The rapid decline of the natural world

Page 3 of 4 [ 53 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,747
Location: Twin Peaks

20 Mar 2019, 9:38 am

TW1ZTY wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Perhaps sterilize rather than castrate. And all those worried about overpopulation should volunteer to have it done.

Also those convinced that fossil fuels are going to destroy the planet in a few years, should voluntarily stop driving and flying and anything else that contributes immediately.

Just imagine if however many millions who are truly concerned about it, suddenly went cold turkey. That alone might save the planet.


I'm ok with going back to horses and carriages. :D


The problem with that is all those horses would destroy the planet the way they cows are.



kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 62,659
Location: Queens, NYC

20 Mar 2019, 9:46 am

In the 19th century, horses were known as "public menaces," and were seen as being injurious to the health of humans. Especially in urban areas.

This is one of the reasons why automobiles eclipsed the horse and buggy so quickly back in the 1920s---especially in the cities.



EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,747
Location: Twin Peaks

20 Mar 2019, 9:52 am

Hopefully the electric car will take over soon.



Prometheus18
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Aug 2018
Age: 23
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,866

20 Mar 2019, 9:59 am

Horses! :heart:



TW1ZTY
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Sep 2018
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,285
Location: Hanging out with my coca cola ladies

20 Mar 2019, 10:02 am

Prometheus18 wrote:
Horses! :heart:


:D


_________________
Break out the bubbly!


EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,747
Location: Twin Peaks

20 Mar 2019, 10:04 am

Wasn't there supposed to be flying cars by now?

How about electric flying horses?



kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 62,659
Location: Queens, NYC

20 Mar 2019, 10:04 am

Read anything from the late 19th to very early 20th century about horses in urban areas---there was not much enthusiasm for them.

It is said that 15,000 horses died per year on New York City streets about 1900.



Crimadella
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jan 2019
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,644
Location: Warner Robins, Ga

20 Mar 2019, 10:27 am

EzraS wrote:
Perhaps sterilize rather than castrate. And all those worried about overpopulation should volunteer to have it done.

Also those convinced that fossil fuels are going to destroy the planet in a few years, should voluntarily stop driving and flying and anything else that contributes immediately.

Just imagine if however many millions who are truly concerned about it, suddenly went cold turkey. That alone might save the planet.

You know, I am noticing just how big of a problem that is, people always saying we have these big issues that need to be solved, insisting we get everybody to go along with it while they do absolutely nothing to resolve the issue they complain about.

One example you already gave, another example being people who complain about environmental issues yet pollute just as much as everyone else and use technology that was created by polluting. If they simply led by example maybe our issues wouldn't be so bad. Hence, if you are going to complain about climate change, don't drive a car or get an electric car, don't use plastic bags and contsiners, use less paper so less trees need to be cut down to make paper. The list goes on.



Crimadella
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jan 2019
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,644
Location: Warner Robins, Ga

20 Mar 2019, 10:32 am

EzraS wrote:
TW1ZTY wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Perhaps sterilize rather than castrate. And all those worried about overpopulation should volunteer to have it done.

Also those convinced that fossil fuels are going to destroy the planet in a few years, should voluntarily stop driving and flying and anything else that contributes immediately.

Just imagine if however many millions who are truly concerned about it, suddenly went cold turkey. That alone might save the planet.


I'm ok with going back to horses and carriages. :D


The problem with that is all those horses would destroy the planet the way they cows are.


Lol, I haven't thought about that. It is true, animals run on gas too, LOL. Perhaps we could instal a fart filter on them to reduce methane emissions :wink:



EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,747
Location: Twin Peaks

20 Mar 2019, 11:06 am

Crimadella wrote:
EzraS wrote:
TW1ZTY wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Perhaps sterilize rather than castrate. And all those worried about overpopulation should volunteer to have it done.

Also those convinced that fossil fuels are going to destroy the planet in a few years, should voluntarily stop driving and flying and anything else that contributes immediately.

Just imagine if however many millions who are truly concerned about it, suddenly went cold turkey. That alone might save the planet.


I'm ok with going back to horses and carriages. :D


The problem with that is all those horses would destroy the planet the way they cows are.


Lol, I haven't thought about that. It is true, animals run on gas too, LOL. Perhaps we could instal a fart filter on them to reduce methane emissions :wink:


Oh yeah that's a big deal. They want livestock eliminated.



Crimadella
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jan 2019
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,644
Location: Warner Robins, Ga

20 Mar 2019, 11:14 am

EzraS wrote:
Crimadella wrote:
EzraS wrote:
TW1ZTY wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Perhaps sterilize rather than castrate. And all those worried about overpopulation should volunteer to have it done.

Also those convinced that fossil fuels are going to destroy the planet in a few years, should voluntarily stop driving and flying and anything else that contributes immediately.

Just imagine if however many millions who are truly concerned about it, suddenly went cold turkey. That alone might save the planet.


I'm ok with going back to horses and carriages. :D


The problem with that is all those horses would destroy the planet the way they cows are.


Lol, I haven't thought about that. It is true, animals run on gas too, LOL. Perhaps we could instal a fart filter on them to reduce methane emissions :wink:


Oh yeah that's a big deal. They want livestock eliminated.


Yeah I know. The extremists pretty much make arguments around, the planet would be much better if humans just didn't exist, it would be more 'natural'. Never-mind the fact that humans are a part of nature, therefor we are natural. Think Cortez's 'Green New Deal' attempts to limit how many cows we can have, suggesting we should eat only one hamburger as opposed to three in a day, she literally said that. Her courier is already being destroyed, the more people learn about her the more they dislike her, that includes democrats. Polls have been done to point out that the majority of dem's dislike her and approval rate is continuing to drop, think the last I hear it was like 31% approval to 43% disapproval and disapproval is steady climbing.



