Do you think there are too many of us in existence?
I was thinking about how human beings take more than they give back in some way, shape or form. Because of an exceeding addiction to excess (whatever it may be), the needless strain on the necessities have reached the breaking point. Nowadays, the natural balance of anything seems nearly non-existent. Is society just too big? Is the population out of control?
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
51 Answers
Forces tend towards a state of equilibrium. If our population becomes too large, then we will eventually experience some sort of backlash.
Poorer parts of the world would experience this first.
We’re about to take care of it by raising global temperatures, and drowning our coasts. New York City is on a coast. Yes! It is!
Absolutely. There are so many people, many have multiple personalities. Both of me think we should lower the population to give one of us room.
We need to get the emo/scene kids off our planet…
Go check out the Pyschiatry Museum if your ever in Hollywood, Ca. It’s got all sorts of info for the amateur eugenicist.
How would this problem be solved if I agreed with it? Ship a healthy amount of volunteers off to the moon? It is dangerous to start to think about who we would get rid of first.
Yes, speaking from a biology point of view. Humans have become a parasite on the planet, we are ruining beautiful natural systems and it will eventually come back to bite us in the ass. It’s unfortunate that those in power don’t seem to care that we’re basically digging ourselves a grave. If nothing else, we’ll exceed the planet’s carrying capacity and have a population crash. With increased populations of any animal, you get increased disease, stress, and fighting. My gut tells me we’ll get to a point where we’re wiped out due to disease or excessive war.
On that light note.. :P
@bumwithablackberry I’m not an amateur eugenicists, if that’s what you were implying or assuming. I’m not interested in having a Gattaca-esque society or Hitler’s idea of improving the human race. I’m just curious how you all feel about this. It feels like the end of an age is near and because humans are like a cancer on the earth, we’re the ones ushering it in in the most detrimental way possible. I feel like we’re gonna be the next dinosaurs. Too many of us live in our own universe and are disconected from the reality of the situation or make excuses not to make a collective effort to change it. I know I’m guilty of this.
@jamielynn2328 You don’t have to agree with it. Your entitled to feel nothing is wrong, but why can’t we think or talk about it? Is it not reasonable or responsible to acknowledge we’re taxing too much of everything and exascerbating the dire state of things? How else are we suppose to find solutions to a problem if we ignore the fact it even exists?
There is a saying, “What is to is must is.” It does appear that we are wearing down the earth, as Lucy Van Pelt once said. So, one day there will be a reckoning and if we are honest, we say to ourselves, not in our time, oh Lord.
@SuckaFreeCitizen unbeknownst to most humans, we are here for a very important purpose. The Earth Needs Plastic! When we have created enough of this non-natural substance, the Earth will rid itself of us the only way it knows how, it will purchase a Hartz Two-In-One Human collar at the Milky Way Galaxy retail and consignment store.
I wonder more about the answer to this problem…what would the solution be, to impose one child per couple laws and selective sex issues. Has simple as it might sound I think the population is as it should be or it wouldn’t be. I think the bigger issue is the greed humans have in using natural resouces and I am not so sure over population is the reason for this.
There may be too many of you, but there is just the right number of me.
Of course!! All these diseases like aids, swine flu, black death, plague, and others are because there are too many of us. Ever think it’s mother natures way of saying this?
Yeah Blame it on the Motha! What about the pandemics when there was less than 20% of our current population, It had nothing yo do with Mother N. We were just nasty and dirty, sleeping with fleas instead of cleaning ourselves, our clothes and homes and taking a dump near the drinking water.
@evelyns_pet_zebra Ha ha! There’s a thought.
@mponochie I’m with you as far as wondering what the solution is. I feel stumped, because I know one person or a small minority can’t fix the problem. And yes, humans are too greedy, although I’m not totally convinced the overgrown population doesn’t have a part in this. I like Bill Hicks’ idea of making the earth a better ride, but I have my doubts our species will survive long enough. Even if we did advance in space exploration, I have an inkling we might shit on the rest of the universe the way we’ve shitted on the planet.
