Remember me
▼ Content

Overpopulation - How not to solve the problem.



Page 2 of 4<1234>
31-10-2015 17:58
Jakob
★☆☆☆☆
(127)
­­



Tim the plumber wrote:

Talk of solving a none problem with billions of deaths is utterly evil.

You are evil.



If it is to you all about preventing people from dying you should come along with a lot better climate policy on this subject.

Clearly less people being born in a year will in the end cause less people to die.

Is that equation too difficult for you to see..?
I think not so you just turn around and work for both the climate and the future people on earth. They will also want some oil to cut pipes.


I wish you the best. It was for your sake I made an exception and wrote this post. I am mostly not here.
If you still think I am evil it is also okay. I may need that in you to scare you off if I have to come back again.






­
Edited on 31-10-2015 18:02
31-10-2015 18:19
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@Jakob - Please DO come back often. Your posts here are very interesting and very important to the subject of climate change.

In the future, I suggest you post in the Sharing Ideas sub-forum which I moderate. Currently, this website is dominated by individuals who tend to "shoot the messenger" instead of discussing the message.

That is why the website administrator, branner, created Sharing Ideas. Inside this sub-forum, people comment in ways that are creative, constructive, on topic and respectful. People can disagree in Sharing Ideas, as long as they do so without attacking someone else.

Again, thank you for your comments, and I apologize for any rude behavior you have had to endure here.

Please return.



The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!

Edited on 31-10-2015 18:21
31-10-2015 21:42
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8642)
trafn wrote:
@Jakob - there's a considerable amount of literature about reversing tubal ligation in women and vasectomies in men. The initial results were not good, as they were attempted on patients who were sterilized without reversibility in mind. Now there are new procedures for both men and women (vasectomy; tubal ligation) which are done so that they are more easy to reverse later on if the patient so desires in the future. While there is never a guarantee that the reversal will be successful, the rates of reversibility have improved over the years.


This method of birth control is still very risky. While improved from the initial experiments, the chances are still quite significant that you will become permanently sterile through this procedure. There also the usual risks due any surgical procedure, including the risk of death.

This procedure is also quite available optionally today, yet you claim there is a population problem. Are you suggesting this be required of all by law?
31-10-2015 21:47
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8642)
trafn wrote:
@Jakob - Please DO come back often. Your posts here are very interesting and very important to the subject of climate change.
* spam *

He is already aware of your spam. Repeating it again will not make him or anyone else more aware of it.
Edited on 31-10-2015 21:47
31-10-2015 23:22
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8642)
Jakob wrote:
­


How do you handle it in the USA if a citizen is not allowed to breed but still wants to..?



­

There is no case where a citizen is not allowed to breed in the USA.
31-10-2015 23:22
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@Into the Night - you wrote This procedure is also quite available optionally today, yet you claim there is a population problem. Are you suggesting this be required of all by law?

1. As a physician, I am unaware of any high death rates associated with voluntary surgical sterilization procedures. A far greater percentage of smokers die from lung cancer than do people who have and then die from voluntary surgical sterilization.

2. If a person was interested in voluntarily participating in a program designed to help reduce the planet's population, then this is one option they should learn about.


The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!
31-10-2015 23:24
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8642)
trafn wrote:
@Jakob - I not aware of any common cases where people want to have children but are not allowed to. Some exceptions might be:

1. If you are under age (younger than 18 years old).

2. You are mentally handicapped and have a legal guardian who stands in the way.

3. You are in prison without access to your "breeding" partner.

Other than those, I can't think of any examples in the USA.

'Underage', mentally handicapped, and prison all allow you to breed. No legal guardian can stand in the way of this.
31-10-2015 23:27
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@Into the Night - you are very fond of accusing others of posting spam, yet you do not recognize that your consistent negative comments towards others who post here is also spam.

