ForumsWEPRWhat would be the best way to unpopulate the earth

290 32702
thecode11
offline
thecode11
242 posts
505

Any answers hopefully humane and by unpopulate i mean lower human populations.

  • 290 Replies
toemas
offline
toemas
340 posts
2,325

Oh, and as a follow-up, it might be great for you to know that the email *** internet monitoring program began under Bush.


Yea, I know that. bush wasnât that great either, you think just because Iâm conservative I like bush?!
maybe im not the only one that need to be educated.
KnightDeclan
offline
KnightDeclan
479 posts
280

To the topic: Well, you could go around everywhere nuking the world... or there are slower ways like abortion, pestilence, starvation, etc.

EndlessMarrow
offline
EndlessMarrow
60 posts
410

Well if the world is going overpopulate then i guess the moon is the only valid option to colonize either that or we all go full nuclear warfare.

nichodemus
offline
nichodemus
14,328 posts
24,220

either that or we all go full nuclear warfare.


For the survivors that would be plain calamitous. Who wants to live their lives choking on a radioactive cloud, or living in a dystopian landscape?
Outcast_Gamer117
offline
Outcast_Gamer117
22 posts
55

A plague. Human beings are vulnerable to almost any type of diseases and it should be transmitted sexually so they can be reluctant to engage in intercourse and repopulate. Think of it as a nature brush fire, it's natural and potentially when the disease does its job humans can develop a cure for it and life continues on with fewer people.

nichodemus
offline
nichodemus
14,328 posts
24,220

A plague. Human beings are vulnerable to almost any type of diseases and it should be transmitted sexually so they can be reluctant to engage in intercourse and repopulate. Think of it as a nature brush fire, it's natural and potentially when the disease does its job humans can develop a cure for it and life continues on with fewer people.


The Aids epidemic and contraception has proven that wrong.
JeffK3
offline
JeffK3
621 posts
970

Humanity will eventually come to blows on a much larger scale then a fist fight in probably at the most, 60 years. What is the most valued resource in the world? Oil. Lets face it, the oil supplies are going to run dry. What will happen when oil starts running out? War. Wars will start breaking out all over the world.

Also, due to the greenhouse effect of carbon dioxide, the ice cap on the norhtpole is melting. Whats underneath the polar icecaps? Trapped methane gas. There is no way at this point we can stop it. We literally set a timer for ourselves to make our mark that won't last forever. THat methane gas is like 4 times as bad a greenhouse gas as CO2. Then the process repeats itself the Greenhouse gas will keep melting the icecaps. Once the icecaps melt fully in 100-150 years, people will start moving towards central locations away from the previously habitable coastline. Most of the East coast of the U.S. will be underwater! When humanity gets really cramped. Genocide. Look at Germany during and before WWII, Germany was overpopulated. That's why they started to invade neighboring countries, but also they did the holocaust. Now before I get flamed for talking about this let me explain. The holocaust, yes it was a terrible thing, but it was a means to an end. One, it reduced the population in Germany to reasonable levels. Two, the nazis were trying to make "the perfect race" but that is not what we are talking about. When the population starts fighting itself it will be gruesome so many lives will end up being lost because of that we don't nee to worry about unpopulating the earth. The Earth will fo it for us.

nichodemus
offline
nichodemus
14,328 posts
24,220

That's why they started to invade neighboring countries, but also they did the holocaust. Now before I get flamed for talking about this let me explain. The holocaust, yes it was a terrible thing, but it was a means to an end. One, it reduced the population in Germany to reasonable levels. Two, the nazis were trying to make "the perfect race" but that is not what we are talking about. When the population starts fighting itself it will be gruesome so many lives will end up being lost because of that we don't nee to worry about unpopulating the earth. The Earth will fo it for us.


Germany wasn't overpopulated. Hitler merely wanted more land for Germany. The idea that the Teutonic people were living in insufficient space and therefore needed to expand was there long before Hitler came to power. Hitler merely added a racist overtone to such a gruesome idea.

And no, anyone that thinks the Holocaust was a means to an end, i.e, reducing the population, that is cruel hogwash.
JeffK3
offline
JeffK3
621 posts
970

And no, anyone that thinks the Holocaust was a means to an end, i.e, reducing the population, that is cruel hogwash.