@XOIIO I’m with @galileogirl where the earth is not responsible for all of these diseases. Some of these diseases are engineered by man to eradicate certain groups of our species. The ratio of certain groups of people who die from or contract these disease compared to others is highly suspect. But I agree with you that earth is definitely reacting to our abuse of it.
Since we have been phasing out survival of the fittest. YES.
Eventually equilibrium will occur. Remember, even if one day man kind dies off.
The earth will continue to spin. It will re-grow life. And, life will go on.
So the answer is actually NO. We are just a process (no matter what it is) in a bigger production of how life works.
Humans have this self-righteous belief that they control more than they do, or that they can control things beyond their ability. We cannot even get weather forecasting right beyond a few days, and that is why I take much of what the Global Warming crowd says with a healthy dose of skepticism. The climate is changing, I agree, but until there is undeniable proof of its cause being humanity’s energy processes I am not convinced. Anecdotal evidence is nothing more than circumstantial evidence. It proves nothing. Money all too often figures into what is considered fact, even in science, which is no more above politics and money than the Kennedys’ were/are.
Read up on corn based ethanol, and discover it is a boondoggle of infinite proportions. It is about money, plain and simple. Solar and wind are much more efficient and ten times cleaner, yet, they don’t get a third of the money that corn based ethanol gets in govt subsidies.
Sorry to go off-topic, and I agree with @ChazMaz Eventually equilibrium will occur. Remember, even if one day man kind dies off.
The earth will continue to spin. It will re-grow life. And, life will go on.
So the answer is actually NO. We are just a process (no matter what it is) in a bigger production of how life works.
“Wow, I can’t believe so many of you hate humans that much.”
Who said that?
defiantly everyone except the awesome people I select should be exterminated
I worry that the earth just can’t sustain the population growth at the current rate… so at this point TODAY, probably no, but if we keep reproducing at the rate we are today… then yes.
@ChazMaz I know, you’re right. That thought is always there in the back of my mind. I guess I keep it there hoping that it doesn’t have to be that way, eventhough that’s just the natural order of things.
@Darbio16 Just because I’m critical of my species doesn’t mean I hate humans. I’m actually dismayed by the idea that we may cause our own extinction and that everything else will just keep going on without us. I guess its also hard for me to accept that it doesn’t matter if it happens. Death is an inevitable part of life.
Yes, of course! But who will we get rid of?
@Darbio16 – thank you for that link. I first came across an early site, more than15 years ago, before Windows 95 was in use and internet connection was dial up, slow and unreliable. Of course I lost the link and have been looking for it ever since, handicapped by an inability to remember the name of the organization.
Of course VHEMT is serious. Theirs is the only ethical way to manage human overpopulation.
YES! We are right now near to 7.000.000.000 Individuums… to much for that planet… but I do not know how we could reduce that number…
How many is too many, and when did we pass that number? How many is just peachy?
I am not so sure we are too many, as I am sure we make a mess of things. We always have been. Now that production and consumption is on a massive scale the mess we make corresponds to that and balances in nature are shifted. Now, as time pass and society develops we will change the patter of production and consumption. What we need is not population control, but to cleaning up and organize ourselves to meet the problems. We would still have a problem if we decreased our population.
It would be worrying if we would increase in numbers as we have been so far. In the first part of the 1800’s we were 1 Billion people, and now we are 6.7. I read that 20 % of all people who has ever lived, is alive today.
That’s massive.
But, I’ve also read that the population increase is slowing down and that we probably won’t go passed 10 billion. That’s an assumption obviously, but in any case it seems as if it’s slowing down.
We are not going to reduce the numbers of people on the planet, and we will always need more energy.
I think that what we have to focus on is clean energy production, renewing and preserving our natural resources and the balances in nature.
Individiuums?
@suckafreecitizen and @galileogirl I’m not saying that mother nature is responsible for all diseases, some are. Do you think there would be as many diseases, different variations of diseases and they would spread as fast if there were less of us?
