Stoned Crow
Member
....I already have a ride....SC
The use of our planet is no longer sustainable
- Thread starter MoldyFrogToe
- Start date
I love how ignorant people post shit about how they can do something they have never done.
This is me crying bullshit in case you don't understand.
No one seems to want to answer the main question here I posed. Who gets to decide which half of the planet needs to die in your bullshit dream world love filled utopia where we all eat fresh ice cream and fresh fruits you picked on the north 40 while only caring for them, and the veggies and the chickens and milking the goats in 14 to 20 hour work weeks.
You (or most people) work 40 hours a week more or less. You spend less then 10% of your income feeding your stupid faces (thats 4 hours a week). Yet you post here in your circle jerk making believe that "I can grow all my own food and do it in about 14 hours a week".
Bullshit. You guys need to stop smoking dope.
LOL
You folks know so little yet you think you know so much.
Pathetic
You seem to be making some rather large and inaccurate assumptions Grape. No one is suggesting that we mow down 50% of the population. Merely that we control how many more are born into an overly populated world. And that we adjust both the means of production and types of production to ones that we can maintain over the long term, rather than continuing to race towards the finish line to say which nation managed to use the most before the system collapsed.
amen brotha..maybe a few people need a taste of THE REAL WORLD in the little fish bowls they call their world..the realms of logic and sense are what is missing in today's society.
peace i'm out..G
I don't believe so. First, in your world, who is the collective "we" that makes these decisions?
Second, it is an absolute and indisputable fact, that the type of fantasy farming I've read above, cannot support our current population. 1/2 of the world needs to die to sustain the dreams I've read above, of bio-diverse farming.
When someone starts thinking in the terms "we need to control how many are born", my brain revolts. Should we kill off the Africans? Maybe all the Muslims? China? Maybe Europe should go. Me? I'm not going anywhere.
It always trickles out that the most liberal among us think they know what's better for the perceived unwashed. Do you subscribe to John Holdren's doctrine? These are dangerous ideas you speak of. Who makes these decisions? Democrats? Republicans? 3rd world countries?
I have 3 kids. Did I break your law?
And the fact of the matter is that the earth isn't going anywhere. History tells us that there will be a catastrophic event that will re-set life anyway someday in the future, maybe tomorrow.... maybe in a 100,000 years. All memory of you and me will be gone and some other life form will rule the planet again.
In the meantime, people need to eat and the idyllic, romantic, sustainable farm model isn't ever, ever going to feed the planet.
It is laughable to read here that some people actually think they can perform this task, that's it's easy (cuz they read about it) and they can do it in their spare time.
O
ocean99
The world is sustainable, we simply need a large portion of human beings to die. War aint seemin so bad now is it hippies?
Kaneh
Member
WTF? Humans die anyway, we don't have to kill anyone!
We just need to stop the growth of population, it's not impossible.
We could easily feed current population if we stop eating meat everyday, most ouf our crop goes to feeding animals, that we then eat. It's not very efficient.
And for fuks sake Grape, you sound like 5 year old bragging about your BIG guns! LOL
...grow up man!
(Maybe you need to start smoking dope! wtf you're doing in this forum anyway?)
MoldyFrogToe
Member
I thought this quote of grapeman's was ironic.
Grapeman's telling us this is all big sham and there's nothing to worry about, no problem, etc.....
Sounds idyllic doesn't it...
"Just bury yer head, don't think about it, it'll be fine...."
And [more irony?] a sustainable model will feed the planet...that's why it's sustainable!
What you advocate is not feeding the planet...you're advocating unsustainability - suicide.
Hate to break it to ya, grapeman, but the type of farming I am talking about is not a fantasy.....I know people who are living this very lifestyle right fucking now. YES, grapeman...real people living real lives (and comfy ones), not some hippie fantasy in some eco-manual
A 100' x 60' garden plot will provide WAY more food than a family of 5 can eat, all on about 3-4 hours a day labour. And that is not bullshit or fantasy...because I have been in gardens like that, seen what can be grown and have eaten from them.
What we call "primitive" hunter/gatherer and subsistence farming societies spend on average about 15-20 hours a week on survival activities......the rest is down time. Why do you think a jacket with 10 000 individually dyed porcupine quills represented wealth?? Because it represented FREE TIME. If everyone in yer tribe had time to make said jacketsd, you had lots of resources....enuff for people to sit on their asses and sew jackets all winter. None of these societies would have produced and art, crafts, music or anything else if they only had time to feed themselves.
You see, in a system that converts effort directly into survival items, you get back pretty much all the energy you expend.
In the modern system which converts energy into money, that then gets used to buy survival items, about 50% of the energy you expend is drained off in the form of taxes, profit margins, etc etc.
If one drop of sweat equals on penny, you are getting back about 50 cents on the dollar for every 100 drops of sweat you expend.......and that works out to about 20 hours a week.
Eliminate that drain of energy, and you can get by quite nicely with 20 hours a week on survival tasks.
Of course, it won't work if everyone is demanding meat and animal products every day in gluttonous amounts.....that's just way too inefficient....which is why we have major hunger issues now. Remember, everytime you reduce the amount of livestock, you increase the amount of food available for humans.
Yes, choices must be made if you are going to be living that way......it is a much more simple life, without the huge amount of technology and toys that we are used to.
