Freethought & Rationalism Archive

alek0 · 02-15-2002, 06:15 PM

The following was posted by LDS member (female, with 5 kids and no intention to stop) at another board:

"I don't believe in overpopulation. I can't remeber the names, but a friend of mine had some books and did a study on "overpopulation" and how it's not as they say it is. The US alone produces enough food to feed the entire world. A lot of it is thrown out or wasted though. There is plenty of room. Ever been to Wyoming or Nevada, lol? Also, Europe has a VERY low population rate and China has the 1 child law policy. That combined with the many people who choose to not have children or limit their families, it all works out.
I don't think it's "moot" because we are going to go to a better place. My children and grandchildren will still be here. But, we have been commanded to multiply. "

She also said later:
"animals are important, but man (woman) was given dominion over them and the earth. True, it's not wise to waste resources or make animals extinct. "

I don't think that there is anything which gets on my nerves more than "Go forth and multiply" and "man was given dominion over earth". What do you think? Is there anyway to get these sort of people to understand that there is a problem with such beleifs? What kind of attitude is that "China has one child policy, so I can have as many as I want". For the record, same person opposes abortions. But anyway one wouldn't expect from fanatically religious persons to be logical and selfconsistent...

Rhea · 02-16-2002, 05:14 PM

I do not believe there is any way to get them to actually do the math. I've tried, but never really made any headway at all. But I keep trying, just for the lurkers.

- Asking them to tell you, if there's all this room, to please outline what policy is going to forcefully take it from some and give it to others. E.g. I have 60 acres. And it's NOT for sale. So take that off your list. Take off GW Bush's 1500 acres, you can bet _he's_ not sharing. Take away all the privately held land, held by people who do NOT think like she does. And what's left? Not a whole lot. So. How does she propose to get her hands on it? Seriously! Please outline your plan.

- Ask her to say what she knows about WATER for all of that land. Oh? She hasn't checked? Well she might be interested in all of the water shortages and downright _crises_ about water in those areas. Land is USELESS without water. ASk her where she thinks the water is going to come from. Cause they're sure having some fights about it already.

- Ask her, if someone has calculated that "America can feed the world" (laugh, chuckle, snort) if she's really happy with the idea of adopting a diet like the average Rwandan. Does she really think that calculation is based on an _American_ diet? Does she really think that means unseasonal fruit and grade A meat for everyone? Reality check. Ask her if she's ready to see her children eating two bowls of rice a day. Maybe a bowl of seaweed to get the vitamins, eh?

- Ask her, so. She supports china's policy? She wants it to go on? That's what she's saying. It's a selfish & arrogant double standard. I can have more because you're forced to not. Nyah, nyah.

- And speaking of the China policy. What ON EARTH do you think prompted them to impose it? Whim? Someone thought it would be FUN? Reducing population is a governments worst economic nightmare. Yet something made them see they had no better solution. Maybe they see something you have not glimpsed. Maybe they see something that is exactly what you plan to provide for your kids. Think about that. Really THINK.

- Ask her, with all of this available land that you intend to cover with people, where do you suppose the landfills will be put? Every additional person makes additional waste. It will get pretty disgusting if you forget to account for that. As you appear to have forgotten.

My bottom line - all I ask is that you look around you. Take what you have and divide it by how many children you have. That is all you can reasonably EXPECT to offer them. NOt my land or someone else's, only what's yours. And now, think about the things that you love. Looking at a wooded hillside. An open landscape. How can you blithely say you don't care if your kids ever get a chance to see that. Don't you _owe_ them at least as much as you had in terms of beauty and resources? All I ask is that people THINK about what they are going to offer their kids. Not have kids and then wonder what they can give and how they will take it from someone who planned better. Be fair to your kids, that's all I ask. That thought process should keep us away from being China!

This topic frustrates me no end. How people cannot see the effect of a growing population is completely beyond me.

echidna · 02-17-2002, 12:16 PM

Why is it that under trade barriers, North American and European farmers are subsidised to RESTRICT their outputs. Who remembers the 1980�s scenes of thousands of tons of overproduced grain being dumped in the sea ? The only reason these scenes are not being repeated now, is that the agricultural sectors are now more organised to simply not produce beyond their quotas. It�s moral hypocrisy.

