Off Topic

The foundation of our society is unsustainable

  • Last Updated:
  • Sep 18th, 2019 3:13 pm
Deal Addict
Dec 27, 2013
2477 posts
719 upvotes
Woodbridge
TomLafinsky wrote:
Sep 11th, 2019 8:39 pm
Nope, the changes in our climate will lead to major changes that aren't "human friendly", if I may say so. To give you an idea, at one point in the future, countries will go at war over food. That should speak for itself...

The way I see it, there could be humans on this planet for the next 1,000+ years, but there will be very few of us compared to now and conditions could be very different. A good number for the planet was 3-4 billion people. But even then, all you would be doing is buying time. Our out-of-control procreation is simply accelerating events in a major way.

Races of beings come to end because of Evolution. There is just so far the current race of being is capable of evolving. And TBH with you, the current race is as primitive as hell. Do you think that wars are the expression of an advanced society??? Of course they are a necessity for primitive minds. This whole Universe is about Evolution.
This is some very creative thinking. Do you have anything substantive to support these predictions?
Deal Addict
User avatar
Oct 20, 2007
4172 posts
375 upvotes
Mississauga
JoeBlack23 wrote:
Sep 12th, 2019 12:47 am
Western society birthrate is already at the point where without immigration most of their populations would be declining. The same is already starting to happen in China and India as their citizens continue to move from rural to urban life. If the trend continues the overall human population will actually start to decline.
I'll never understand the obsession that some people have with wanting to keep increasing a nation's population. A decline in population especially in 3rd world countries that can't ever seem to get their crap straight would be a great thing, but of course most of them are too stupid to do the right thing and then they have to flood western nations because we have to be their never ending release valve.
Not all Toronto sports teams are cursed!! Toronto Raptors 2019 NBA Champs! :D
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Aug 16, 2010
5529 posts
1695 upvotes
Aurora
A combination of science and technology and social change will save us. To think we're at the end of our evolution is ridiculous.
Deal Addict
Dec 27, 2013
2477 posts
719 upvotes
Woodbridge
TomLafinsky wrote:
Sep 12th, 2019 9:54 am
If I were to tell you that one day you will die would you call that a prediction? Time is only a container allowing events to unfold.

Btw, there is no such thing as death, all there is is the death of the physical body.
Could you please answer my question?
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Aug 16, 2010
5529 posts
1695 upvotes
Aurora
TomLafinsky wrote:
Sep 12th, 2019 11:26 am
a) There is nothing to save. Usually those who think this way can only see the here and now.
Of course there is. You wrote there was an imbalance. Saving = correcting.
TomLafinsky wrote:
Sep 12th, 2019 11:26 am
b) There is always a limit to how far a specific race can evolve.
And we're not even close to that limit. Believing that we're there is cynicism to the extreme.
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Aug 16, 2010
5529 posts
1695 upvotes
Aurora
Face With Tears Of Joy This thread feels like the late stages of a drug induced party when everyone is chilling out and having a deep existential discussion. Everyone thinks the group is having a coherent conversation, being in perfect harmony with each other. But in reality, they've all retreated in themselves and are having their own incomprehensible conversations.

There's no sensation to compare with this. Suspended animation in a state of bliss! Face With Tears Of Joy

I'm just here for the ride.
Member
Aug 23, 2019
440 posts
234 upvotes
zod wrote:
Sep 12th, 2019 1:53 am
Someone posted projection reports which basically say the same thing. Population increase of the planet is currently 2% and estimated to be close to .2% by 2100. Problem being when you have 7 billion people 2% to .2% increases compounding is still adding a craptonne more people over the decades. Resulting in a population of 9 billion by the year 2100.

I'm not even sure the Earth, as it currently stands can support the current population, let alone 9 billion by 2100. My gut tells me, we keep going until we can't. Once the humanity gets past the point of maxing out the Earth's resources (or severely damaging the environment), then the population is going to end up decreasing one way or the other. Probably not in pleasant ways. Maybe it'll decrease to the point, the Earth starts to repair itself. It survived the meteor that took out the DInosaurs. I'm sure it would bounce back :)

but yah... I find it sad that I honestly think I might be old enough that I'm gone before it gets really really bad.

Also Thanos issue was it wasn't a solution. All he did was remove half the population then destroyed the stones. All the universe would do is recover and grow, and you'd have the same problem a few hundred years later. He could of just snapped his fingers, and make pollution free power, star trek synthesizers, and whatever else the universe needed.... he had issues.
that number seems off. Populations double every 50 years or so, and we are already at 7.5 billion if im not mistaken.. 2100 should be over 10 billion easy.
Deal Addict
Nov 20, 2009
1054 posts
662 upvotes
39.0392° N, 125.7625…
sandikosh wrote:
Sep 12th, 2019 3:59 am
Humans will venture out and inhabit other planets.
This will never, ever happen. No one will ever go to Mars, that is just a pipe dream by NASA and SpaceX to keep interest and funding alive. Sending a probe to Mars is orders of magnitude cheaper than a human trip. The cosmic radiation over the many months would render the travelers too sick and weak to even stand on Mars. And there is no point in sending people, just as the Moon landings were just a propaganda stunt to impress the world and the Soviets.
As for going to planets around other stars, fuggedaboudit. It would take many thousands of years to get there. Traveling a fraction the speed of light is also not survivable. Space is full of dust and gas molecules and the ship would be bombarded like in a particle accelerator, and all life would be snuffed out.
Deal Addict
Nov 20, 2009
1054 posts
662 upvotes
39.0392° N, 125.7625…
Our over-populated world has reached the point where we are exhausting the resources faster than they are replenished. Oceans are being vacuumed of anything that can be eaten, by nations that have no regard for sustainability. Instead of giving baby bonuses, governments should reward those who have fewer kids. Unfortunately, short-sighted governments are only concerned with getting reelected. Our economic model is pyramid based, needing an ever growing population to pay for the reckless spending of the generations before. Pyramid schemes are doomed to collapse.