But of course selfish greedy parasites like you will NEVER give up your 60" TV and your giant fucking V8 truck for any reason (even your descendants survival) because it's the AMERICAN WAY goddamit, and you deserve it!
Humanity needs a serious kick in the face and to take a dood long break from this rampant technologically accelerated rape of our only home if we are to learn how to use said technology for actual long term species benefit.
Until that time, we are like a 3 year old kid with a can of gasoline, a crack pipe and a box of matches.....and have just as much of a future.
You are the only one living a fantasy, grapeman......denying reality usually does qualify as fantasy.
You think the world actually works in the way your corporate masters trained you to believe, and that their solutions are the only ones that are viable, and everything else is to be mocked condescendingly......how very mature and intelligent of you.
WWF research(if you call it that) is laughable ... imo anyhow carry on just my 2 cents
This is real easy guys. Ruling elite have used war as a one means of population control since the beginning of governments and social contracts thousands of years ago. That's a fact.
Do you think that fact has changed any?
Do you think because we are Americans we are somehow invincible to propaganda and history?
Like I said. We are all worked up for nothing. International tensions are running extremely high. Escalation is becoming very evident. Militarization is happening at break neck speed around the world. The global economy is melting down. We have over produced so now we go to war to help thin out the herd and make some money on the side.
When you control the world, it's really that easy. Just ask Alexander the Great.
Look up the the causes for WWI and WWII. History repeats yourself.
Sorry you aren't special lol. Shit happens and apathy kills generations.
Do you think that fact has changed any?
Do you think because we are Americans we are somehow invincible to propaganda and history?
Like I said. We are all worked up for nothing. International tensions are running extremely high. Escalation is becoming very evident. Militarization is happening at break neck speed around the world. The global economy is melting down. We have over produced so now we go to war to help thin out the herd and make some money on the side.
When you control the world, it's really that easy. Just ask Alexander the Great.
Look up the the causes for WWI and WWII. History repeats yourself.
Sorry you aren't special lol. Shit happens and apathy kills generations.
Time to stop the world and let off about half the people.
I want to be in charge of deciding who stays, and who goes.
I want to be in charge of deciding who stays, and who goes.
like I said, the Orcs are starting to show themselves 
What do you base your claim of supremacy on?
Modern Humans have been around about 100,000 years... and we're already getting close to our own extinction event.
Dinosaurs, on the other hand, were around for 165 million years.
Supreme species?
How are you defining your criteria?
Yes, China is a representative of the kind of culture that is currently dominant among the human species, and a prime example of just what is wrong with that culture. You're making my points for me! Please continue to educate us!
This is from 2006:
"The planet is losing species faster than at any time since 65 million years ago, when the earth was hit by an enormous asteroid that wiped out thousands of animals and plants, including the dinosaurs. Scientists estimate that the current rate at which species are becoming extinct is between 100 and 1,000 times greater than the normal "background" extinction rate - and say this is all due to human activity."
The fundamental problem with our current agricultural system is that it is NOT sustainable. For 10,000 years, while there was plenty of land to move to when the population exploded, it was hard to notice this effect. Now that we've got people in all those niches, there's nowhere else to expand to. We're running out of land.
Let me state again that in any feeder population, an increase in available food resources will bring an inevitable increase in the feeder population. For 10,000 years, we've been "solving" this problem by conquering more land, putting it under cultivation and growing more food.... which inevitably leads to an increased population.
This scenario does not end well and we're approaching the end game.
For 90,000 years human populations did not depend on agriculture to sustain their population. For 90,000 years, modern humans survived through hunting and gathering. For 90,000 years, the human population of this planet grew, but at a very slow pace.
In the last 10,000 years, the pace of the growth of the human population of this planet has shot up ASTRONOMICALLY. In the last 50 years alone, we have DOUBLED the human population of this planet! You don't see the red lights flashing and pressure valves ratcheting up?
Of course, hunting and gathering would not work now, because we have thousands more people than a given area can support via hunting and gathering. That's why we truck, ship and fly food all over the place. That's why when an event happens that severs that transportation system (aka Hurricane Katrina) you see the whole system break down. There isn't enough food in New Orleans to feed the people of New Orleans. When transportation breaks down, the people of New Orleans were left to fend for themselves. Are we shocked that they were looting?
Thanks, Dad. Glad to know you're out there saving me from myself.
Your argument? Sure is.
Wow. Did I mention guns? Re-read the post.
Still no takers on the "who get to die first" question?
You guys all talk in theoretical nonsense.
If you don't think the human race is the supreme species on this planet then you smoke too much weed.
OK - if we can all agree that kalicokitty calls the shots we can get on with it then.
I'm in kitty, just don't look over here.
Well, it wasn't really about population control 5,000 years ago. It was about increasing the size of the empire to gain more access to needed resources to feed that population. If any people happened to be LIVING THERE, they had the choice of being assimilated into the conquering culture or of being wiped out.
Which leaves more land for cultivation, which increases the population, which required new land to be conquered, new peoples to be subjugated or destroyed, new land to be cultivated, more people, which requires more expansion... and so on.
You must be REALLY stoned if you don't remember how you said you had lots of big guns a few posts back.
We have memories. Sorry if you don't.
