The elephant in the living room...and bedroom...and kitchen...and garage...and

[bean fidhleir]

on the lawn...and....

[hootinholler]

1. Cmon people if you can rec it, you can kick it too. n/t

[OneBlueSky]

2. okay . . . kicked and recommended . . . field goal!!! . . . n/t

[MountainLaurel]

3. Dead on, isn't it

I think a natural correction is in the forecast.

[RobertSeattle]

4. Yes but it one of those "WhatAreYaGonnaDo's?"

And it is certainly nothing you talk about at a Convention - it Debbie Downer material.

[ClayZ]

5. K and R

[SlipperySlope]

6. There is very little wrong with this world that a sudden 80% population reduction couldn't cure.

[readmoreoften]

14. Which 80% would you reduce suddenly?

Free global abortion access is a fantastic idea. A sudden 80% reduction of the global population means global extermination.

[bean fidhleir]

21. That's what Lovelock predicts we're going to get, want it or not

Because we're too godsdamned passive to do what's needed to save ourselves. 80% dieoff by 2100.

[cobalt1999]

29. An 80% reduction of human population is just what this planet needs

Of course, everyone wants to be in the remaining 20%.

Where we are is not sustainable even if growth stops tomorrow. Soon things will have to collapse and that reduction is going to be ugly.

[Growler]

7. K&R

[yorgatron]

8. K&R

:kick:

[ceile]

9. K&R

[Duppers]

10. Indeed, indeed, indeed

why is this so difficult for many to see?

why are they so defensive?

[NashVegas]

12. Because The First Person To Say It Is Going To Get Crucified

Who's going to decide what tribes get wiped out, and what tribes don't?

Don't kid yourself into thinking there aren't and haven't been very high level meetings among the world's most powerful NGOs (GOs would have to be on the record).

I reckon right now there's a bit of a fight going on between the very well-intended groups who have unintentionally exacerbated the issue, and the pragmatists who have no plans to interfere with nature - and maybe wish even to help it along.

[riverdeep]

17. Some big names have gone on the record.

You better believe the elite know what's going on. Now, I don't know if I buy the Alex Jones (there's his name again today) theory that the elite are out to kill 90% or so of us off, that they're holding secret meetings at Bilderberger planning our demise, but I think they know.

Here is what Ted Turner said about the subject:

One way to combat global warming, Turner said, is to stabilize the population.

"We're too many people; that's why we have global warming," he said. "Too many people are using too much stuff."

If steps aren't taken to stem global warming, "We'll be eight degrees hotter in 30 or 40 years and basically none of the crops will grow," Turner said during a wide-ranging, hour-long interview with PBS's Charlie Rose that aired Tuesday.

"Most of the people will have died and the rest of us will be cannibals," said Turner, 69. "Civilization will have broken down. The few people left will be living in a failed state — like Somalia or Sudan — and living conditions will be intolerable."

"Ted Turner: Global warming could lead to cannibalism"
http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/news/stories/2008/04/03/turner_0404.html

[NashVegas]

18. We Don't Have 30 or 40 Years

What do you suppose would happen if Ted went on Larry King and said it's time to stop it with cancer treatments and in vitro fertilization, and feeding the hungry in Africa?

[SmokingJacket]

13. When we solve the poverty problem, the population problem

will take care of itself. Over-population is mainly a problem of the poorest countries. The wealthiest countries are actually losing population or holding steady.

Honestly, I don't see how we can solve the population problem otherwise.

[Indenturedebtor]

22. How do you solve the poverty problem without consuming more crap?

I think that ultimatelywe will be able to string things out for at least another 150 years barring some major catastrophe. Probably lose 30% TO global warming... but unless the warming happens REALLY QUICKLY we would build food towers, etc.

[Duppers]

26. you read the environment forum

do really think we have 150 yrs to string things out?

[Indenturedebtor]

28. Not as they are no.... I think at minimum we will lose 30% not 80%

In this country probably more like 10-15%.

[Duppers]

25. Simplified: people cannot afford birth control?

and the right wing are against birth control to the max.

Killing us off???? Then who'd work to support their rich asses?



"TOO MANY PEOPLE are using too much stuff." Amen, Ted.

[rucky]

23. The Worldwatch Institute has been saying it for over 20 years.

and still deaf ears...

http://www.worldwatch.org/node/5326

[MellowDem]

27. I live down the road from that church in your picture

I cringe every time I pass it on the way down 75, and I'm a Christian!

(not to others, the referee shirt was digitally added, humorously at that)

Don't forget, regarding the cartoon, that economics are also a big reason why governments won't face overpopulation. Lower population growth = less profit for bloated corporations.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

11. But..but..God wants us to produce more consumers!!

[robertpaulsen]

15. First thing I thought of upon reading your title, before seeing the cartoon.

Fantastic cartoon! Elephant on the planet! K & R!

:kick:

[riverdeep]

16. Population control is a tough nut.

The good news is that anti population control is mostly a product of traditional or conservative thinking. Whether it is a religion that says go forth and multiply (and multiply and multiply and multiply), or abhorrence at birth control and sex education, or raising the status of women and increasing their opportunities in society and education- all factors that contribute to lower population- these ideas are mostly found on the right side of the curve.

The bad news is, they're the ones with power.

In his book, "The World Without Us", Alan Weisman offers one solution: everyone voluntarily having one child. Eventually the population would come down 'naturally' without the need (or inevitability) of massive die-offs. This wouldn't go over too well with many people who feel large families are a right, but either we find solutions, or nature finds solutions for us.

[NashVegas]

24. That Can't Work Without Coercion

ie, totalitarianism. Some people would rather let a catastrophe take care of it than have it come to that.

[misanthrope]

19. So true, so true...

...and looking at human history it's fairly easy to deduce we will not address this problem and nature will correct it for us in the most painful of ways.

We certainly have had every opportunity to see this for ourselves and do what was necessary to avoid it, but ultimately we're no more responsible, mature or proactive than any of the other animals we so arrogantly see as "beneath" us.

Homo sapiens- the fightin'est, f#ckin'est monkey around.

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

20. Um,...hasn't population growth slowed beyond mere stagnation?

:shrug:

Besides, one of the many failed "problem-identifiers" to complex issues would be,...over-population. The right-wing says all our problems are due to aborting the babies that would have solved ALL these issues (geez,...hundreds of millions of more struggling lives would have made this life a better place).

:shrug:

The only ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM I see,...is the one perpetuating oppression for profit and power.

[varelse]

30. Thread is too old, can't rec

:kick: