Article

2009-04-01 Home Front: Culture Wars

"Environmentally Sustainable Populations" -- a conference for people who want you to die

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Mike 2009-04-01 12:05|| || Front Page|| [4 views ] Top

#1 Of course, the people attending these conferences don't need to die; quite the contrary, they need to stay around to make sure enough of the rest of us die. Vital work. Can't be left to amateurs, you see.

Posted by Jonathan 2009-04-01 12:13|| 2009-04-01 12:13|| Front Page Top

#2 If these folks wanna go home and stick their heads in the oven, or bathe with their blow dryers in order to reconcile their moral dillemma about overpopulation, please, feel free. A win-win for everybody.
Funny thing is? They ain't doing it.

Posted by tu3031 2009-04-01 12:21|| 2009-04-01 12:21|| Front Page Top

#3 I need the coordinates.

I will call in a MOAB strike so we can start the process properly.

Posted by DarthVader 2009-04-01 12:51|| 2009-04-01 12:51|| Front Page Top

#4 They should serve Kool-Aid at these things.

But seriously, it amazes me that people don't realize how much of our civilization requires a high population. Cut the population by half, then check to see how many specialty foods they sell in your local supermarket. Did I say "supermarket"? Only in major urban centers. Mass transit? What "mass"? Universal electrical service, 500 channels on TV, drugs for rare illnesses -- the list goes on an on.

Posted by Iblis 2009-04-01 13:06|| 2009-04-01 13:06|| Front Page Top

#5 Two birds with one stone: Save the planet - feed a polar bear.

If you truly want to prove your dedication to the planet and lead by example, head on up north and feed yourself to a polar bear.

There was a ST:TNG episode, forget its name, where I think a planet's sun was going to explode or something and the one person who had a chance to solve that problem was required to be put down at a certain age according to custom.

Posted by swksvolFF 2009-04-01 13:16|| 2009-04-01 13:16|| Front Page Top

#6 ..and in that episode they explained that it was done because the 'cost' of up keep on the 'old' people became too economically expensive. Took too much of the budget. They didn't realize all they had to do was implement Dutch/British/Canadian universal socialized health care and bureaucratic ~~rationing~~ scheduling to achieve the same effect. I guess the prime directive inhibited them from communicating the concept.

Posted by Procopius2k 2009-04-01 13:57|| 2009-04-01 13:57|| Front Page Top

#7 Thats right..thanks for the addition/refresher P2K.

Posted by swksvolFF 2009-04-01 17:01|| 2009-04-01 17:01|| Front Page Top

#8 Well, if somebody started a global nuclear war, that would certainly reduce the population to a "sustainable" level. First nuke all the big cities, so you get the most kills from the soft targets. Even if you didn't kill all the residents right away, many of them would die from starvation, since the transportation and energy transportation and energy systems would be destroyed, leading to mass starvation.
Not to mention, that a nuclear war would cause a nuclear winter, which would be an effective antidote to global warming.
I'm surprised that no one at the conference suggested this. If you look at it from a purely statistical view, it would be quite effective.
Please note that I am in no way really suggesting this. People have been screaming since I was a child fifty years ago that the world was overpopulated, and we had to "do something" to put a brake on population growth to prevent an apocalypse by the end of the twentieth century.
The world has essentially infinite water. What it may not have is adequate fresh, drinkable water. It is merely an engineering problem to produce fresh water from sea water and distribute it. A few nuclear powered distillers could probably supply all the water the world needs.

Posted by Rambler in Virginia">Rambler in Virginia 2009-04-01 17:05|| 2009-04-01 17:05|| Front Page Top

#9 a nuclear war would cause a nuclear winter

This theory has long since been discredited.

Posted by Elmese Pelosi5370 2009-04-01 19:33|| 2009-04-01 19:33|| Front Page Top

#10 EP5370,well, we won't know for sure until we try, now, will we. Even if there isn't a nuclear winter, there will still be mass starvation, since there will be no way to transport the food to market, or fuel or fertilizer for the farms.

Posted by Rambler in Virginia">Rambler in Virginia 2009-04-01 21:19|| 2009-04-01 21:19|| Front Page Top

#11 Maybe they should talk to the Chinese and Indian people about the problem.

Posted by rjschwarz 2009-04-01 23:58|| 2009-04-01 23:58|| Front Page Top

23:58 rjschwarz
23:48 Galactic Coordinator Omavising9607
23:37 JosephMendiola
23:34 JosephMendiola
23:09 ed
23:05 JosephMendiola
23:00 Thing From Snowy Mountain
22:59 Thing From Snowy Mountain
22:59 JosephMendiola
22:55 JosephMendiola
22:39 Spiny Norman
22:15 Old Patriot
21:58 Barbara Skolaut
21:54 Barbara Skolaut
21:46 Iblis
21:19 Rambler in Virginia
20:54 DMFD
20:27 JosephMendiola
20:23 JosephMendiola
20:18 Bright Pebbles the flatulent
20:16 Barbara Skolaut
20:16 JosephMendiola
20:15 whatadeal
20:09 Barbara Skolaut