People who make frequent accusations of others often come from the excluded middle point of view where there is no middle or common ground. In the Sharing Ideas sub-forum, we practice the included middle philosophy which actively seeks out common ground between each others' ideas. In Sharing Ideas there is no need to accuse anyone or express anger. There is only sharing and understanding. Perhaps you would like to try moving from the excluded middle to the included middle at Sharing Ideas.


The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!
31-10-2015 23:33
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@Into the Night - you wrote: 'Underage', mentally handicapped, and prison all allow you to breed. No legal guardian can stand in the way of this.

Legally, yes they can.

In some States, a person who is underage can, if their parents/guardians decide, have their unborn child surgically removed against their will.

The same goes for a mentally handicapped person who is legally bound to a guardian.

Many prisons, especially high security ones, do not have to allow conjugal visits to all prisoners.


The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!
31-10-2015 23:34
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8642)
trafn wrote:
@Into the Night - you wrote This procedure is also quite available optionally today, yet you claim there is a population problem. Are you suggesting this be required of all by law?

1. As a physician, I am unaware of any high death rates associated with voluntary surgical sterilization procedures. A far greater percentage of smokers die from lung cancer than do people who have and then die from voluntary surgical sterilization.

I never said there was. I said death is a risk with any surgical procedure of this sort. It is you that qualified it as a high death rate.
trafn wrote:
2. If a person was interested in voluntarily participating in a program designed to help reduce the planet's population, then this is one option they should learn about.

They already know. They could hardly miss the advertisements for it, could they?

Personally, I consider offering this form of sterilization as a method of voluntary birth control an ethical violation for any physician. You are supposed to save lives, not prevent them.
31-10-2015 23:45
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8642)
trafn wrote:
@Into the Night - you are very fond of accusing others of posting spam, yet you do not recognize that your consistent negative comments towards others who post here is also spam.
* spam *


It is not spam to condemn censorship. It is not spam to point out hypocrisy, such as yours when you write a personal attack on someone, then invite them to your Kiddie Pool where they are "safe" from personal attacks (except obviously by you). I will have no part of your hypocrisy. I have already told you this in no uncertain terms, yet you continue to spam.

My negative comments are directed only toward those who themselves have made negative comments. You brought this on yourself, sir.
31-10-2015 23:54
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8642)
trafn wrote:
@Into the Night - you wrote: 'Underage', mentally handicapped, and prison all allow you to breed. No legal guardian can stand in the way of this.

Legally, yes they can.

In some States, a person who is underage can, if their parents/guardians decide, have their unborn child surgically removed against their will.

Name the States.
trafn wrote:
The same goes for a mentally handicapped person who is legally bound to a guardian.

Again, name the States.
trafn wrote:
Many prisons, especially high security ones, do not have to allow conjugal visits to all prisoners.

Not a factor. If a woman is pregnant (for whatever reason), she is allowed to have the child, even in prison.
01-11-2015 00:21
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@Into the Night - you wrote Personally, I consider offering this form of sterilization as a method of voluntary birth control an ethical violation for any physician.

That is an interesting position which some people do take today, though not as commonly as they used to. The American Medical Association, The American Osteopathic Association and the American Bar Association have all published many position papers over the years which substantially support the opposite view.


@Into the Night - in the same post you also wrote It is you that qualified it as a high death rate.

Actually, what I wrote (and you quoted) was "I am unaware of any high death rates associated with voluntary surgical sterilization procedures." If I qualified it as anything, it was as not being a high death rate.


@Into the Night - additionally, in the same post you also wrote They could hardly miss the advertisements for it, could they?

You made this statement after quoting me about population control options. There were no advertisements being made in the quoted content.


The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!

Edited on 01-11-2015 00:27
01-11-2015 00:33
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@Into the Night - you wrote My negative comments are directed only toward those who themselves have made negative comments.

Well, I can see we have now degenerated into tit-for-tat logic.

