Community votes are collected from you and other visitors to Ask500People. Independent votes are collected from visitors to hundreds of other websites around the world.
Sign Up or Login
Sorry, this data is only available to users with an account.
The Earth periodically goes through stages of heating and cooling. They can be 100s or 1000s of years in between but it does. Ask any knowledgeable geologist.
No one is disputing that, the dispute is if CO2 in the atmosphere changes the earths temperatures and by how much. If we accept that the atmosphere acts like a blanket, then just like a blanket, altering the composition of the atmosphere will affect its thermal conductivity. This really shouldn't be that hard to understand, even for those of us that are not scientists.
Well, if the entire planet doesn't take responsibility for reining in reproduction, we will go the way of yeast in a Petri dish, and drown/get poisoned by our own shit.
Or we can take the mathematician's solution, and just shoot every other person. Seems the smell of rotting meat would get pretty bad, though.
Cheaper solution would be to stop all social services, those to old or ill to contribute to society and don't have money for food or medicine, will just be recycled. No need to waste money on a bullet and administrative cost.
I had heard of it, never read it until just now. It took me a while to realize he was just being cynical. I truly appreciate you pointing it out to me.
I'm not sure what you thought of a cynical. It is a simple matter of fact that yeasts stop producing alcohol in a fermentation at about 14%-15% because it kills them. They literally die of their own waste products accumulating to too high a concentration, and the human race is likely to follow suit--if it hasn't already.
We have treated the planet like one big waste dump, and huge swathes of it are dead as a result, especially in the oceans. If we can actually pollute the oceans enough, we won't have to wait for global warming to make life for us untenable. After all, turn off the air machine on spaceship Earth and we die.
Plankton populations are crashing world-wide. (That is what makes the free oxygen, not forests. Trees are 'just' the air filters). Is it part of a normal cycle? We don't know, and won't until it is too late to act if we are fault.
The mathematician's solution is easy, except for the smell. The planet is supporting about ten times the human population it can conceivably handle without widespread environmental devastation. Line everyone up and shoot the first nine of every ten people.
'Cause it is a lead pipe cinch people aren't going to become responsible about reproducing BELOW replacement level for a few generations.
And since everyone always asks at this point--I have no children. And that, unlike having them, is never an accident.
[2 points]2 years ago by dauguyReplyEdited 2 years ago by dauguy
I have none, and disagree with the mathematician's solution as well. But Nature WILL strike a balance and doesn't care how many die along the way. She is the original perpetrator of the mathematician's solution.
This comment was deleted.
[2 points] 2 years ago by deleted user ReplyThis comment was deleted.
[1 point] 2 years ago by deleted user ReplyThis comment was deleted.
[-6 points] 2 years ago by deleted user ReplyThe Earth periodically goes through stages of heating and cooling. They can be 100s or 1000s of years in between but it does. Ask any knowledgeable geologist.
No one is disputing that, the dispute is if CO2 in the atmosphere changes the earths temperatures and by how much. If we accept that the atmosphere acts like a blanket, then just like a blanket, altering the composition of the atmosphere will affect its thermal conductivity. This really shouldn't be that hard to understand, even for those of us that are not scientists.
If they have more than one, what do you suggest happens to the excess ?
Well, if the entire planet doesn't take responsibility for reining in reproduction, we will go the way of yeast in a Petri dish, and drown/get poisoned by our own shit.
Or we can take the mathematician's solution, and just shoot every other person. Seems the smell of rotting meat would get pretty bad, though.
Cheaper solution would be to stop all social services, those to old or ill to contribute to society and don't have money for food or medicine, will just be recycled. No need to waste money on a bullet and administrative cost.
Sounds like the cue for A Modest Proposal: http://art-bin.com/art/omodest.html
Maybe combined with your idea?
I had heard of it, never read it until just now. It took me a while to realize he was just being cynical. I truly appreciate you pointing it out to me.
She.
Jonathan Swift was a female?
Sorry, misunderstood the antecedent to the pronoun. And Swift was using irony.
No worries...
I'm not sure what you thought of a cynical. It is a simple matter of fact that yeasts stop producing alcohol in a fermentation at about 14%-15% because it kills them. They literally die of their own waste products accumulating to too high a concentration, and the human race is likely to follow suit--if it hasn't already.
We have treated the planet like one big waste dump, and huge swathes of it are dead as a result, especially in the oceans. If we can actually pollute the oceans enough, we won't have to wait for global warming to make life for us untenable. After all, turn off the air machine on spaceship Earth and we die.
Plankton populations are crashing world-wide. (That is what makes the free oxygen, not forests. Trees are 'just' the air filters). Is it part of a normal cycle? We don't know, and won't until it is too late to act if we are fault.
The mathematician's solution is easy, except for the smell. The planet is supporting about ten times the human population it can conceivably handle without widespread environmental devastation. Line everyone up and shoot the first nine of every ten people.
'Cause it is a lead pipe cinch people aren't going to become responsible about reproducing BELOW replacement level for a few generations.
And since everyone always asks at this point--I have no children. And that, unlike having them, is never an accident.
Hey I agree about the population and have only one child. I disagree with the mathematicians solution solution.
I have none, and disagree with the mathematician's solution as well. But Nature WILL strike a balance and doesn't care how many die along the way. She is the original perpetrator of the mathematician's solution.
This comment was deleted.
[-7 points] 2 years ago by deleted user ReplySadly I agree.
This comment was deleted.
[0 points] 2 years ago by deleted user Replyno, we won't have enough people in the workforce to take care of the elderly.
http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/natural_parenting.png
Haaa!