Just as does the rest of the world, Australia as huge capacity for further meat and grain production, but it�s simply market dependent. Europe, Japan and North America restrict their markets and the rest of the world can�t afford it.

Regardless of thought on population, world food prices are largely a consequence of protecting the farming lobby and farmer�s lifestyles.

Polly Flinders · 02-17-2002, 12:47 PM

Rhea, most of the problems that are being blamed on overpopulation are actually a result of underdevelopment. Our stone age ancestors had no problems with overpopulation. Their numbers were not more than a few thousand, but that didn't improve their standard of living. Every day was a struggle for them. Their infant mortality rate would have made modern Africa look like paradise by comparison. Eventually, after millenia of barely surviving, they discovered agriculture, then civilization. The success of these ways of life caused population increase. Be thankful, Rhea, don't complain because you and billions of others have a chance to survive in today's world.

echidna · 02-17-2002, 01:17 PM

The paradox we are faced with is that here in the west is that now we are spending more and more on diet foods. One of our biggest health risks is over-eating, we are working harder and paying more to eat less !!! Who would have guessed this 2000 years ago when life-expectancy was 25 � 30 years ?

Maybe there are other reasons, but I do not believe food shortage to be one of them. Any food shortage we have is a self-imposed one.

alek0 · 02-17-2002, 06:23 PM

Polly Flinders,
have you read "Ishmael" by Daniel Quin?

Others who think that there is no problem to feed the current population and that there is capacity for improved food production, please tell me do you think it is justified to make a number of species extinct in order to feed more humans?

BethHartford · 02-17-2002, 08:25 PM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by alek0:
[QB]The following was posted by LDS member (female, with 5 kids and no intention to stop) at another board:"I don't believe in overpopulation. I can't remeber the names, but a friend of mine had some books and did a study on "overpopulation" and how it's not as they say it is. The US alone produces enough food to feed the entire world. A lot of it is thrown out or wasted though. There is plenty of room. Ever been to Wyoming or Nevada, lol? Also, Europe has a VERY low population rate and China has the 1 child law policy. That combined with the many people who choose to not have children or limit their families, it all works out. don't think it's "moot" because we are going to go to a better place. My children and grandchildren will still be here. But, we have been commanded to multiply. " >>>>

Yeah and it is those with one or no kids who support this womans religious beliefs. If her church wants to foot the bill for her kids fine. But the hard fact is she cant even remember where she read what she read. And she is hard headed and not even open to changing her mind.

Pomp · 02-18-2002, 12:05 AM

I'd just like to point out that, while the discussion here seems to center around food production, the ability to produce enough food to feed the human population is not the only, or even the primary concern with overpopulation. From the Zero Population growth <a href="http://www.zpg.org" target="_blank">website</a>:

Quote:

Continued population growth is foremost among the factors aggravating deforestation, wildlife extinction, climate change and other critical environmental and social problems. It also erodes democratic government, multiplies urban problems, consumes agricultural land, increases volumes of waste, heightens competition for scarce resources and threatens the aspirations of the poor for a better life.

I'm not saying that we necessarily have to accept that each and every one of these concerns reflects a real danger, but those of us who are wary of overpopulation are not just wringing our hands and wondering how we will ever feed everyone.

Edited because, after all this time, I am still unable to get UBB code right on the first try.

[ February 18, 2002: Message edited by: Pompous Bastard ]</p>

Polly Flinders · 02-18-2002, 08:48 AM

Alek0, I have not read the book that you mention and would be interested to know more about it. Regarding your other question, do you think it is justified for lions to eat antelopes? Nature isn't the perfect world that we would like to see, and the imperatives of survival sometimes lead to tragedy. We should try to minimize the problems of endangered species to the best of our ability, because we have more intelligence than lions have, but I don't think we have an obligation to sacrifice human life in the process of doing so.

Jane Bovary · 02-18-2002, 04:03 PM

The success of these ways of life caused population increase. Be thankful, Rhea, don't complain because you and billions of others have a chance to survive in today's world.
Polly Flinders
Is that what it's all about? Keep populating so there'll be more of us with a "chance" of survival?