Verbal dyslexia is communication state in which the person says things which they think make sense, but in reality have little connection to reality. Verbal dyslexia is both disruptive and upsetting to the individual who exhibits this pathological condition, as well as to those who must endure it. Luckily, here at Climate-debate.com, we have Sharing Ideas, a moderated sub-forum where you can find relief from verbal dyslexia.

Sharing Ideas - the verbal dyslexia-free sub-forum!


The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!
01-11-2015 00:38
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@Into the Night - as to your "Name the States" challenge, I will leave that up to you. There are many internet resources available to assist you with this, if you are interested in educating yourself on this subject.

As to your statement about a pregnant woman who is in prison, no, in that case you are right, it is not a factor. However, in the case of a man who is in prison who wishes to impregnate his wife or girlfriend while he is still in prison, there is no guarantee that he will be allowed to do so while still in prison. In this one example, this was, perhaps, more a case of misunderstanding the parameters rather than really disagreeing about anything.


The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!
01-11-2015 00:45
Ceist
★★★☆☆
(592)
Tim the plumber wrote:
Thank fuck I'm not the only one who considers talk of mass killings/sterilisation as utterly evil.

Just as to post it again;

https://overpopulationisamyth.com/


Tim, were you aware that the website you are propagating is run by a 'pro-life' religious group which campaigns against contraception and abortion? Their content is not based on published research. It's pseudoscience propaganda.

Spreading anti-contraception religious propaganda (eg lying about the effectiveness of condoms) played a big role in spreading HIV in poverty- stricken countries as well as increasing poverty. They also campaign against vaccinations.


01-11-2015 01:04
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@Tim the plumber - given what Ceist just posted, I wonder, are you pro-life?

If so, does that in any way influence your comments that you make here?


The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!
01-11-2015 01:43
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8642)
trafn wrote:
@Into the Night - you wrote Personally, I consider offering this form of sterilization as a method of voluntary birth control an ethical violation for any physician.

That is an interesting position which some people do take today, though not as commonly as they used to. The American Medical Association, The American Osteopathic Association and the American Bar Association have all published many position papers over the years which substantially support the opposite view.

That does not change my personal view.

trafn wrote:

@Into the Night - in the same post you also wrote It is you that qualified it as a high death rate.

Actually, what I wrote (and you quoted) was "I am unaware of any high death rates associated with voluntary surgical sterilization procedures." If I qualified it as anything, it was as not being a high death rate.

A denial of your own argument. I never mentioned high death rates at all. You did. Now you are continuing to make a point of it in inconsistent ways.
trafn wrote:

@Into the Night - additionally, in the same post you also wrote They could hardly miss the advertisements for it, could they?

You made this statement after quoting me about population control options. There were no advertisements being made in the quoted content.

I never said you were advertising it.
01-11-2015 02:27
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@Into the Night - your wrote That does not change my personal view.

No one is trying to. I was just pointing out that it stands in contrast to a large number of respected authorities on the subject. Given it does so, would you like to explain your position (if not, it's okay)?


You also stated I never mentioned high death rates at all.

True, but you were the one who introduced death rates into the topic of voluntary sterilization when you wrote There also the usual risks due any surgical procedure, including the risk of death. I was merely making sure that no one mistook your statement to imply that those death rates were in any way significant on a "risky expectancy" basis.


Additionally, you stated I never said you were advertising it.

Oh, my mistake. Just checking.


The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!
01-11-2015 03:20
Totototo
★☆☆☆☆
(117)
Into the Night - Will you please answer my question? It's like, a hundred posts above but you seem to have skipped it.
01-11-2015 10:10
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8642)
Totototo wrote:
Into the Night - Will you please answer my question? It's like, a hundred posts above but you seem to have skipped it.


Restate the question, please. I'm not going to do the footwork on a reference like that. No one else is going to either. It's just clearer for everyone that way.
01-11-2015 11:00
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8642)
Jakob wrote:
­


­
Thanks again for all answers.


I think most nations already have strong tools that they use to prevent people from breeding but normal people are just not aware of it.

