Skip to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

ASEAN NOW

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.

Halving humanity could help save Earth, scientists say

Featured Replies

12 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Clot you say.

I see what you did there. :)

  • Replies 67
  • Views 1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Most Popular Posts

  • blaze master
    blaze master

    Hahahah save the earth. I love this. Apart from breaking our planet in 2 there is nothing we could ever do that the earth wont recover from. Billions of years of damage and recoveries. 5 or so mass

  • Mr Awesome
    Mr Awesome

    Global population growth has significantly slowed down, except in Africa.

  • Halving is a good idea ... start wth the scientist.

Posted Images

9 hours ago, Mr Awesome said:

Global population growth has significantly slowed down, except in Africa.

21 out of 22 nations in Africa have the highest birth rates in the world. And that is one of the major reasons to limit immigration from Africa. There are others.

6 hours ago, blaze master said:

Hahahah save the earth. I love this. Apart from breaking our planet in 2 there is nothing we could ever do that the earth wont recover from.

Billions of years of damage and recoveries. 5 or so mass extinction events......save the earth....what a hoot.

That is a rather uneducated statement. The skeptic will argue that anything we do could not possibly influence the climate, or effect the atmosphere. The planet is simply too large, and the population is too small to have any effect. Let the ships dump whatever they want into the ocean. The ocean is simply too large for anything we do to damage it. 


This frees them to buy as many plastic bottles as they please, drive filthy diesel vehicles, and behave as if nothing effects anything. 

It's not us. It is just a cycle. We are not responsible. Do not blame me. I refuse to take any responsibility for my misdeeds and behavior.

3 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

21 out of 22 nations in Africa have the highest birth rates in the world. And that is one of the major reasons to limit immigration from Africa. There are others.

According to your liberal ideology you are racist for saying this.

15 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

That is a rather uneducated statement. The skeptic will argue that anything we do could not possibly influence the climate, or effect the atmosphere. The planet is simply too large, and the population is too small to have any effect. Let the ships dump whatever they want into the ocean. The ocean is simply too large for anything we do to damage it. 


This frees them to buy as many plastic bottles as they please, drive filthy diesel vehicles, and behave as if nothing effects anything. 

It's not us. It is just a cycle. We are not responsible. Do not blame me. I refuse to take any responsibility for my misdeeds and behavior.

Everything you mention after a few hundred thousand years would vanish like they never happened.

The rest of what you said is pointless in regards to the long term health of this planet.......

The earth doesnt need saving.....we do.

18 minutes ago, blaze master said:

Everything you mention after a few hundred thousand years would vanish like they never happened.

The rest of what you said is pointless in regards to the long term health of this planet.......

The earth doesnt need saving.....we do.

Well us and an awful lot of other species.

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Well us and an awful lot of other species.

And ? This planet has had at least 5 mass extinction. 99 percent of all species to ever exist have gone extinct.

You're just not that important.

The earth will go on and new species will come along.....Its quite simple really.

49 minutes ago, ArchieBunker said:

According to your liberal ideology you are racist for saying this.

And that's why I'm not a liberal nor an idealogue. I am a Centrist Democrat, I do not subscribe to PC, nor woke BS. I simply speak the truth. And at the risk of sounding even more racist, which I'm not, I will say that 21 out of 22 of the nation's that have the highest population growth rate in Africa are predominantly Muslim. Sometimes facts are simply facts, and you can interpret them however you want.

The USA is already doing their bit by arranging for the average death age to be 79 years old in contrast to other OECD countries of 81.

But the situation is really complicated as some say the population is not being replaced. However, AI is stepping up by replacing people faster than anyone thought.

7 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

And that's why I'm not a liberal nor an idealogue. I am a Centrist Democrat, I do not subscribe to PC, nor woke BS. I simply speak the truth. And at the risk of sounding even more racist, which I'm not, I will say that 21 out of 22 of the nation's that have the highest population growth rate in Africa are predominantly Muslim. Sometimes facts are simply facts, and you can interpret them however you want.

What an asinine thing to say that you are not an ideologue and believing that you are a centrist. You by all accounts are an extremest and for starters you group everyone that supports Trump in its entirety as koolaid drinking MAGA in derogatory language and much more so by that virtue shows that you have no objective concept. It’s all one sided. So don’t try to falsely claim that you are some kind of John Fetterman or that you can even bring your self to even be close enough to Bill Maher who are not in the middle of the road liberals. So don’t come here and claim to be something that you are not. It is disingenuous and typical of an extremest liberal which you make yourself out to be. 99% of extremest liberals claim to be centrist, how ignorant can anyone be about themselves?

Edited by ArchieBunker

Dan Brown wrote a book entitled "inferno". Yes it was about population reduction to save the planet. it was the worst movie of the three based upon Dan Brown's books. The first two, Da Vinci Code and Angels and Demons, were actually good.

