It is currently Thu May 28, 2026 9:42 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 69 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
mechaphil
PostPosted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 12:41 pm 
Offline
Thy Horror Cosmic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 4:57 pm
Posts: 19086
Location: BFLO
No need to call anyone a Nazi.

And yea, population growth is a huge problem, but unfortunately those of us interested in population control can't talk about it without the above happening. So we don't, cuz most people are dicks about it.

_________________
mechaphil


Last edited by mechaphil on Mon Jul 12, 2010 12:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
Stuuuuuuu
PostPosted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 12:44 pm 
Offline
Franchise Defenseman
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:09 pm
Posts: 2876
Location: Portland, Oregano
Sabresfansince1980 wrote:
More importantly, the amount of change US citizens can make (if in fact humans have any impact) based on the litany of environmental laws that have been passed or are on the horizon is miniscule if not at all possible. No matter how many Priuses anyone on the US drives, nothing will change as long as the rest of the world (or at least Russia, China, etc) doesn't care to change (if in fact humans have any impact what-so-ever).


This statement couldn't be less true. The average US citizen (me included) contributes more CO2 per capita than that of ANY other country. In fact, China just now surpassed the US as the world's biggest carbon polluter despite the fact that they have roughly 5 times the population of the US. That's including the environmental laws that have limited emissions in the US.

As to the "oh well, we're not gonna stop it" attitude, your'e a cop right? Well, crime is going to always exist. Do you think your actions can stop crime? No matter what you do, there will still be crime. So why not just throw your hands in the air and say "oh well"? That's basically the attitude you're giving on climate change. But you don't do that do you? Know why? Because you want to make the problem better despite the fact you won't be able to totally solve it. Pity you don't take that same attitude in this situation.


Top
 Profile  
 
YankeeInRaleigh
PostPosted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 12:56 pm 
Offline
Franchise Defenseman
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 9:58 pm
Posts: 2631
Location: Take a guess...
Hammygoodness wrote:

You know, this claim has been made for 100 years. Yet we haven't reached a point of overpopulation.

Ham



And how would you define 'overpopulation' ham?


Top
 Profile  
 
NYIntensity
PostPosted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 1:08 pm 
Offline
Superstar Goalie
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 2:11 pm
Posts: 4463
I would define overpopulation as anything above sustainable. And on a global measure, not just a "there's extra food in the cupboard" standard of measure.

_________________
ksquier89 wrote:
Holy fucking fuck...Boyes couldn't suck a dick if it landed in his mouth.


Top
 Profile  
 
Crosscheck
PostPosted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 1:12 pm 
Offline
Sober enough to run a server
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 3:10 am
Posts: 7477
Location: 2,568 miles from the F'n arena
Stuuuuuuu wrote:
As to the "oh well, we're not gonna stop it" attitude, your'e a cop right? Well, crime is going to always exist. Do you think your actions can stop crime? No matter what you do, there will still be crime. So why not just throw your hands in the air and say "oh well"? That's basically the attitude you're giving on climate change. But you don't do that do you? Know why? Because you want to make the problem better despite the fact you won't be able to totally solve it. Pity you don't take that same attitude in this situation.

If every American became carbon neutral today, nothing would change in the picture being painted by AGW "proponents".
It's already too late. Catastrophic climate change is a foregone conclusion.

While we're at it, the gulf of Mexico is about to implode and unleash a planet killing wave of toxic gasses.

I'm going to go home, have a juicy steak, a beer and say fuck-it-all. ;)

_________________
Hold my beer and watch this...


Top
 Profile  
 
mechaphil
PostPosted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 1:21 pm 
Offline
Thy Horror Cosmic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 4:57 pm
Posts: 19086
Location: BFLO
Seriously, Ham, calling you out on this one. You roll up in here to address someone's valid thoughts about the fact that the human race's population growth is a problem, and your only retort is to bust out a tired attack? Get over yourself.

