Unfortunately here in Europe the majority do not share the individualistic nature of most of your countrymen (but not you). Europeans would be far more likely to accept the premise that the majority's will should be law, that it is justifiable to sacrifice the freedom of individuals for the perceived good of society. That, combined with global warming propaganda, an apathetic population and power hungry politicians is why I can see ideas such as yours becoming more prevalent in the near future.

I have no idea how many people our planet can sustain, and neither do you. What I do know is that the last people I would trust to solve any problems that come our way are politicians.

 

[Shoqiyqa]

It's not the number of people living on this earth that are creating problems for it, it's the quality of people and how we run our civilization that's doing it. But seriously over-population is not really a problem. You could take every single person in the world and setelt them in the state of Texas and we wouldn't fill the whole state up.

Erm ...

An "argument" like that has already been made in one of those insane religious podcasts.

World population: 6,706,993,152

At one square metre per person, divide by PI and square-root: 46204m radius. You could stand the world's whole human population in a circle 92.4km wide ... therefore, according to the podcast, God is real and all-powerful and made the world and created Man in His image and all resources are infinite.

Insane, yes?

Assuming for the time being that you have a way to get them all there instantly, you have an immediate problem: air. Everyone's breathing, according to SCUBA manuals, 20 to 30 litres of air per minute. That's 167,674,828,800 litres of air you're going to need to blow into that 92.4km-wide and -deep area every minute, so it had better be a windy day or the children in the middle are going to asphyxiate.

Let's assume that everyone's somehow breathing. Next: heat. If it's cold, they're going to have to do the penguin shuffle to take turns at the chilly upwind edge. It it's hot, well, everyone's burning through a couple of thousand calories a day, aren't they? That's a lot of heat being generated in that area. Well, there goes 10% of your population with heatstroke, doesn't it?

Well, let's ignore oxygen, carbon dioxide and temperature. Next problem: water. Wtf are they all going to drink? They need 10 litres a day each just to drink. 67,069,931.5 metric tonnes of fresh water are going to have to be collected, delivered and distributed every day. Assuming you can manage that, you've also got to deal with 621,000 people pissing every second in that circle. That's got to go somewhere too.

Taken care of all that? Great! It's been a few hours by now, and that's a few time zones' populations that want to go to sleep. Ah. Problem? Well, I suppose we just need to increase the width of this circle by a small fraction to let one third of the population have 2 square metres each at a time, right? Okay, got that sorted, and it lets a bit of a breeze in. Now, what's for breakfast? Well, you'd better go and get something, then, hadn't you?

So ... assuming, like Morrowind characters, your people can all rest where they stand and never exhaust the air supply or need water, food or the toilet, you've got it sorted ... for a day or so, after which it is going to stink because you didn't provide any showers. Oh. Right. Showers. Get on it.

Got that sorted? Groovy. See that guy over there, 579th one in from the edge, just behind the woman in the red shirt? Yeah? He's got swine flu. Deal with it. Gee, calm down, man. It's only swine flu. If you're crapping your pants over that ... well, you should have provided toilets after all, but either way you're going to blow a gasket when I mention that someone way over there on the far side has had ebola-Zaire the whole time we've been here.

...

...

...

Like I said, insane. I suppose the faithful will swallow it, eh?

...

On top of all that, people need green space to "decompress" and distance from others and privacy and hobbies and so on and all the pollution's got to go somewhere and we're still not talking about whether any other species are "worth saving" i.e. have some sort of right to exist parallel to our own right to exist. It'd be a shit sort of world without birdsong, butterflies, forests, migratory moths, coral reefs, comb jellies, lizards, mantises, low-lying jungles, mangrove swamps, graceful sharks, scorpion fish, sea snakes, mimic octopuses, whales, dolphins, orcas, seals, manatees, elephants, bumblebees, platypuses and all those interesting and/or adorable species. It'd be like ... like Morrowind without the quests.

 

[Danman1]

I've been in favor of this forever. Why not just adopt. Why does an ugly baby have to drop out of your cooche when there are thousands upon thousands just switting in warehouses?

