No one blames over-population for our diminishing natural resources! WHY NOT?

[Symbology]

Which is why making the spectrum of birth control options free to those that want it would be a good start.

 

At some point when the "review board" is implemented, the problem will be that economic preference will be the norm

 

"Well clearly you are of good stock [expensive genetic engineering] and have the wherewithal to support and raise a child "

[stamp of Approval]

*Slips Benjamin under the table*

 

"I'm sorry M'am, I realize both your parents were gold medal winners, but you just don't have the means to raise a child. [aka enough money to pay me off] Come back next year"

...as well as the natural corruption that goes with anything based on economics.

[Symbology]

Yes, that's what happens. It is even worse. Rats and mice over-crowding ends in a dramatic change in behavior. There develops a behavioral breakdown. Gangs of mice invade family warrens, some of the rats become trance like. Other gangs pick on each other and rape. They sink into what has been called "a behavioral sink."

 

As we crowd each other for diminishing resources, we also are beginning to exhibit behavioral deterioration not only within our societies but also between them and between nations.

 

charles

the Atheistic Science Institute - home page* *

 

 

You know... sometimes nature does something like -has a lightning strike hit and set off a fire- that wipes out the entire forest and leaves a nice level playing field of fertilizer (aka ash). Then the new little seeds get to compete and rebuild a new forest. It takes several hundred years, but pine trees have an edge in that their offspring come in a fire protected shell which actually only opens up when subjected to fire (a pine cone). Oak trees provide sneaky food to squirrels that kindly bury their offspring beneath the ground where the fire can reach them. Fruit trees provide more sneaky food that birds eat and then deposit miles away with more fertilizer.

 

Certain viruses provide the same level playing field in the form of a pandemic that burns across a population "like wildfire" - and interestingly enough any creatures that survive the fire/plague are generally immune to any reinfection. So then they and their offspring have another big level playing field to grow back into (regardless of how rich your parents were, EVERYONE is needed to work with LOTS of opportunities at that point).

 

So if you speed up the still frames a bit... maybe our species is just a wildfire blip on the terrestrial timeline [we have only been here what... 50,000 years or so?]... that will wipe everything out on the planet and let just the hardy ones that are built to survive the fire (like cockroaches) compete to rebuild the place after the "fire" is gone.

 

... or maybe I am just blowing smoke :smart:

[Racoon]

Woah Nellie!

 

Maybe if we educate the men, then they can start doing a better job around the world of treating women as equals, and being treated as real individuals vs. "them" - then we can see the better formal education of women.

 

To my observation women are plenty smart on the home front. They understand much better than men what the true costs are to parenting. It's the men who go around spreading their seed and not sticking around that are at least 50% of the responsibility here... if not more.

 

While I completely agree, the problem IS the lack of education and opportunity for women.

 

Men tend to enjoy the privledges and education that most women do not; especially in 3rd world countries.

 

An uneducated woman stays home and gets knocked up over and over again.

An educated woman does not.

 

Men are usually willing to fill the hole between a womans thighs regardless of education or socio-economics. ;)

 

Its much tougher to break traditional societal gender roles, than it is to educate women on family planning, and allowing them to be gainfully employed. Thats the problem.

 

Its no secret that countires where women are more educated and are a vital part of the work force, are the countries with the lowest number of children per couple...

[Racoon]

The correlation between Womens education and family size is unmistakable.

 

Therefor, the answer to Human Overpopulation is either War,Disease,Famine, Or educating Women...

 

 

 

Look at any sociological study regarding that issue.

[Kayra]

I think there are other significant forces at work as well. Well, they are at work when birth control is available and social/religious taboos do not prevent them.

 

Most of the world exists in different stages of a demographic transition from high infant mortality to low infant mortality. Some countries are completely through the transition already. In those countries, the average fertility is well below 2 children per woman. In the 25 countries of the EU, it is at 1.5 on average. Japan is at 1.3. North America is 2.

 

The “cost” of having too few children is no free labor and no old age security. The “Cost” of having too many children is a tremendous burden and hardship on the family itself to maintain its own level of living. From these forces comes a balance that seeks for the unit to perpetuate itself, plus a little bit more or less. It is a natural state of mankind and can be shown before and after the demographic transition brought about by the current causes of population increases.

 

I guess what I am trying to say is that within 1 or 2 generations, with no intervention by man or government, each society has, and I believe will continue to, self adjust it’s own birthrate. I personally think it will end up somewhere between 9 and 10 billion, and decline from there naturally.