It was a means to an end for Hitler. The final solution was where he started exterminating people. He tried to start moving people first. So he would do whatever it would take to remove these people from his countries. ALso according to the textbook Modern World History Germany, more specifically Hitler, started invading neighboring countries because of a lack of space for his people. This was called lebensraum which translates literally to living space.

Also I realize now that the Holocaust was a bad example but, regardless there would be massive overcrowding after the loss of the coasts that there woud be a streak of murders over places to grow food.
nichodemus
offline
nichodemus
14,328 posts
24,220

It was a means to an end for Hitler. The final solution was where he started exterminating people. He tried to start moving people first. So he would do whatever it would take to remove these people from his countries. ALso according to the textbook Modern World History Germany, more specifically Hitler, started invading neighboring countries because of a lack of space for his people. This was called lebensraum which translates literally to living space.


Germany was not overpopulated. Plain and simple. The populace was starting to enjoy the benefits of the Nazi's economic policies, with unemployment falling to a record low, and prosperity returning. And yes, the history texts all state this but an important caveat to note is that the Nazi party promulgated such a belief, yet this does not give it the status of truth.

Much of Hitler's own version of Lebensraum was overtly racial propaganda. Lebensraum's original theorists did not envision Lebensraum as a solution of overpopulation, but simply as a program of expansion. Ratzel, Lebensraum's original proponent theorized that in order to remain healthy, species must continually expand the amount of space they occupy, for migration is a natural feature of all species, an expression of their need for living space. In other words, an excuse for continuous expansion when combined with Hitler's Aryan vision.

Dr. Friedrich Burgdoerfer, director of the Reich's Statistical Office, asserted at the Berlin world population conference in solemnly objective tones, that by the year 1960 Slavs would make up over half the European population, while the proportion of Germans would shrink to one-fourth. He illustrated his speech with charts which were later reprinted in numerous Nazi propaganda documents. Was Lebensraum therefore a policy to target overpopulation, or was it a ghoulish policy of racial superiority? Lebensraum was for Hitler the belief in a German manifest destiny, and ranged from a desire to retake what was taken in the Treaty of Versailles to plans of ruling the world, with the cover up myth of overpopulation.

In fact, towards the war years, Hitler's Germany came close to achieving autarky then it ever had. It's unemployment dropped from over 6 million to 1.6 million.

And I know what Lebensraum is. I would venture to say that I'm the most well-read about Hitler in this entire community, having spent much of my youth mired in Nazi-related history books and research.

Also I realize now that the Holocaust was a bad example but, regardless there would be massive overcrowding after the loss of the coasts that there woud be a streak of murders over places to grow food.


The world has enough arable land to feed our current population and even more; we're just not using it right.
pangtongshu
offline
pangtongshu
9,995 posts
3,285

The holocaust, yes it was a terrible thing, but it was a means to an end. One, it reduced the population in Germany to reasonable levels. Two, the nazis were trying to make "the perfect race" but that is not what we are talking about. When the population starts fighting itself it will be gruesome so many lives will end up being lost because of that we don't nee to worry about unpopulating the earth. The Earth will fo it for us.


For the love of all that is holy..you better not be justifying the ****ing holocaust.
nichodemus
offline
nichodemus
14,328 posts
24,220

He isn't. But he's trying to frame an argument that the Holocaust helped solved the "overpopulation problem''.

Sonatavarius
offline
Sonatavarius
1,326 posts
2,150

abstinence is the best means by which to solve the overpopulation problem!

Salvidian
offline
Salvidian
4,229 posts
2,255

For the love of all that is holy..you better not be justifying the ****ing holocaust.


Had the holocaust been much different it could have benefited both Jews and Nazis. They hated each other, so separating them would've helped everyone. By separating, I mean humanely and equally - and without genocide and violence altogether. But you know why that wouldn't work, I'm sure.

If t'd been like that, it wouldn't even be a holocaust. More like a perfect segregation.
Nerdsoft
offline
Nerdsoft
1,274 posts
430

abstinence is the best means by which to solve the overpopulation problem!

Aye aye. Basic Darwinism there- killing off the crazy. No, I would say a worldwide family planning scheme, heavy rationing and two-child bonus for farmers to keep the food supply going. Possibly the same for scientists to keep research up. The Chinese have the right idea.
Showing 91-105 of 290