 

[quiet_samurai]

It's not the number of people living on this earth that are creating problems for it, it's the quality of people and how we run our civilization that's doing it. But seriously over-population is not really a problem. You could take every single person in the world and setelt them in the state of Texas and we wouldn't fill the whole state up.

that's a good idea SEND EVERYONE TO TEXAS! make it manditory to have a gun and a 1 kill per day law, the world's population will decrease in a matter of hours, after about half a day, we can all go back to our normal countries

/end retardation

OT: less idiots having kids, the less idiot kids it's a win win and how exactly is using a condom barbaric? it's not like we're killing the childeren the day their born, we're just stopping the semen from fertilizing the egg, OH NOES A WASTE OF SEMEN CALL TEH WORLD POLICE WE'RE KILLING CREATURES THAT ONLY KNOW HOW TO MOVE, THOUSANDS OF WHICH WILL DIE BEFORE THEY GET A CHANCE TO FERTILIZE ANYWAY... man we are FUCKING cruel to those tiny little life forms that are barely aware of their own existence, huh?

I didn't say to actually send everyone to Texas, I was just talking about how much space we as humans really take up.

 

[quiet_samurai]

It's not the number of people living on this earth that are creating problems for it, it's the quality of people and how we run our civilization that's doing it. But seriously over-population is not really a problem. You could take every single person in the world and setelt them in the state of Texas and we wouldn't fill the whole state up.

Erm ...

An "argument" like that has already been made in one of those insane religious podcasts.

World population: 6,706,993,152

At one square metre per person, divide by PI and square-root: 46204m radius. You could stand the world's whole human population in a circle 92.4km wide ... therefore, according to the podcast, God is real and all-powerful and made the world and created Man in His image and all resources are infinite.

Insane, yes?

Assuming for the time being that you have a way to get them all there instantly, you have an immediate problem: air. Everyone's breathing, according to SCUBA manuals, 20 to 30 litres of air per minute. That's 167,674,828,800 litres of air you're going to need to blow into that 92.4km-wide and -deep area every minute, so it had better be a windy day or the children in the middle are going to asphyxiate.

Let's assume that everyone's somehow breathing. Next: heat. If it's cold, they're going to have to do the penguin shuffle to take turns at the chilly upwind edge. It it's hot, well, everyone's burning through a couple of thousand calories a day, aren't they? That's a lot of heat being generated in that area. Well, there goes 10% of your population with heatstroke, doesn't it?

Well, let's ignore oxygen, carbon dioxide and temperature. Next problem: water. Wtf are they all going to drink? They need 10 litres a day each just to drink. 67,069,931.5 metric tonnes of fresh water are going to have to be collected, delivered and distributed every day. Assuming you can manage that, you've also got to deal with 621,000 people pissing every second in that circle. That's got to go somewhere too.

Taken care of all that? Great! It's been a few hours by now, and that's a few time zones' populations that want to go to sleep. Ah. Problem? Well, I suppose we just need to increase the width of this circle by a small fraction to let one third of the population have 2 square metres each at a time, right? Okay, got that sorted, and it lets a bit of a breeze in. Now, what's for breakfast? Well, you'd better go and get something, then, hadn't you?

So ... assuming, like Morrowind characters, your people can all rest where they stand and never exhaust the air supply or need water, food or the toilet, you've got it sorted ... for a day or so, after which it is going to stink because you didn't provide any showers. Oh. Right. Showers. Get on it.

Got that sorted? Groovy. See that guy over there, 579th one in from the edge, just behind the woman in the red shirt? Yeah? He's got swine flu. Deal with it. Gee, calm down, man. It's only swine flu. If you're crapping your pants over that ... well, you should have provided toilets after all, but either way you're going to blow a gasket when I mention that someone way over there on the far side has had ebola-Zaire the whole time we've been here.

...

...

...

Like I said, insane. I suppose the faithful will swallow it, eh?

...