Skilpadde
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 7 Dec 2008
Age: 42
Gender: Female
Posts: 26,743
Location: Alola

20 Mar 2019, 11:37 am

Finally someone mentions the elephant in the room!

The decline of the natural world would be greatly helped if we counted billions fewer.

Yet no one dare to call a spade a spade. The UN is cowardly avoiding the topic, despite it being the number one problem we face.

goldfish21 wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
Culling the masses?


Indeed. I can’t recalk the name of the documentary but there was some rich woman asked about depopulation and she replied “You mean the great cull? It’s already begun.”

Some figure that’s why we’re seeing lower fertility rates around the world (chemical castration via air, water, food etc) and it wouldn’t surprise me one bit of our financial systems have been rigged to make it too expensive to have kids and thus that’s why people are opting to be childless. Etc.

But war = very efficient way to reduce the population ASAP.


While it wouldn't surprise me, chemical castration via air, water would be a bad idea as it would affect wildlife too, and that's the last thing it needs.
We have already seen the effects of chemicals that mimic female hormones. It leads to misshapen and fewer fertile males.


The entire world needs a united population decline policy, a very strict one, kept by any means necessary.

The question at this point shouldn't be how many kids to allow, but who should be allowed to have them.

Helping people conceive should be a serious crime.


_________________
"And the turtles, of course...all the turtles are free, as turtles and, maybe, all creatures should be." -Dr. Seuss

http://turtleforum.freeforums.org/index.php


The tiger and the lion may be more powerful....

...but the Wolf does not perform in the circus.


Crimadella
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jan 2019
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,644
Location: Warner Robins, Ga

20 Mar 2019, 12:32 pm

Skilpadde wrote:
Finally someone mentions the elephant in the room!

The decline of the natural world would be greatly helped if we counted billions fewer.

Yet no one dare to call a spade a spade. The UN is cowardly avoiding the topic, despite it being the number one problem we face.

goldfish21 wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
Culling the masses?


Indeed. I can’t recalk the name of the documentary but there was some rich woman asked about depopulation and she replied “You mean the great cull? It’s already begun.”

Some figure that’s why we’re seeing lower fertility rates around the world (chemical castration via air, water, food etc) and it wouldn’t surprise me one bit of our financial systems have been rigged to make it too expensive to have kids and thus that’s why people are opting to be childless. Etc.

But war = very efficient way to reduce the population ASAP.


While it wouldn't surprise me, chemical castration via air, water would be a bad idea as it would affect wildlife too, and that's the last thing it needs.
We have already seen the effects of chemicals that mimic female hormones. It leads to misshapen and fewer fertile males.


The entire world needs a united population decline policy, a very strict one, kept by any means necessary.

The question at this point shouldn't be how many kids to allow, but who should be allowed to have them.

Helping people conceive should be a serious crime.


Getting into conversations like that can cause people to go off the rails even though it is obvious that yes, If we aimed to better control birth and pass our best genes along while preventing bad genes from being passed around humanity as a species would evolve in a much better way. Currently people with bad genes, genetic disabilities and behavioral disorders and low levels of intelligence tend to produce more young than people on the opposite end of that spectrum. Thus we are continuing to downgrade the human gene pool in the name of 'love and protect all'. It's hard to say that's bad, but it's obvious we will pay for doing such. In unintelligent nature, it has a way to prevent bad genes from being passed, the weak die and the strong pass their genes.

Who's to say which route is the 'moral' route, to love all or to damage the entire species by continuing to expand on the bad genes in the gene pool? Just like population, it is not far off to compare us to a virus for the planet, the virus may flourish and spread out of control, but when it kills it's host, it is likely to die also. When we over populate the world and increase use of it's resources and pollute on massive scales, it's a guarantee that we will eventually reach a tipping point where we cannot sustain and the species and other species will pay for it by loss of lives. I don't think we are reaching that level, but as we get further a long, it gets a bit more difficult to make the majority be able to understand the impact of over population. If we can manage to be able to explore space and mine resources from other planets before we kill ourselves, there will be no issue, their are so many resources and other planets that we could never become 'to big' or 'too much of a drain on resources'.

It would help for people to be smarter as a whole, good luck on that though, people love to have objecting opinions, even me :D



Crimadella
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jan 2019
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,644
Location: Warner Robins, Ga

20 Mar 2019, 12:42 pm

In all fairness though, who is to say that our smarter portion of humanity can't come up with ways to help everyone out through technology and advanced medical practices. I'm not sure what you call it, but I was watching a show once where they were giving women the option to pay for your child's genes to be altered before birth, like implanting cells or something to insure your child has great genes, intelligent and things of that nature. I think that's is a great idea. If we could insure every child born was super intelligent with great genes, imagine how much faster we could evolve to master our evolution throughout the universe :D sounds exciting to me, hope we are trying to move in that direction and don't get held back by 'moral activists'.

Imagine a world of people whom were all as smart as Nikola Tesla(my hero!). What an amazing world that would be, surely most if not all of our issues would be resolved.

:wtg:



goldfish21
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,320
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada

20 Mar 2019, 4:52 pm

It’s WAY more than AOC calling for people to consume less beef. It’s scientists, economists, the UN etc - globally, not just in the USA. Factory farmin beef is horrendous for the planet vs other forms of protein. No one is saying eat Zero beef, just less in a more sustainable manner.


_________________
No :heart: for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.