_________________
mechaphil


Top
 Profile  
 
CriminallyVu1gar
PostPosted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 1:23 pm 
Offline
Captain Dynasty
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 4:56 pm
Posts: 16859
NYIntensity wrote:
CriminallyVu1gar wrote:
I think the problem that people ignore is over-population. The current growth of the world population is not sustainable. (Not to mention those that tend to breed are morons).

While I take particular exception to the latter portion of your post, the former is quite true. We're bloating well past sustainable levels, and I really think that there ought to be some limitations, based on income, career, education, etc.

People should need a license to procreate.


Talking about people like this guy.

Image


It's called a condom, tell your stupid religion to stop hating them.

_________________
Proud LGBTQQ Individual


Top
 Profile  
 
mechaphil
PostPosted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 1:24 pm 
Offline
Thy Horror Cosmic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 4:57 pm
Posts: 19086
Location: BFLO
NYIntensity wrote:
I would define overpopulation as anything above sustainable. And on a global measure, not just a "there's extra food in the cupboard" standard of measure.

Given the world's daily consumption of petroleum, the severe food and clean drinking water shortages, and the destruction of rain forests and the like by encroaching "civilization", and I'd say we're overpopulated for sure.

_________________
mechaphil


Top
 Profile  
 
Stuuuuuuu
PostPosted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 1:28 pm 
Offline
Franchise Defenseman
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:09 pm
Posts: 2876
Location: Portland, Oregano
Overpopulation is a very relative thing, in Ham's defense. Obviously there's enough food to feed everyone that's already here. And there's enough space. When I was in college I had a professor who once told us that you could take every person in the world, put them in standard suburban houses in families of 4-6, with small yards and everything, and they would all fit within the state of Texas.

Now, populations outgrowing their resources in other ways would be less easy to define. There are many historians who say that's exactly what happened to the people on Easter Island. But those historians are generally seen as endorsing the idea that people and their lifestyles affect the environment. As we know, that idea is apparently very controversial around here. :?


Top
 Profile  
 
mechaphil
PostPosted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 1:34 pm 
Offline
Thy Horror Cosmic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 4:57 pm
Posts: 19086
Location: BFLO
I don't take umbrage with Ham's idea that there might not be population overgrowth, but with the fact that he came out of nowhere and called Alex a Nazi just for suggesting that there's too much breeding going on (which, if there's population overgrowth, THERE IS).

Also, Stuu, that's not the first time I've heard the Texas theory but I can't remember where it was I heard it before.

_________________
mechaphil


Top
 Profile  
 
Crosscheck
PostPosted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 1:36 pm 
Offline
Sober enough to run a server
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 3:10 am
Posts: 7477
Location: 2,568 miles from the F'n arena
Our global economy and advanced technology is what allows modern society to have populations that outgrow their resources (see every major city on the planet).
I wouldn't out and out call that a bad thing.

_________________
Hold my beer and watch this...


Top
 Profile  
 
CriminallyVu1gar
PostPosted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 1:39 pm 
Offline
Captain Dynasty
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 4:56 pm
Posts: 16859
Well if you took the roughly 6,000,000,000 people and put them in houses of five on a half acre, you'd take up 937,500 square miles which is roughly 3.5 times the size of texas.

_________________
Proud LGBTQQ Individual


Top
 Profile  
 
mechaphil
PostPosted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 1:40 pm 
Offline
Thy Horror Cosmic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 4:57 pm
Posts: 19086
Location: BFLO
Isn't the global economy in a bit of a shitty downswing at the moment, though? (save the strong Canadian dollar. Goddamn Canucks! lol)

_________________
mechaphil


Top
 Profile  
 
Crosscheck
PostPosted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 1:42 pm 
Offline
Sober enough to run a server
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 3:10 am
Posts: 7477
Location: 2,568 miles from the F'n arena
mechaphil wrote:
Isn't the global economy in a bit of a shitty downswing at the moment, though? (save the strong Canadian dollar. Goddamn Canucks! lol)

Ahh but I can still get resources that wouldn't be available to me naively in my location...like Taiwanese porn for example.