 

There are some animations on this website that show some of what I mean.

[Little Bang]

No one wants to attack the sanctity of humans right to have as many children as they want. The majority of people with IQ's higher than average have less than three children, where those that are lower have anywhere from 4 to 10. What does that tell you about the direction the average is moving?

[pgrmdave]

IQ isn't passed down that simply, though education levels might be...

[Symbology]

 

Men are usually willing to fill the hole between a womans thighs regardless of education or socio-economics.

 

 

While many native Louisianian's are quite ok with being called a coonass, my guess is that most women reading this board would not appreciate their anatomy being referred to as a hole.

 

http://jasonanddiane.net/pins/coonass.jpg[/img]

[Symbology]

The correlation between Womens education and family size is unmistakable.

 

Therefor, the answer to Human Overpopulation is either War,Disease,Famine, Or educating Women...

 

 

 

Look at any sociological study regarding that issue.

 

Are there any fair studies that happen to have male education rates beside the female? My expectation is in many places the education level of male and female is near equal. I appreciate the intent of getting education to people. But this set of diagrams just smacks of sexism to me. It still leaves the implication that the responsibility lies with the females and that's just BS.

[Racoon]

Agree to disagree then Symbiology. :confused:

 

Thats what my Socio Profs stated. Its what the data correlates. Its what the textbooks show.

 

That was just one graph you can quickly google.. But the rest are very similar.

 

I'm not wrong. Prove me wrong.

 

 

Yeah, men should be wearing rubbers all the time.. But guess what?? They don't; and they don't have Symbiology from Hypography right there telling that to them in a hut in Africa, or a shanti in South America.

 

Thats just the facts.

 

 

and there are numerous other words to call a vagina. If you don't think its a "hole" to stick your penis into, then I'm sorry if you can't bear other terminology.

Good grief...

[paigetheoracle]

....because no one wants to offend the Religious Right! Marxist China seems to be the only place on Earth that grasps the problem and does something about it.

 

Are we failing to face what is really causing our environmental and pollution problems because we hate to admit that their truly defective system still has

SOMETHING right?

 

It is a big mistake to think that science and technology will enable us to keep on growing in numbers without ending in an immense population crash. What is happening is that the growth of religiouness in our society and, indeed, in others as well, is cutting down science. Religious reaction is growing and has been for the last some 40 years. Even the periodic liberal phases of this cyclical down-trend are characterized by being always LESS liberal than the last such cycle.

 

A good source of info on this is the Atheistic Science Institute - home page* *

 

charles

 

I can't agree more with these points. Birth control is needed to stop our suicidal population growth, that will eat up resources/ pollute everything into oblivion. Everybody keeps on about the financial crash but this 'theoretical', not 'real' ('You cannot eat money' American Indian statement about our social token of exchange). Before this crash came a real moral/ morale one came as community started to break down and Learning (education) stopped. The answer to the financial crisis is to pour more money in - is the answer to worthlessness and pointlessness of life, to pour more bodies in?

[paigetheoracle]

No one wants to attack the sanctity of humans right to have as many children as they want. The majority of people with IQ's higher than average have less than three children, where those that are lower have anywhere from 4 to 10. What does that tell you about the direction the average is moving?

 

It's quality over quantity - smaller classrooms/ families, lead to more individual attention and better quality of life and education - this is the science behind why things 'work' this way and fail to the other way (Big families occur in Third World Countries to compensate for higher mortality rates - so better hygiene and medicine is the answer here). When I was in Scientology (God forgive me) they had a saying that you rewarded up statistics and punished down statistics - this means tough love or 'logic' dictated that you kept stupid actions under control as Rudi Guilliani did with New York (Too many single girls at home having babies - get them back to work by cutting down their state benefits or whatever).

 

The problem is that nobody wants to get tough at the grass roots level and bring in drastic population control methods and if they don't as Racoon says that means population control will occur naturally at the adult end (War, famine, pestilence). Sensible, middle class people do the former (educated) and the latter create the above scenario (Thanks for that point Little Bang!).

[paigetheoracle]

While many native Louisianian's are quite ok with being called a coonass, my guess is that most women reading this board would not appreciate their anatomy being referred to as a hole.

 

http://jasonanddiane.net/pins/coonass.jpg[/img]

 

'Symbology' - can we get a little reality in here? Sexism my backside - we are talking about problems of existence and you are pussy footing about womens feelings? If you were pregnant all the time, would you care a damn about what others called your vagina? I don't think so. As for the education thing - it is female suppression by men that is being addressed here, not whether men are educated or not and that is 'real sexism' not the pseudo-joke you are talking here.

[paigetheoracle]

Yes, that's what happens. It is even worse. Rats and mice over-crowding ends in a dramatic change in behavior. There develops a behavioral breakdown. Gangs of mice invade family warrens, some of the rats become trance like. Other gangs pick on each other and rape. They sink into what has been called "a behavioral sink."

 

As we crowd each other for diminishing resources, we also are beginning to exhibit behavioral deterioration not only within our societies but also between them and between nations.

 

charles

the Atheistic Science Institute - home page* *

 

Good points again! This reminds me of what is happening in Africa especially and the chaos there plus the feral youth gangs now infecting Britain. "Good fences make good neighbours" Robert Frost because control and limit allow us to develop internal resources, rather than have to fight for external ones: Population overgrowth leads to external chaos and internal confusion - reduction in density allows things to calm down and rationalize out, mentally and physically.

[paigetheoracle]

Woah Nellie!

 

Maybe if we educate the men, then they can start doing a better job around the world of treating women as equals, and being treated as real individuals vs. "them" - then we can see the better formal education of women.

 

To my observation women are plenty smart on the home front. They understand much better than men what the true costs are to parenting. It's the men who go around spreading their seed and not sticking around that are at least 50% of the responsibility here... if not more.

 

Sorry Sym I seem to have misjudged you somewhat! (One finger pointing mistake!)

[paigetheoracle]

You know... sometimes nature does something like -has a lightning strike hit and set off a fire- that wipes out the entire forest and leaves a nice level playing field of fertilizer (aka ash). Then the new little seeds get to compete and rebuild a new forest. It takes several hundred years, but pine trees have an edge in that their offspring come in a fire protected shell which actually only opens up when subjected to fire (a pine cone). Oak trees provide sneaky food to squirrels that kindly bury their offspring beneath the ground where the fire can reach them. Fruit trees provide more sneaky food that birds eat and then deposit miles away with more fertilizer.

 

Certain viruses provide the same level playing field in the form of a pandemic that burns across a population "like wildfire" - and interestingly enough any creatures that survive the fire/plague are generally immune to any reinfection. So then they and their offspring have another big level playing field to grow back into (regardless of how rich your parents were, EVERYONE is needed to work with LOTS of opportunities at that point).

 

So if you speed up the still frames a bit... maybe our species is just a wildfire blip on the terrestrial timeline [we have only been here what... 50,000 years or so?]... that will wipe everything out on the planet and let just the hardy ones that are built to survive the fire (like cockroaches) compete to rebuild the place after the "fire" is gone.

 

... or maybe I am just blowing smoke ;) :)

 

Interesting point - maybe that is what will happen and there's nothing we can do about it or 'need' to!

[Symbology]

'Symbology' - can we get a little reality in here? Sexism my backside - we are talking about problems of existence and you are pussy footing about womens feelings? If you were pregnant all the time, would you care a damn about what others called your vagina? I don't think so. As for the education thing - it is female suppression by men that is being addressed here, not whether men are educated or not and that is 'real sexism' not the pseudo-joke you are talking here.

 

If, in the process of discussing science or opinion, we blithely trample all over a minority (or majority's) feelings, rights, and dignity, then we can damn well better expect to get told our insensitivity is wrong, degrading, and non-productive to the discussion.

 

This branches into the topic of "politically correct" words. But there are a whole string of words that in the past were considered "just fine" by those that were not the target of such words. But the words still carried significant negative connotations. Somebody had the balls (a word that, ironically, does not carry negative connotations) to speak up and declare those words as not right, and to offer some alternatives.

 

I find that the anti-pc and anti-affirmative action groups still try and grumble about having to share the public space with "Them damn ____". I can agree with them that it is important that such protective campaigns not bring the whole process to a screeching halt if possible. But if bringing it to a screeching halt is what it takes to get it to stop, then count me in.

 

Feminism is the radical notion that women are people.

~Cheris Kramarae and Paula Treichler

 

The little rift between the sexes is astonishingly widened by simply teaching one set of catchwords to the girls and another to the boys.

~Robert Louis Stevenson