Edited by sqwakvfr

So, 1 Billion of whites, (or pinks as Steve Biko would have said), 1 Billion of Blacks, one Billion of Browns and one Billion of Lellows?

Edited by Peter Crow

2 hours ago, Briggsy said:

Allow women to chose how many children to have, if any.

Allow women to access education.

Allow women to control their own finances.

Then a lower fertility rate, which I believe is desirable, leading to significant population decline is far more likely to occur without any coercion.

Unfortunately some cults do the exact opposite to weaponise the womb and enable their cult to win the breeding war. It's a form of reverse evolution, with educated and thinking people having fewer children and the uneducated believers breeding a maximum speed.

1 hour ago, spidermike007 said:

And that's why I'm not a liberal nor an idealogue. I am a Centrist Democrat, I do not subscribe to PC, nor woke BS. I simply speak the truth. And at the risk of sounding even more racist, which I'm not, I will say that 21 out of 22 of the nation's that have the highest population growth rate in Africa are predominantly Muslim. Sometimes facts are simply facts, and you can interpret them however you want.

Tell us what you think about Israel again!

6 hours ago, PhilipHabib said:

LOL , what age did you have as the cut off point ?

42, long before you have the chance to enjoy retirement.

11 hours ago, bannork said:

Halving the world’s population over the next two centuries could dramatically reduce pressure on the planet

Time to start culling.

Pedos, rapist, metal health psychos and mass murderers, should go first.

3 hours ago, FlorC said:

Hopefully AI will do the job once it doesn't need humans.

Come on, man.

You're not genuinely rooting for AI to wipe us all out, are you?

4 minutes ago, SAFETY FIRST said:

Time to start culling.

Pedos, rapist, metal health psychos and mass murderers, should go first.

And who's next after that?

Sex tourists?

1 hour ago, blaze master said:

And ? This planet has had at least 5 mass extinction. 99 percent of all species to ever exist have gone extinct.

You're just not that important.

The earth will go on and new species will come along.....Its quite simple really.

You first old chap.

I was going to say ‘you and those you care about first’ but spotted my error just in time.

1 hour ago, Kinnock said:

Unfortunately some cults do the exact opposite to weaponise the womb and enable their cult to win the breeding war. It's a form of reverse evolution, with educated and thinking people having fewer children and the uneducated believers breeding a maximum speed.

This isn’t about Catholics or Mormons.

5 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You first old chap.

I was going to say ‘you and those you care about first’ but spotted my error just in time.

Me first what. What a strange reply. Of course what would a ch reply be without a coy dig.

Despicable as usual. Bye.

35 minutes ago, save the frogs said:
minutes ago, SAFETY FIRST said:

Time to start culling.

Pedos, rapist, metal health psychos and mass murderers, should go first

And who's next after that?

Sex tourists

I like you, you can stay

Edited by SAFETY FIRST

1 hour ago, ArchieBunker said:

What an asinine thing to say that you are not an ideologue and believing that you are a centrist. You by all accounts are an extremest and for starters you group everyone that supports Trump in its entirety as koolaid drinking MAGA in derogatory language and much more so by that virtue shows that you have no objective concept. It’s all one sided. So don’t try to falsely claim that you are some kind of John Fetterman or that you can even bring your self to even be close enough to Bill Maher who are not in the middle of the road liberals. So don’t come here and claim to be something that you are not. It is disingenuous and typical of an extremest liberal which you make yourself out to be. 99% of extremest liberals claim to be centrist, how ignorant can anyone be about themselves?

Well I very obviously pushed your button and often times Trump devotees tend to be very sensitive about criticism of their master. To many of you guys anyone who dislikes Trump is an extremist and a communist.

Supporting the death penalty and being against abortion after the first trimester are not exactly liberal positions. I could go on but why bother?

To many of us in the center we are simply patriots speaking the truth about a charlatan clown.

images (14).jpeg

I'm not treated well enough by governments to listen to the lies and to fake care about it. I don't have kids and even if I did they wouldn't have kids.

For decades we here the lies and yet see the yachts, private planes, fancy Uber wealthy meetups.

Mark Zioberg has two massive yachts. One merely follows behind the larger one as a supply and logistics vessel.

They all have bunkers 🖕

🖕🖕🖕

Posts breaking forum guidelines removed.

Low-Value Posts Reminder.

Posts that add no written contribution harm the forum and reduce its value for readers and search engines.

This includes:

2–3 word replies

Emoji-only posts

Memes or GIFs with no explanation or context.

Screenshots with no supporting text

Embedded social media posts with no comment or opinion

Youtube videos with no explanation or comment

If your post does not explain, add context, or express a view in your own words, it has no value here.