In Denmark if at women has a child but no income the social worker may tell her that if she breeds another child they will take the first child away from her.


I am not so happy about that and I hope we can do better.
But it shows a way, and maybe we can agree about what the state can do for a little money it can also do for the climate..?




­

So...what? Are you condoning kidnapping as the solution? What happens to the kidnap victim in Denmark? If they are kept alive, how does that reduce the population?
01-11-2015 12:04
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1295)
trafn wrote:
@Tim the plumber - you see evil in much of what you disagree with. The perception of evil in others is often a projection of our own fears and insecurities.

If I post a statement saying that mass murder has been used in the past (which it has, as in Cambodia) and may be used in the future as a form of population control, this is not the same as advocating it. It is merely a statement of historical fact, something which is neither good or evil.

If I post a statement saying that nuclear bombs could be used in the future as a form of population control, something others have repeatedly discussed in the past (e.g. - General MacArthur's Korea-China Dead Zone Proposal), this is not the same as advocating it. It is merely a statement of a potential future reality, something which is also neither good or evil.

To improve both the quality of your posts as well as your interactions with other members on this website, might I invite you to release any underlying fear or insecurities which might be influencing your posting mannerisms by posting in the Sharing Ideas sub-forum. There, you will have a moderator who can assist you in posting in a fear-free and insecurity-free manner.


I am fearful of fools who wish to advocate the killing of billions of people for no good reason. I am not fearful of frank discussion. I do not need a kiddy pool.

Your tactic of setting up a situation where the basic premis of the discussion has the obvious only next step as mass murder and then attacking anybody who disagrees with the basic premis as destructive and not allowed in your kiddy pool is ridiculous.

Rigor requires that all the ideas presented are open to challenge.

Just by putting forward the wrong idea that the world is over populated you invite mass murder. This is evil.
01-11-2015 12:09
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1295)
Jakob wrote:
­­



Tim the plumber wrote:

Talk of solving a none problem with billions of deaths is utterly evil.

You are evil.



If it is to you all about preventing people from dying you should come along with a lot better climate policy on this subject.

Clearly less people being born in a year will in the end cause less people to die.

Is that equation too difficult for you to see..?
I think not so you just turn around and work for both the climate and the future people on earth. They will also want some oil to cut pipes.


I wish you the best. It was for your sake I made an exception and wrote this post. I am mostly not here.
If you still think I am evil it is also okay. I may need that in you to scare you off if I have to come back again.

­


What?????

Yes the best way to have the fewest possible human deaths over the next billion years is to erradicate humanity today.

Sure that is mathematically correct. Fine.

It is very silly though.

I want there to be the most humans having the nicest lives. Now and in the future.

Talk of over population is evil because the world is not over populated and there is no need to reduce the human population.

It's very straight forward.
01-11-2015 15:15
Totototo
★☆☆☆☆
(117)
@Into the Night - http://www.climate-debate.com/forum/overpopulation-how-not-to-solve-the-problem--d6-e783.php#post_4182

My question about natural law.
01-11-2015 15:25
Ceist
★★★☆☆
(592)
Hey! I wonder if some anti-science zealots don't worry about overpopulation because they believe they will be Raptured.... any day now.


Apparently "pro-life", anti-contraception religious websites are acceptable as sources in this thread, so here's some er...'evidence' that the earth won't become overpopulated because... Jesus.

http://www.endtime.com/when-is-the-rapture/



Edited on 01-11-2015 15:34
01-11-2015 16:05
Ceist
★★★☆☆
(592)
Totototo wrote:
@Into the Night - http://www.climate-debate.com/forum/overpopulation-how-not-to-solve-the-problem--d6-e783.php#post_4182

My question about natural law.