We'll be sacrificing not only lives but quality of life if we don't keep a check on our population. As you suggested yourself, the difference between us and "the lion eating the antelope" is that we are in a position to exert some control over our human destiny...we are supposed to have awareness, forsight...the capacity to reason out the effects of our actions.

Curbing population is not "sacrificing lives"...you might as well say the pill or the diaphragm sacrifices lives.

02-15-2002, 06:15 PM	#1
alek0 Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 640	Overpopulation and environmental problems The following was posted by LDS member (female, with 5 kids and no intention to stop) at another board: "I don't believe in overpopulation. I can't remeber the names, but a friend of mine had some books and did a study on "overpopulation" and how it's not as they say it is. The US alone produces enough food to feed the entire world. A lot of it is thrown out or wasted though. There is plenty of room. Ever been to Wyoming or Nevada, lol? Also, Europe has a VERY low population rate and China has the 1 child law policy. That combined with the many people who choose to not have children or limit their families, it all works out. I don't think it's "moot" because we are going to go to a better place. My children and grandchildren will still be here. But, we have been commanded to multiply. " She also said later: "animals are important, but man (woman) was given dominion over them and the earth. True, it's not wise to waste resources or make animals extinct. " I don't think that there is anything which gets on my nerves more than "Go forth and multiply" and "man was given dominion over earth". What do you think? Is there anyway to get these sort of people to understand that there is a problem with such beleifs? What kind of attitude is that "China has one child policy, so I can have as many as I want". For the record, same person opposes abortions. But anyway one wouldn't expect from fanatically religious persons to be logical and selfconsistent...

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-16-2002, 05:14 PM	#2
Rhea Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Recluse Posts: 9,040	I do not believe there is any way to get them to actually do the math. I've tried, but never really made any headway at all. But I keep trying, just for the lurkers. - Asking them to tell you, if there's all this room, to please outline what policy is going to forcefully take it from some and give it to others. E.g. I have 60 acres. And it's NOT for sale. So take that off your list. Take off GW Bush's 1500 acres, you can bet _he's_ not sharing. Take away all the privately held land, held by people who do NOT think like she does. And what's left? Not a whole lot. So. How does she propose to get her hands on it? Seriously! Please outline your plan. - Ask her to say what she knows about WATER for all of that land. Oh? She hasn't checked? Well she might be interested in all of the water shortages and downright _crises_ about water in those areas. Land is USELESS without water. ASk her where she thinks the water is going to come from. Cause they're sure having some fights about it already. - Ask her, if someone has calculated that "America can feed the world" (laugh, chuckle, snort) if she's really happy with the idea of adopting a diet like the average Rwandan. Does she really think that calculation is based on an _American_ diet? Does she really think that means unseasonal fruit and grade A meat for everyone? Reality check. Ask her if she's ready to see her children eating two bowls of rice a day. Maybe a bowl of seaweed to get the vitamins, eh? - Ask her, so. She supports china's policy? She wants it to go on? That's what she's saying. It's a selfish & arrogant double standard. I can have more because you're forced to not. Nyah, nyah. - And speaking of the China policy. What ON EARTH do you think prompted them to impose it? Whim? Someone thought it would be FUN? Reducing population is a governments worst economic nightmare. Yet something made them see they had no better solution. Maybe they see something you have not glimpsed. Maybe they see something that is exactly what you plan to provide for your kids. Think about that. Really THINK. - Ask her, with all of this available land that you intend to cover with people, where do you suppose the landfills will be put? Every additional person makes additional waste. It will get pretty disgusting if you forget to account for that. As you appear to have forgotten. My bottom line - all I ask is that you look around you. Take what you have and divide it by how many children you have. That is all you can reasonably EXPECT to offer them. NOt my land or someone else's, only what's yours. And now, think about the things that you love. Looking at a wooded hillside. An open landscape. How can you blithely say you don't care if your kids ever get a chance to see that. Don't you _owe_ them at least as much as you had in terms of beauty and resources? All I ask is that people THINK about what they are going to offer their kids. Not have kids and then wonder what they can give and how they will take it from someone who planned better. Be fair to your kids, that's all I ask. That thought process should keep us away from being China! This topic frustrates me no end. How people cannot see the effect of a growing population is completely beyond me.