On top of all that, people need green space to "decompress" and distance from others and privacy and hobbies and so on and all the pollution's got to go somewhere and we're still not talking about whether any other species are "worth saving" i.e. have some sort of right to exist parallel to our own right to exist. It'd be a shit sort of world without birdsong, butterflies, forests, migratory moths, coral reefs, comb jellies, lizards, mantises, low-lying jungles, mangrove swamps, graceful sharks, scorpion fish, sea snakes, mimic octopuses, whales, dolphins, orcas, seals, manatees, elephants, bumblebees, platypuses and all those interesting and/or adorable species. It'd be like ... like Morrowind without the quests.

I wasn't arguing that we should actually do it, I was just stating about how much room we actually take up. And what the hell does religion have to do with it?

 

[MrFluffy-X]

carbon footprints are a load of BS! Global warming is BS! there is nothing that we can do to stop it speed it up or slow it down its just a cycle that the earth goes thro dont fall for the BS! have as much kids as you want!

 

[space_oddity]

Don't make fewer children, just kill more.

This post is so good it wins one of three prizes:

Spoiler: A Nerd Themed Cake (reported to be delicious and moist)

Spoiler: A Jet Ski (guy who doesnt understand gravity not included)

Spoiler: Your Entire House Wallpapered This

Please choose now.

 

[Nemorov]

It's only really barbaric if you then have to murder every subsequent child. Or something. I don't know.

I do know that that won't go over well with some more religious people who don't believe in contraception.

"Sorry honey, no nookie for you. We already have one kid."

 

[TheNumber1Zero]

Don't make fewer children, just kill more.

This post is so good it wins one of three prizes:

Spoiler: A Nerd Themed Cake (reported to be delicious and moist)

Spoiler: A Jet Ski (guy who doesnt understand gravity not included)

Spoiler: Your Entire House Wallpapered This

Please choose now.

I choose this<spoiler=what should have been a choice>

give me their eternal loyalty

 

[Florion]

Ethically, saying "Have fewer children in order to lower your carbon footprint" is a bit sketchy. I mean, doesn't that logic extend into the "Kill more people to lower your carbon footprint" category? Kill yourself to lower your carbon footprint?

It just kind of sucks the joy out of being a responsible citizen. There are better ways, really.

 

[grimsprice]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20090803/sc_livescience/savetheplanethavefewerkids

I had just heard this on CNN recently. Personally, I think its barbaric and there are more efficient, if not less ugly, ways to get the same results; but I'm just one person. What are your thoughts?

How is it barbaric not to have children?

Am I missing the part where they have the kids but eat them before they grow, or something?

Anyway, I guess that means I'm savin' tha werld.

Yeah I don't see the barbaric nature in not having children either, I guess condoms are a step in the wrong direction and the pregnant teenagers in my state having children like crazy are ahead of the curve.

Seems we're both saving the world, we should create a league of some sort.

i'd join this league... do we get free jackets? superpowers?

 

[space_oddity]

Don't make fewer children, just kill more.

This post is so good it wins one of three prizes:

Spoiler: A Nerd Themed Cake (reported to be delicious and moist)

Spoiler: A Jet Ski (guy who doesnt understand gravity not included)

Spoiler: Your Entire House Wallpapered This

Please choose now.

I choose this<spoiler=what should have been a choice>

give me their eternal loyalty

 

[TheNumber1Zero]

Don't make fewer children, just kill more.

This post is so good it wins one of three prizes:

Spoiler: A Nerd Themed Cake (reported to be delicious and moist)

Spoiler: A Jet Ski (guy who doesnt understand gravity not included)

Spoiler: Your Entire House Wallpapered This

Please choose now.

I choose this<spoiler=what should have been a choice>

give me their eternal loyalty

<spoiler=shortened to contain epicness>

yes,yes it is

 

[grimsprice]

Ethically, saying "Have fewer children in order to lower your carbon footprint" is a bit sketchy. I mean, doesn't that logic extend into the "Kill more people to lower your carbon footprint" category? Kill yourself to lower your carbon footprint?

It just kind of sucks the joy out of being a responsible citizen. There are better ways, really.

that is the stupidest logic i have ever heard. so ethically saying... don't drive excessively polluting cars, its bad for the environment. would that extend to... kill people who drive polluting cars? of course not thats stupid. not having kids is not the same as killing kids. its like the same argument stupid people use against contraceptive.