Even honest leftists are now coming to grips with the fact that feminism is a failure

submitted by casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter from self.debatealtright

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (21 children)

De-population is openly the goal and I don't think it's all bad especially in the third world where families have more children than the carrying capacity of their environment.

I haven't seen the evidence that demonstrates that the "carrying capacity" of the environment has been exceeded by 3rd world families.

The Malthusian theory has been debunked thoroughly, but the eugenicists continue to push it..

It would be interesting to hear your feedback to one particular source who has gathered significant sources of evidence to debunk the idea of "overpopulation".

Meet Paul Ehrlich, Pseudoscience Charlatan

The evidence speaks for itself.

[–]casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

How has it been debukned? Its simply been postponed by advances in science. But there is a physical limit to how much industrial production and population the earth can handle

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Don't take my word for it. Watch the video.

Source material is provided on the page below the video.

[–]EthnocratArcheofuturist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Stop with this nonsense. Infinite growth on a finite planet is lunacy.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Paul Ehrlich predicted in the 70's that global populations would exceed planetary capacity in the 80's or 90's predicting:

  • Great Britton would cease to exist by the year 2000
  • global famine
  • total war
  • mass starvation
  • Petroleum supplies with be exhausted
  • etc.

He filled a book with this crap.

Hopefully, I don't need you do a recap of recent history to remind you that he was completely wrong about every major aspect of his prediction.

For whatever reason, these morons predictions fail miserably, yet they continue to push their demonstrably false agenda.

There probably is a finite number that the planet can support.
However, I suspect that human innovation would continue to allow people and the environment to thrive for many billions more people.

Increases in innovation would probably advance similar to moore's law in terms of increases in efficiency, energy output, and resource utilization.

Even so, the current trajectory of the global population is expected to cap around 11 billion.
Most of the growth is expected to occur in Africa.
Africa is not overpopulated.

What I've stated is demonstrably true. Overpopulation is not a crisis.

[–]EthnocratArcheofuturist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Your entire premise is based on a straw man.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Your entire premise is based on a straw man.

You could use a logical fallacy refresher course.

Edit: You will find the explanation in my comments below.

The reality is the overpopulation offers no concrete evidence. Instead, it's a "it seems obvious to me that everything is worse" argument.

My argument (provided below) undermines the idea that resources are running out due to actually scarcity (the scarcity is manufactured).

The evidence provided in the linked video demonstrates reality that finite resources go down in price and increase in availability over time.

This reality is counterintuitive.

The evidence provided explicitly refutes the overpopulation argument.

[–]EthnocratArcheofuturist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

The evidence provided in the linked video demonstrates reality that finite resources go down in price and increase in availability over time.

They're still finite.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I agree. Yet they still increase in availability.

Or alternatives are identified and leveraged.

Either way, people find a way to make things better.

[–]EthnocratArcheofuturist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Except things aren't getting better. The biosphere is collapsing.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Is it?

Is this info brought to us by the same guys who are hyping CovAIDS?

Climate change is a hoax.

[–]EthnocratArcheofuturist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yawn!

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

The Malthusian theory has been debunked thoroughly

How can you even say this?

People consume resources, resources are limited. Both of those pre-suppositions are airtight and I really can't take anyone seriously who argues otherwise. Plus, we should always strive to consume less resources anyways so....... yeah you completely lost me.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

That is a good question, and it's easy to oversimplify the situation.

There was a panic in the 1880's or so, when the whales were almost hunted to extinction because whale oil was needed for lamps, etc.

It seems laughable today, because alternatives are always identified and substituted.

Summary: In the med/long term (5-10 years) commodity prices of every non-regulated resource continue to go down over time (adjusted for inflation).

Innovation always outpaces demand.

People and human ingenuity are the greatest resources on the planet.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

That's not scientific and whale oil limitations are a bad example. Try oxygen instead, can human innovation conquer that? Will an entrepreneur make the switch to nitrogen and market it?

This is a huge fallacy that a lot of "free market" libertarians fall under and it's this idea that everything exists in a vacuum and that economics has no constraints. The truth is that not every market force has competition and not every resource has viable alternatives. So both of these axioms:

Innovation always outpaces demand.

People and human ingenuity are the greatest resources on the planet.

are false. We are mortal and we are limited.

If you want actual proof that the third world is at carrying capacity then I recomend you visit Africa and bear witness to the ecological collapse that many regions are undergoing particularly around lakes and water systems. And while more efficient tech could improve this situation, the reality is that the regions are simply overburdened with consumers.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That's not scientific and whale oil limitations are a bad example.

Here's an omnipresent solution.

Limitless energy is easily available and environmentally safe with local implementation small scale thorium reactors (and 1990's tech). Thorium is as common a material as nickel. Free quasi-eternal energy. Solved.

When energy is free, then there are very few limitations to what can be done.

The root-cause of our "scarcity" condition is the psychopaths/sociopaths who have manipulated and enslaved the public, with their PR propaganda operations. From their perspective, If there are no "have-nots", then they wouldn't be as special.
They're still not special, they are corrupted and delusional.

Propaganda is intended to set the limits of debate, and exclude options that would serve to further liberate us all.

We need to recognize the problems, and then we can resolve them. The problems are not insurmountable.

First we need legitimate information to base decisions off of. The first video is a good start for the population fraud that is being used to brainwash people into a hysterical fear of future possibilities. The source material is provided below on the same page.

Here's another high-quality recommendation. It's equally relevant.
Interview 1563 – Keith Knight and James Corbett Dissect Voluntary Servitude
From the same source.

the reality is that the regions are simply overburdened with consumers.

You think Africa is overburdened with consumerism? It's not even remotely industrialized. It's like the US in the 30's.

Year-round sunlight, combined with green house production. Regions in Africa could easily increase production by 100x. Easily.

We would first need to invest in the region, instead of exploit it. Add in some Thorium reactors, and it could be a modern paradise in ~20 years.

Africa has been exploited for centuries, and deserves a win.

Every person on every other continent has somewhere around ~2-4% neanderthal DNA.
Africans are objectively the most human among us.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Do you believe in climate change?

[–]EthnocratArcheofuturist 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I'm not OP, but yes, I do.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

The actual evidence suggests they planet is not warming.

Why Who do you ask?

[–]bald-janitor 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Nah