Back when we had horses, local populations fed themselves from local farmers. Exotic fruits and vegetables were a relative rarity (getting an orange at Christmas was a real treat not that long ago). If the supply line from major producers in the USA and other countries were cut, 90% of the population (especially in cities) would starve. We've paved over and built on so much prime farm land that we can no longer feed ourselves.

Canada is not the life boat for the world and we should drastically cut the number of immigrants and refugees we accept. Roads and highways are horribly congested in all cities and a housing crisis is upon us, supply can't keep up with demand, therefore housing costs are soaring.

As for accepting refugees on a humanitarian basis, I have a radical idea: allow them to come on the condition that they be sterilized. They can bring their existing children (sterilize them too) and they can all live out their lives, safe from whatever dangers they left, but not add to the burgeoning population problem. If they want children, adoption would be the only path. This idea is not really cruel since the potential refugees do not have to accept this condition and can stay where they are.
Deal Guru
Feb 24, 2018
10605 posts
10674 upvotes
TomLafinsky wrote:
Sep 12th, 2019 11:26 am
a) There is nothing to save. Usually those who think this way can only see the here and now.

b) There is always a limit to how far a specific race can evolve.
Tom bud, your two threads scream 'I need a beer with good friends'.

Get out there into the world, socialize, romanticize, meet people, build businesses... and if need be, seek psychiatric help.

God bless.
Deal Fanatic
Nov 17, 2004
6683 posts
1020 upvotes
Toronto
When you break problems down to it's fundamental parts, you will see that everything mostly revolves around energy.

Food production is just about energy, to grow food you just need energy, farmland is not necessary. The netherlands is the bread basket of europe, and it is not because they have alot of farmland, it is because they are world leaders in hydroponics.

Isreal is the world leader in water desalination, using energy to clean water.

In modern times nobody goes to war over water or over food, because it is easier just to build a nuclear powerplant to provide energy to grow food and desalinate water.

Canada is the 2nd largest country in the world with a population of about 33 million people. I do not know what the optimal population is for a country as large as ours but certainly it is well north of 33 million. More immigration would benefit this country greatly.

Before you get all 3rd reich and start to pick and chose who to sterilize, you should consider less dramatic and more fruitful actions.
I workout to get big so I can pickup bricks and ****.
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Aug 16, 2010
5529 posts
1695 upvotes
Aurora
RSole wrote:
Sep 12th, 2019 7:50 pm
This will never, ever happen. No one will ever go to Mars, that is just a pipe dream by NASA and SpaceX to keep interest and funding alive. Sending a probe to Mars is orders of magnitude cheaper than a human trip. The cosmic radiation over the many months would render the travelers too sick and weak to even stand on Mars. And there is no point in sending people, just as the Moon landings were just a propaganda stunt to impress the world and the Soviets.
As for going to planets around other stars, fuggedaboudit. It would take many thousands of years to get there. Traveling a fraction the speed of light is also not survivable. Space is full of dust and gas molecules and the ship would be bombarded like in a particle accelerator, and all life would be snuffed out.
W.T.F?? At least you didn't outright deny the moon landings. A manned Mars mission WILL happen. We WILL learn. We WILL progress. The cynics better not venture too far from home lest they fall off the edge of the world.
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Mar 12, 2005
8731 posts
1265 upvotes
Victoria
Doebird wrote:
Sep 12th, 2019 6:45 pm
that number seems off. Populations double every 50 years or so, and we are already at 7.5 billion if im not mistaken.. 2100 should be over 10 billion easy.
I think it's because people are predicting that population growth is going to completely taper off. They could end up being wrong. If the century closes out at a an almost non-existent growth rate then yah.. maybe 9 billion. If it keeps chugging at 2% the whole time.. way way more than 9 billion.

This one has similar reasoning but estimates 10.9 billion people.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2 ... e-century/

either way its still alot of people, and we're already messing up the plan with 7+ billion.
Deal Addict
Nov 20, 2009
1054 posts
662 upvotes
39.0392° N, 125.7625…
DiceMan wrote:
Sep 12th, 2019 9:11 pm
W.T.F?? At least you didn't outright deny the moon landings. A manned Mars mission WILL happen. We WILL learn. We WILL progress. The cynics better not venture too far from home lest they fall off the edge of the world.
Only naive and uninformed people believe a manned Mars trip will happen. Scott Kelly spent a year on the ISS to see how long exposure to zero gravity affects the body. He could not even stand when he came back, and he lost a lot of bone mass. He spent that year inside the protective magnetosphere of Earth, shielded from most of the radiation out there. A Mars return trip would take several years of travel exposed to deadly radiation and no gravity. Assuming someone could survive the trip, why would we spend billions of dollars to send someone there? Mars is completely uninhabitable, even the probes we've sent there deteriorate from the harsh radiation. What would a potential Mars visitor do there? Just look around for a bit and crawl back to the ship and hope to make it back alive. To establish a habitable base there would take the resources of many nations, nations that are increasingly hard pressed to support their own citizens. Any human base would cost trillions to build. The Moon is almost infinitely closer yet we have not found the resources or will to go back there. Again, why send men to the moon? Probes can do the job much cheaper and there's not much left to learn. A moon base could happen, but Mars... no way. Dream on.

Top