What happens next

Any such content will be removed without notice

Repeat posting of this type may lead to further moderation action

3 hours ago, KornPop said:

Mark Zioberg has two massive yachts. One merely follows behind the larger one as a supply and logistics vessel.

Not sure what your point is.

The 1% elites use a lot more resources than the average person.

I wouldn't even want a yacht if I could afford one. Not sure what I would do on a yacht.

But still, making sure billions of people have food, shelter, water, energy is the more complex issue.

And potential advances in tech are not factored in, so halving humanity may not be necessary.

reminds me of the Georgia Guidestones from the 1980s. A sort of American stonehenge erected by an annonymous group.

"Highlighted tenets such as keeping the world population under 500 million, guiding reproduction wisely, and uniting humanity with a living new language"

Someone blew them up eventually (with a bomb)

Our soon to be arriving AI overlords will (sooner or later) likely prefer no humans left at all.

26 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Our soon to be arriving AI overlords will (sooner or later) likely prefer no humans left at all.

I've always considered you to be a remarkable form of Artificial Intelligence.

15 hours ago, Roadsternut said:

<deleted> you. I'm a scientist. Why do you want to murder me?

Halving the population is simplistic. Which part of the population has to die or not get to live?

Addressing population size through birthrates will kill your society in about 3 generations, ie China.

The main challenge of population growth is food, or energy demand.

Between 0 and 15 years, a child requires 26 million kcal. We can further model that by age; a baby has a lower calorific requirement than a 15 year old. But both are nothing but consumers. But they will both become producers. Assuming death at 90 years, a 65 year old will consume 19 million kcal. They will always be a consumer. Adulthood has a cost of 44 million kcal.

Assuming arable agriculture, then about 9 quadrillion kcal is produced each year. Based on the current global population mix, annual demand is about 6.6 quadrillion kcal. There is not that much slack. If we address population size by reducing the number of young people, through birth control, then eventually you will see falls in agricultural outputs because there are less farmers. Countries get away with that right now because there is always another country with more farmers, hence China massively imports soy from predominantly catholic, and fecking like bunnies, Brazil. Otherwise, you get away with it for a while by artificially boosting yields through fertilisers (but blokes like you want to murder the scientists, so you're going to run out of new fertilizers, pesticides, genetically improved crops). Eventually you won't be able to innovate through mechanisations, because your best engineers are all retired and your pool of would be engineers (kids) has declined.

So the alternative is that other part of the non-productive population, the old. We only keep them alive out of sentimentality, and all they do is cost us money and food. And they feel entitled to do that.

If you have to murder anyone to solve demands due to population growth, kill the old, not the scientists. Soylent Green was right.

Here's a thought experiment. Assume improvement to crop yields is elastic; that there is no upper constraint due to technological innovation, and that all the innovation is carried out by 15-65 year olds. In this version of Logan's Run, you get to live to 70 years, before being topped (solving worries about pensions etc, eliminating the vast majority of chronic healthcare). Then the population is not constrained by food supply. We won't starve. But water becomes the next limiter. If we consider water' we can make it, using extraterrestrial material, but probably the planet could sustain 30-40 billion before things become problematic again, maybe even 50 billion. By then, we will collectively ascend to the next energy plain.

If technological progress is allowed to remain indefinitely elastic, population itself may cease to have a conventional "carrying capacity". The limiting factor becomes the amount of energy and technology available to manufacture an increasingly artificial environment. In other words, the question has moved from "How many people can Earth feed?" to "How many people can an industrial civilisation maintain?"

But don't kill the scientists, so you can live a life of religious fanaticism, ISIS style.

Wasn't it Shakespeare who said, "First we kill all the scientist?"

You got some opinions on you but your financials are right on and your stats are good, too.

I'm wondering, though, who will really be "productive" in the next gen. Won't AI render most workers obsolete?

I had high hopes for AIDS but it was much too slow. Whatever happened to the neutron bomb that just killed the people but left all the BMWs intact?

That agriculture is going to be gone or with vastly shifted geopolitical demographics. You're right. Lowering the birthrate (fertility is declining everywhere) does not solve the problem.

Maybe starvation will. Sad but the truth. I don't think we'll starve here in Thailand but other countries may well war on Thailand for our food. Even UK is talking about food insecurity, right now!

If we run low on food, maybe the mortality age will get back to a realistic number 65 or 70. I don't want to live on a planet with 40 billion people. Think about airports...today!

The only real solution is Soylent Green. You're a scientist. Can you come up with something? I'm being serious--why not? I wouldn't complain about the queue. MAiD already accounts for 5% of all deaths in Canada. Think bumping that to 30 or 40% would be about right?

In addition to food, you mention energy. Energy today depends on fossil fuels. I can't see that is likely to change. But with fewer people, well, less is more.

Create an account or sign in to comment

Recently Browsing 0

  • No registered users viewing this page.

Account

Navigation

Search

Search

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.