_________________
Hold my beer and watch this...


Top
 Profile  
 
mechaphil
PostPosted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 1:43 pm 
Offline
Thy Horror Cosmic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 4:57 pm
Posts: 19086
Location: BFLO
There's a good chance you're gonna get a trap, so I'd stay away from that Taiwanese porn if I were you ;)

_________________
mechaphil


Top
 Profile  
 
Stuuuuuuu
PostPosted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 1:46 pm 
Offline
Franchise Defenseman
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:09 pm
Posts: 2876
Location: Portland, Oregano
CriminallyVu1gar wrote:
Well if you took the roughly 6,000,000,000 people and put them in houses of five on a half acre, you'd take up 937,500 square miles which is roughly 3.5 times the size of texas.

A half acre is pretty big for suburban living IMO. I said small yards. Of course I never bothered fact-checking this statement before repeating it so kudos on that.


Top
 Profile  
 
CriminallyVu1gar
PostPosted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 1:47 pm 
Offline
Captain Dynasty
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 4:56 pm
Posts: 16859
Stuuuuuuu wrote:
CriminallyVu1gar wrote:
Well if you took the roughly 6,000,000,000 people and put them in houses of five on a half acre, you'd take up 937,500 square miles which is roughly 3.5 times the size of texas.

A half acre is pretty big for suburban living IMO. I said small yards. Of course I never bothered fact-checking this statement before repeating it so kudos on that.


Thought a half acre was pretty standard for suburbia.

_________________
Proud LGBTQQ Individual


Top
 Profile  
 
mechaphil
PostPosted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 1:48 pm 
Offline
Thy Horror Cosmic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 4:57 pm
Posts: 19086
Location: BFLO
Stuuuuuuu wrote:
CriminallyVu1gar wrote:
Well if you took the roughly 6,000,000,000 people and put them in houses of five on a half acre, you'd take up 937,500 square miles which is roughly 3.5 times the size of texas.

A half acre is pretty big for suburban living IMO. I said small yards. Of course I never bothered fact-checking this statement before repeating it so kudos on that.

When in doubt, have Alex crunch the numbers and calculate the stats. He won't let ya down :)

_________________
mechaphil


Top
 Profile  
 
CriminallyVu1gar
PostPosted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 1:49 pm 
Offline
Captain Dynasty
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 4:56 pm
Posts: 16859
CriminallyVu1gar wrote:
Stuuuuuuu wrote:
CriminallyVu1gar wrote:
Well if you took the roughly 6,000,000,000 people and put them in houses of five on a half acre, you'd take up 937,500 square miles which is roughly 3.5 times the size of texas.

A half acre is pretty big for suburban living IMO. I said small yards. Of course I never bothered fact-checking this statement before repeating it so kudos on that.


Thought a half acre was pretty standard for suburbia.


Tried to google the average suburban plot and came up empty. Not trying to bust your balls, I was just curious myself.



Alright, so a half acre is around 100 x 200 feet which isn't that much bigger than the land we had when we lived in an (end) townhouse. I'd guess we probably had something like 200 x 70 feet, so I think that's pretty standard for most housing developments.


I think I've heard if you took the population density of the densest county in NYC and applied that to the world, everyone would fit in Rhode Island.

_________________
Proud LGBTQQ Individual


Top
 Profile  
 
NYIntensity
PostPosted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 1:51 pm 
Offline
Superstar Goalie
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 2:11 pm
Posts: 4463
mechaphil wrote:
NYIntensity wrote:
I would define overpopulation as anything above sustainable. And on a global measure, not just a "there's extra food in the cupboard" standard of measure.

Given the world's daily consumption of petroleum, the severe food and clean drinking water shortages, and the destruction of rain forests and the like by encroaching "civilization", and I'd say we're overpopulated for sure.


Like I said, global measure. (For clarification, we're on the same page).

_________________
ksquier89 wrote:
Holy fucking fuck...Boyes couldn't suck a dick if it landed in his mouth.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 69 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron