Re: Fewer Feet, Smaller Footprint

Postby j2hyde on Thu 24/Sep/09 9:46pm

Yogi wrote:However, without reading his whole work it seems like he's missing the biological side of the argument. Would i be right there?
Does Simon suggest we'll keep inventing ways to stretch resources further and further?


I'm not sure the "biological argument" you mention is relevant. There is little evidence supporting the theory that there is a carrying capacity for the humans species, and certainly no reliable estimate of what that capacity might be should it exist. As fatwombat and others have already pointed out scientists that study the subject believe we can produce more than enough food and other neccessities for at least twice the earths current human population, and if you kept reading that wikipedia article you quoted you'd see that the UN (amongst others) expects population growth to plateau before we get to that figure, based on extrapolating current trends.

And the answer to the second question is yes. Except that it's about more than just stretching resources .

So far every person who has predicted overpopulation doom and gloom has been wrong. And hey, you could be the first to be right, but I doubt it.
j2hyde
User avatar
"I'm not for that. I'm for the ladies."
Member for: 12 years 2 months

Re: Fewer Feet, Smaller Footprint

Postby Kazmeistyr on Thu 24/Sep/09 11:05pm

Fact: There are too many humans on earth.

How do I know this?

Cos they fuck me off when I am trying to get somewhere.
Kazmeistyr
User avatar
"has the power of Greyskull"
Member for: 14 years 3 months

Re: Fewer Feet, Smaller Footprint

Postby Oli on Thu 24/Sep/09 11:09pm

Imagine twice as many! Earth may well be theoretically able to sustain twice the population, but it's hard to comprehend it being a pleasant existence. :crazy:
Oli
User avatar
Member for: 12 years 4 months

Re: Fewer Feet, Smaller Footprint

Postby Oli on Thu 24/Sep/09 11:10pm

Unless human nature has been completely remodelled so that everyone cares for each other and the environment, of course... :huh:
Oli
User avatar
Member for: 12 years 4 months

Re: Fewer Feet, Smaller Footprint

Postby shmoodiver on Thu 24/Sep/09 11:13pm

humans are cheating natural selection by making safer cars and better medicines, let the weak and the stoopid die
shmoodiver
User avatar
"There he goes. One of God's own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production. Too weird to live, and too rare to die."
Member for: 10 years 3 months

Re: Fewer Feet, Smaller Footprint

Postby Oli on Thu 24/Sep/09 11:15pm

Even the alcohol, cigarettes and drugs aren't doing that very well. :(
Oli
User avatar
Member for: 12 years 4 months

Re: Fewer Feet, Smaller Footprint

Postby Kazmeistyr on Thu 24/Sep/09 11:16pm

Oli wrote:Imagine twice as many! Earth may well be theoretically able to sustain twice the population, but it's hard to comprehend it being a pleasant existence. :crazy:



Haha. So some cunzor with a pen in his pocket and no sex life reckons in theory the planet can sustain twice the current population when it the bloody thing is fucked with what it has now. Fucking theoritical maths debaters.
Kazmeistyr
User avatar
"has the power of Greyskull"
Member for: 14 years 3 months

Re: Fewer Feet, Smaller Footprint

Postby Oli on Thu 24/Sep/09 11:17pm

We're going to EVOLVE, man. :exclaim:
Oli
User avatar
Member for: 12 years 4 months

Re: Fewer Feet, Smaller Footprint

Postby Kazmeistyr on Thu 24/Sep/09 11:20pm

Oli wrote:We're going to EVOLVE, man. :exclaim:


We've evolved into cunzors now, what's next? Teh 'nus?
Kazmeistyr
User avatar
"has the power of Greyskull"
Member for: 14 years 3 months

Re: Fewer Feet, Smaller Footprint

Postby shmoodiver on Thu 24/Sep/09 11:24pm

Kazmeistyr wrote:
Oli wrote:Imagine twice as many! Earth may well be theoretically able to sustain twice the population, but it's hard to comprehend it being a pleasant existence. :crazy:



Haha. So some cunzor with a pen in his pocket and no sex life reckons in theory the planet can sustain twice the current population when it the bloody thing is fucked with what it has now. Fucking theoritical maths debaters.




in theory, if we shove food up our arse we should poo from our mouths
shmoodiver
User avatar
"There he goes. One of God's own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production. Too weird to live, and too rare to die."
Member for: 10 years 3 months

Re: Fewer Feet, Smaller Footprint

Postby Kazmeistyr on Thu 24/Sep/09 11:26pm

shmoodiver wrote:
Kazmeistyr wrote:
Oli wrote:Imagine twice as many! Earth may well be theoretically able to sustain twice the population, but it's hard to comprehend it being a pleasant existence. :crazy:



Haha. So some cunzor with a pen in his pocket and no sex life reckons in theory the planet can sustain twice the current population when it the bloody thing is fucked with what it has now. Fucking theoritical maths debaters.




in theory, if we shove food up our arse we should poo from our mouths


This, apparently, does actually happen. Cartman said so.

It is actually possible, via severe constipation, to vomit teh turd.
Kazmeistyr
User avatar
"has the power of Greyskull"
Member for: 14 years 3 months

Re: Fewer Feet, Smaller Footprint

Postby Oli on Thu 24/Sep/09 11:27pm

That's grosser than an Ethiopian famine! :crazy:
Oli
User avatar
Member for: 12 years 4 months

Re: Fewer Feet, Smaller Footprint

Postby Kazmeistyr on Thu 24/Sep/09 11:37pm

Oli wrote:That's grosser than an Ethiopian famine! :crazy:


Tee hee. I just remembered the "cornflake" joke. I am a bad man.
Kazmeistyr
User avatar
"has the power of Greyskull"
Member for: 14 years 3 months

Re: Fewer Feet, Smaller Footprint

Postby fatwombat on Fri 25/Sep/09 2:24am

Oli wrote:
fatwombat wrote:But in this thread I wish I could think :exclaim:


It's always fun to quote someone out of context, isn't it? :thumbsup:


I don't know if it's fun, but it is certainly a good way to get more evidence for one's own point of view. And your point here is . . . ?
fatwombat
User avatar
"Our planet is the mental institution of the universe. - Goethe"
Member for: 8 years 3 months

Re: Fewer Feet, Smaller Footprint

Postby philstar on Fri 25/Sep/09 7:46am

E Dogg Capizzle wrote:
philstar wrote:so I repeet either value is subjective or not, if it is not then the value of things belong to it by its very naturen it and "intrinsic value" is a tautology.


Where did you do moral philosophy? I hope they failed you. A moral realist isn't committed to all values being intrinsic. They can consistently claim that people are intrinsically valuable and that the environment only has value insofar as it has an effect on people. Moral theory isn't as simplistic as your naive distinctions imply. :rolleyes:


what does moral philosophy have to do with it? I'm arguing semantics of the definition of value (weather value is subjective or not, which in my definition it has to be) :D but I guess you could say some things have "intrinsic value" whilst others have subjective value, and then I ask how you distinguish between them ?
philstar
User avatar
"misanthropic"
Member for: 11 years 9 months

International Politics | Politics | Sifting - Latest Posts

Who is online

57 Users browsing this website: DotBot, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], OliverBendix, Zoom and 51 guests

REMEBER TO CLICK THE LINKS WHEN BUYING FROM VORB SUPPORTERS


  • Chain Reaction Cycles
  • GT Bicycles
  • Merlin Cycles
  • ProBikeKit
  • Vorb Shop
  • Wiggle