Maybe he means the story of Adam and Eve when they were told to "go forth and multiply"? This video looks at what would have happened to the earth's population if Adam and Eve had actually followed the Christian God's first 'law', not to eat from the Tree of Knowledge


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_a6RjR_AHY



Edited on 01-11-2015 16:06
01-11-2015 17:06
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@Into the Night - you wrote So...what? Are you condoning kidnapping as the solution? What happens to the kidnap victim in Denmark? If they are kept alive, how does that reduce the population?

Jakob merely stated a social policy in Denmark that protects children from being born into, and raised in unsafe conditions. Why would you equate this with kidnapping? The United States, as well as many other developed nations, have similar policies. You are merely trying to add confusion to the conversation.

People like you are trolls who should be banned from this website for repeatedly and consistently posting in this way.


The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!
01-11-2015 17:11
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@Tim the plumber - you wrote Just by putting forward the wrong idea that the world is over populated you invite mass murder. This is evil.

Okay Tim, I get it, you're a retard. You consistently make accusations like this without any proof and then repeatedly antagonize other with statements you refuse to back up with any evidence. You are a troll and should be banned from this website.

Again in this thread you wrote another version of your often repeated accusation when you wrote Talk of over population is evil because the world is not over populated and there is no need to reduce the human population.

And again you give no proof of why this is evil. You continue to behave in troll-like fashion and continue to need to be banned from this website until you either grow up or get a brain (preferably both).


The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!
01-11-2015 17:17
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@Ceist - many people are actually under the impression that Adam and Eve where the first couple in the Garden of Eden. They were not.

In fact, the first two people to establish a personal, intimate relationship in the Garden of Eden were Adam and God, and God groomed Adam by creating the following conditions:

1. I will keep you in a garden.
2. I will keep you naked all the time.
2. I will watch you all the time.

As such, this is also the first recorded instance of a homosexual relationship in history. Unfortunately, as Adam is the Son of God, this is also the first known case of sexual abuse, as a father is keeping his son (Adam) naked and confined in a restricted space for his own (God's) purposes.

Perhaps we should look up the number for the Intergalactic Police and report God for the child molester that he obviously is.


The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!
01-11-2015 17:24
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1295)
trafn wrote:
@Tim the plumber - you wrote Just by putting forward the wrong idea that the world is over populated you invite mass murder. This is evil.

Okay Tim, I get it, you're a retard. You consistently make accusations like this without any proof and then repeatedly antagonize other with statements you refuse to back up with any evidence. You are a troll and should be banned from this website.

Again in this thread you wrote another version of your often repeated accusation when you wrote Talk of over population is evil because the world is not over populated and there is no need to reduce the human population.

And again you give no proof of why this is evil. You continue to behave in troll-like fashion and continue to need to be banned from this website until you either grow up or get a brain (preferably both).


For those who are utterly unable to use their imagination;

By discussing how to reduce over population without discussing if the world is in fact over populated in the first place you put forward an idea that the world is over populated in the first place.

The logical step from this is to work out how to kill a few billion people.

The world is not over populated.

The topic of how to reduce the world's population by a few billion is more evil than the topic of how to remove the world's Jews simply because there are less than a billion Jews.

Acting in a way to enrage others with no scientific support is trolling. You are a Troll.
01-11-2015 17:45
Jakob
★☆☆☆☆
(127)
­



@Tim the plumber

I am glad math finally makes it clear that my suggestions is not about more but less people dying pr. year.

So now all you have to see is that the future is not going to be the nicest place for people if too many people before them has polluted and drained the earth for things you need to get the nicest life.
That must be easy too for you.



I also think it must be possible for you to imagine a situation where less breeding can be a good thing or at least less evil than alternatives.
If you think that is not today you may still understand it is in the peoples best interest to have good methods prepared for a situation like that and therefor talking about ways to solve such a problem is not evil but a very good thing.





@Into the Night

What happens to the kidnap victim in Denmark? If they are kept alive, how does that reduce the population?


They get killed immediately of course and sold as mink food they give a good contribution to the economy.

Are you a total fool..?