@XOIIO Of the natural kind? Maybe. That’s depending on how we would continue to impact the earth if there were smaller numbers of us, but I’m leaning more towards no. Of the engineered kind? There probably wouldn’t be less. I think there’s always going to be that one group that others would rather have weakened or non-existent.
There are too many undereducated people. Good education will solve overpopulation and end poverty.
@mattbrowne I hear that A lot and honestly agree, but Logistically speaking, isn’t that highly improbable? Not due to lack of resources, but lack of willingness from those can do this?
“Good education” is subjective, especially when telling who can and cant have children.
Our over population is like the snowball effect. No stopping it now and you cant tell people to not have children. Which currently in this world would not be a bad thing.
Sort of like telling the snow to get out of the way of the snowball.
So, do we “educate” our people, that for the betterment of the party is is best to not have children or to limit it? Children are our future and our legacy.
Sounds like Socialism or Communism to me.
@oratio HIV, AIDS, Sickle Cell Anemia, Lupus, H1N1 Flu Virus, etc. Of course, none of this is proven. It’s just a speculation of mine and others who share this opinion. I find it highly suspect that these diseases are more predominant in groups that might be considered less desirable (such as homosexuals, Blacks, Hispanics, and the impoverished) by certain members of society. Yes, I’m that cynical.
@SuckaFreeCitizen
I disagree. I don’t find it curious that it’s common in poor countries and neighborhoods. In my opinion it’s rather simple. Poor people tend to be less educated and less informed. I also think that people who has little hope for the future are more reckless than others.
In sub-Saharan Africa there are many who treat diseases like demons or curses. Many rapes of virgins are done to cleanse yourself of the curse.
If you don’t have clean drinking water you will get sick. Few people in impoverished nations can boast about clean water.
There are many reasons for why diseases flourish in poor parts of the world. You don’t have to engineer viruses and planted them there. The situation they live in and the lack of education and information makes it ideal for diseases to spread.
Look at the situations many nation live in and look at the culture, before making such an assumption.
@Resonantscythe – Take a look at India. Every year a few million more people rise to the middle class. Good access to education. Good jobs. Good or reasonable incomes. Usually living in larger towns and cities. Average around 1.6 – 1.8 children per family. Now look at the countryside. Quite the opposite. Low incomes and poverty. Access to basic education. Average 3 – 3.5 children per family.
Now look at the countries in central Africa. Almost no education or very poor education especially for girls. Average 5–8 children per family. See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_territories_by_fertility_rate
Education will slow overpopulation.
@mattbrowne: It isn’t even education in general—it’s when girls realize that they have more options in life and more to aspire to than just being a mother and homemaker, and that wise family planning means they can both have a family and a career.
This is not to say that being a mother and a homemaker is not something one should aspire to—but if it’s the only thing you can imagine to aspire to, it’s what you wind up doing. Meanwhile, in cultures where some women aspire to being mothers and homemakers, while others aspire to being biochemists and journalists and firefighters, the birth rate is going to go down.
@mattbrowne – as is happening in Costa Rica and other countries in Latin America. Some of the decline is thought to be influenced by indigenous soap operas based on the North American model.
@cwilbur – Yes, it’s about realizing there are more options in life. The better the education, the better the awareness and the understanding of the options.
@bea2345 – Well, if soap opera slow down overpopulation, great.
@mattbrowne Heh, maybe i shouldn’t lose faith in humanity just yet
I grew up feeling that people are born self-centered and egotistical, and that we learn to be good to each other as opposed to it being a quality one just possesses
@mattbrowne – the theory goes somewhat like this: viewers see these beautiful, well dressed women on the screen and identify with them because their problems are similar – love and marriage, boy friends, that sort of thing. At the same time, they observe the absence of crowds of children. The heroine seldom has more than two offspring, three is downright rare.
This video talks about over-population and it says every person on earth, that’s all 6 billion + of us, could all fit comfortably in Australia. Each person would have a quarter acre plot of land. Plus, there would be room left over in Australia.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUnv4m0LS6c
Answer this question 
Composing members:
0