02-17-2002, 12:16 PM	#3
echidna Veteran Member Join Date: May 2001 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 2,832	Why is it that under trade barriers, North American and European farmers are subsidised to RESTRICT their outputs. Who remembers the 1980�s scenes of thousands of tons of overproduced grain being dumped in the sea ? The only reason these scenes are not being repeated now, is that the agricultural sectors are now more organised to simply not produce beyond their quotas. It�s moral hypocrisy. Just as does the rest of the world, Australia as huge capacity for further meat and grain production, but it�s simply market dependent. Europe, Japan and North America restrict their markets and the rest of the world can�t afford it. Regardless of thought on population, world food prices are largely a consequence of protecting the farming lobby and farmer�s lifestyles.

02-17-2002, 12:47 PM	#4
Polly Flinders Junior Member Join Date: May 2001 Location: Canada Posts: 75	Rhea, most of the problems that are being blamed on overpopulation are actually a result of underdevelopment. Our stone age ancestors had no problems with overpopulation. Their numbers were not more than a few thousand, but that didn't improve their standard of living. Every day was a struggle for them. Their infant mortality rate would have made modern Africa look like paradise by comparison. Eventually, after millenia of barely surviving, they discovered agriculture, then civilization. The success of these ways of life caused population increase. Be thankful, Rhea, don't complain because you and billions of others have a chance to survive in today's world.

02-17-2002, 01:17 PM	#5
echidna Veteran Member Join Date: May 2001 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 2,832	The paradox we are faced with is that here in the west is that now we are spending more and more on diet foods. One of our biggest health risks is over-eating, we are working harder and paying more to eat less !!! Who would have guessed this 2000 years ago when life-expectancy was 25 � 30 years ? Maybe there are other reasons, but I do not believe food shortage to be one of them. Any food shortage we have is a self-imposed one.

02-17-2002, 06:23 PM	#6
alek0 Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 640	Polly Flinders, have you read "Ishmael" by Daniel Quin? Others who think that there is no problem to feed the current population and that there is capacity for improved food production, please tell me do you think it is justified to make a number of species extinct in order to feed more humans?

02-17-2002, 08:25 PM	#7
BethHartford New Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Sierras of California Posts: 1	[QUOTE]Originally posted by alek0: [QB]The following was posted by LDS member (female, with 5 kids and no intention to stop) at another board:"I don't believe in overpopulation. I can't remeber the names, but a friend of mine had some books and did a study on "overpopulation" and how it's not as they say it is. The US alone produces enough food to feed the entire world. A lot of it is thrown out or wasted though. There is plenty of room. Ever been to Wyoming or Nevada, lol? Also, Europe has a VERY low population rate and China has the 1 child law policy. That combined with the many people who choose to not have children or limit their families, it all works out. don't think it's "moot" because we are going to go to a better place. My children and grandchildren will still be here. But, we have been commanded to multiply. " >>>> Yeah and it is those with one or no kids who support this womans religious beliefs. If her church wants to foot the bill for her kids fine. But the hard fact is she cant even remember where she read what she read. And she is hard headed and not even open to changing her mind.

02-18-2002, 08:48 AM	#9
Polly Flinders Junior Member Join Date: May 2001 Location: Canada Posts: 75	Alek0, I have not read the book that you mention and would be interested to know more about it. Regarding your other question, do you think it is justified for lions to eat antelopes? Nature isn't the perfect world that we would like to see, and the imperatives of survival sometimes lead to tragedy. We should try to minimize the problems of endangered species to the best of our ability, because we have more intelligence than lions have, but I don't think we have an obligation to sacrifice human life in the process of doing so.

02-18-2002, 04:03 PM	#10
Jane Bovary Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: The Fatal Shore Posts: 900	The success of these ways of life caused population increase. Be thankful, Rhea, don't complain because you and billions of others have a chance to survive in today's world. Polly Flinders Is that what it's all about? Keep populating so there'll be more of us with a "chance" of survival? We'll be sacrificing not only lives but quality of life if we don't keep a check on our population. As you suggested yourself, the difference between us and "the lion eating the antelope" is that we are in a position to exert some control over our human destiny...we are supposed to have awareness, forsight...the capacity to reason out the effects of our actions. Curbing population is not "sacrificing lives"...you might as well say the pill or the diaphragm sacrifices lives.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.