@trafn

I think I agree with branners "wait-and-see policy" for a while again.
The new subforum is very good and I thank you very much for moderating it.
But as long as I also find good writers and good posts to the subject here that I don't find in the other thread I will still come back here.
And for just as long I can not judge this thread as all negative or all waste.
I think we need more time before more is changed.





However forgetting questions and quoting from another place without giving a link to the place is about to make this debate pretty unreadable.




­
01-11-2015 17:52
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@Tim the plumber - you wrote The world is not over populated.

Like I stated before, you are a retard and a troll, and I am getting sick and tired of you polluting this website with your shit-brained remarks.

In an effort to stop you, IBdaMann and Into the Night from repeatedly destroying this website by posting content that only serves to drive new members away, I've started a new thread to request that branner take immediate action to correct the way the three of you behave here. It is at:

http://www.climate-debate.com/forum/why-is-climate-debate-com-so-messed-up-d15-e788.php#post_4318

And just so you know, I posted it outside of Sharing Ideas just to see what retarded comments you'll make.


The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!
01-11-2015 17:58
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@Jakob - thanks for your support of Sharing Ideas (SI). Unfortunately, branner does not give it the same protection he gives PM's, so people like IBdaMann and Into the Night are still free to extract content from there without the author's permission so as to ridicule them outside of SI, as they have repeatedly done so. This defeats the whole purpose of a safe place, as it's like a teacher telling them that they cannot bully other students while in the classroom, but that it is okay for them to bully other students out on the playground.

Personally, I can appreciate your agreement with the "wait and see" policy, as you are relatively new here. Unfortunately, I've been here for many weeks now and had to endure the insanity of IBdaMann, Into the Night and Tim the plumber. That's why I've started a new thread to request branner to correct this problem now. It's at:

http://www.climate-debate.com/forum/why-is-climate-debate-com-so-messed-up-d15-e788.php#post_4318

Perhaps it is still a little too early for you to get involved in something like this, but have a look at it anyways.

PS - mink food? Hmmmm. How does it taste?



The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!

Edited on 01-11-2015 17:59
01-11-2015 22:11
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8642)
Totototo wrote:
@Into the Night - http://www.climate-debate.com/forum/overpopulation-how-not-to-solve-the-problem--d6-e783.php#post_4182

My question about natural law.


You need me to define it for you? Google is your friend, you know.

Oh well...what the hey...

Natural law is simply that which drives human nature. In this particular case, the natural urge to reproduce.

There is no document citing 'natural laws', but our founding documents used this concept as they were being written, typically citing 'God given rights'. Now whether you believe in a God or not (evolution presupposes certain urges as well), these rights or urges exist. To deny them to someone only invites revolt or at the least a clandestine activity which will eventually lead to a revolt.

Among these natural laws is the general recognition that your mind is your own. You are free to believe what you will and communicate that belief to others. First amendment or no, any government that fails to recognize this at least to some degree will see rebellion, a form of 'communication' that becomes violent.

Again, these are not black and white laws given by some government or agency. They are the rights inherent in each of us. It is why our judges are not merely a computer. It is why we recognize the power of a jury. It is why we recognize the power of the press.
01-11-2015 22:21
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8642)
Ceist wrote:
Hey! I wonder if some anti-science zealots don't worry about overpopulation because they believe they will be Raptured.... any day now.


Apparently "pro-life", anti-contraception religious websites are acceptable as sources in this thread, so here's some er...'evidence' that the earth won't become overpopulated because... Jesus.

http://www.endtime.com/when-is-the-rapture/


Rapture would solve the 'overpopulation' problem though, wouldn't it?

You bring up an interesting point. I doubt, though, that it's top of the mind of the Christian when they view the 'overpopulation' problem.

Here's a counter-view. What religion is the anti-scientist? For that matter, what religion is the scientist?
01-11-2015 22:29
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8642)
trafn wrote:
@Into the Night - you wrote So...what? Are you condoning kidnapping as the solution? What happens to the kidnap victim in Denmark? If they are kept alive, how does that reduce the population?

Jakob merely stated a social policy in Denmark that protects children from being born into, and raised in unsafe conditions. Why would you equate this with kidnapping? The United States, as well as many other developed nations, have similar policies. You are merely trying to add confusion to the conversation.

People like you are trolls who should be banned from this website for repeatedly and consistently posting in this way.


Ad hominem ignored.

He was using that as a possible solution vector for 'overpopulation'. That goes far beyond it's use in the United States.

Here in the United States the government must go through the court system and follow very restrictive guidelines to remove a child. All of these are based on the abuse against said child, including abuse resulting in death.

This use of removing a child is simply because of the violation of an arbitrary limit on family size set by the government. You are confusing the two. It is you that is confusing the conversation.
01-11-2015 22:31
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1295)
Jakob wrote:
­



@Tim the plumber

I am glad math finally makes it clear that my suggestions is not about more but less people dying pr. year.

So now all you have to see is that the future is not going to be the nicest place for people if too many people before them has polluted and drained the earth for things you need to get the nicest life.
That must be easy too for you.



I also think it must be possible for you to imagine a situation where less breeding can be a good thing or at least less evil than alternatives.
If you think that is not today you may still understand it is in the peoples best interest to have good methods prepared for a situation like that and therefor talking about ways to solve such a problem is not evil but a very good thing.

­


If the question was in terms of "What is the carrying capacity of the earth?" then I would see your point.

Today, however, there is no over population problem. Resources of all kinds are more readily availible than ever.

The world of 30 years time will, as long as those who wish to drag us down don't get their way, be lots richer in all ways. I predict that about that point will see us start to use captured asteroids as mining sites for the getting of valuable minerals. Solar power will be lots cheaper than coal, if present trends continue and hopefully graphine or something else will have produced room temperature super conducting technology. This will allow the use of geothermal from Etna and other volcanoes to power the world.

With even half of these advances the present costly ability to grow food anywhere we wish to will become easy. No need to use beautiful land for that purpose we can use hydroponics and other things.

The future is bright. As long as we don't do a cultural revolution Mao style.

Being reasonably wealthy is generally the best way to ensure that families don't become huge.
01-11-2015 22:32
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8642)
trafn wrote:
@Ceist - many people are actually under the impression that Adam and Eve where the first couple in the Garden of Eden. They were not.

In fact, the first two people to establish a personal, intimate relationship in the Garden of Eden were Adam and God, and God groomed Adam by creating the following conditions:

1. I will keep you in a garden.
2. I will keep you naked all the time.
2. I will watch you all the time.

As such, this is also the first recorded instance of a homosexual relationship in history. Unfortunately, as Adam is the Son of God, this is also the first known case of sexual abuse, as a father is keeping his son (Adam) naked and confined in a restricted space for his own (God's) purposes.

Perhaps we should look up the number for the Intergalactic Police and report God for the child molester that he obviously is.


And what has this to do with any discussion of overpopulation? Are you trying to turn this into a religion discussion instead?
01-11-2015 22:39
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8642)
Jakob wrote:
­@Into the Night

What happens to the kidnap victim in Denmark? If they are kept alive, how does that reduce the population?


They get killed immediately of course and sold as mink food they give a good contribution to the economy.

Are you a total fool..?

@trafn
However forgetting questions and quoting from another place without giving a link to the place is about to make this debate pretty unreadable.

­


You failed to answer the first question. What happens to the kidnap victim in Denmark?

Cross referencing over hundreds of posts to regain a context is something few people will do. By restating the question, context is restored in a local area for people to follow. I'm sorry you found it so difficult to ask a one-liner question again.
Page 2 of 4<1234>





Join the debate Overpopulation - How not to solve the problem.:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Do We even want solve climate change?9207-10-2017 21:14
Overpopulation - How to solve the problem..?3501-11-2015 17:22
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2019 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact