My Rant About People in Denial in Regards to Human Overpopulaton

To me it makes no sense to deny that there is a human overpopulation problem.  Most of the people who say overpopulation is a myth are those who already have a few kids.  They throw up stupid arguments like "Everyone on the planet could fit in the state of Alaska and we would all have 2,000 square feet of room each", but fail to explain how each person would produce enough food (clothing, etc) for themselves in that 2,000 foot space, where their waste would go, and if they would be willing to share that space with their kids, grandkids, and so forth.

The over population deniers spout crap like "The earth provides enough for everyone's need, but it is just not being distributed fairly".  Which is only partially true and it negates the fact that most people are over consuming... if everyone lived like the average American, we would need 4 or 5 earth's to sustain us all!  Perhaps the earth would provide enough for everyone's need, if everyone in the developed nations did not consume as much as they do now (not just food, but other resources too).  However, when I see somebody saying that the world is not overpopulated they represent the typical first world person; living in a roomy house, driving a newer car, owning electronics and things that are otherwise not true "needs".  They have no idea what a mess the world would be if everyone had an equal amount of stuff as they had.

Aerial photos show that this area was once a thick forest, now the only trees that remain are a thin band separating one farm from another, primarily to serve as a windbreak and nothing more than that.   The loss of trees in North America was one of the contributing factors in the extinction of the Passenger Pigeon, a bird that once numbered in the billions.

Deniers don't see the obvious things as signs of overpopulation.  I refer to farmer's fields and other avenues of agriculture.  Do they think that farms have always been where farms are now?  Does it not occur to them that in some cases that land used to be a rich forest?  As soon as the very first forest was cleared and that land turned into a farm, we impacted the earth negatively. 

As soon as we drove another species to extinction, either because of habitat loss, or because we over-consumed it, we were a problem.  As soon as our waste started to pile up we should have clued in that we were a problem.  Why can people not get that?

Are they so wrapped up in their own reality that they fail to see the global picture, or are they just in denial because they have to be in order to justify pumping out kid after kid?

I rarely bother to argue with ignorant deniers any more.  I have conceded that in most cases they will not be swayed, especially if they already had kids and have to maintain the fact that they are not contributing to a potential major concern.  Instead I will focus on educating the youth, with subtle comments here and there, in hopes that they have open minds and will absorb some of what they are told and will go forth to expand on what I tell them.

Where a Farm Used to Be, A Lesson on Urban Sprawl and Overpopulation

Howdy boys and girls.

I know a lot of you are in denial about human overpopulation, you don't think it is a real "thing".

I suppose some of you might even be shocked to learn that human overpopulation has been talked about for many years, even over 100 years ago when Reverend Thomas Malthus suggested that war and famine was God's way of punishing us for overpopulating the earth.

I am over 50 years old, and in my time the earth's human population has more than doubled, many forests have been destroyed, rivers polluted, the Aral sea has almost vanished, and hundreds of species have gone extinct.  YES human over population is a real thing!

Please watch the video above but mostly listen to the words!

In my lifetime I have observed the urban sprawl of many cities, mostly the one where I grew up, Edmonton, Alberta.

I remember as a child driving out to a place in the country to take our cat for boarding when we went away.  That place is now a parking lot for a shopping area, and it is at least another 10 minutes drive to get out of the city.  When I was a kid all that are was farm land.  Before it was farm land I suppose it was natural area, perhaps forest, or other wilderness area.

Years ago North America was home to a bird that numbered in the billions.  This being the Passenger Pigeon.  Those birds have gone extinct in part due to hunting but mostly due to loss of habitat as they needed certain large forests in which to congregate and nest.  Those forests were destroyed to make way for farm land.

I do not understand how anyone more than 30 years of age can deny the changes they should have been seeing in their own lifetimes, unless they just do not get out of the city much and have not seen how things actually have changed, or have not read the news about how fast some animal species are going extinct due to habitat loss.

Ask yourself what used to be where a farm used to be?  Hint in the background!

Where a farm used to be there is now a parking lot, mega shopping structures, housing, and hundreds more people.  Nonetheless what is very important to remember is that something used to be in the spot where the farm used to be too.  As soon as we needed to clear trees to have a farm, at that very point, we entered an area of being an invasive species, we became overpopulated, not necessarily to the point it hurt our own species, but to the point that it hurt others!

What if Each Family Only Had One Acre?

Why are people considering living on Mars?

The answer is simple; it is because we are overpopulating and destroying our own planet and need more room! 

Imagine if each couple were delegated 1 acre of land to live on, and could only use resources from that plot of land (catching rain water as needed).  All their food had to come from that acre, all their waste had to be disposed of on that acre.

They build a house using all the trees and rocks.  They plant a garden and have some chickens.  They have a goat for milk.  If they are lucky they have a pond for fish.  They are perfectly sustainable on their land.  Then one day they have a baby.  That baby needs things.  They re-purpose older clothes for baby clothes, but food eventually becomes an issue.  At first they can produce enough to feed the child, but eventually the child needs more food and it gets tough with the parents eating a bit less just so the child can have more.  Then they have another child.

At one point their small house starts to feel crowded, but they have no more trees to use to expand their home, and do not wish to take away any more land from what they need to produce food.

On land that previously supported two people, they are now trying to support four.  What do they do?

Vege patties, spinach, cucumber, tomatoes.  A meal for two.

They find ways to cheat on food production.  They pump the goat with hormones so it produces more milk.  They water the garden more so it produces larger vegetables and fruits, but even though the fruit is larger it contains only the same nutrition as would be in a smaller vegetable.  Combined with the fact that the land has been used so much that it contains less nutrients than in earlier years, and we see how the family has barely enough food but the food itself has less value. 

This is where the human population is now.  Although we feel like we have unlimited space and we technically produce enough food for everyone, the food we are producing today has less nutritional value than it did even 20 years ago.  Dairy animals in some nations are pumped with hormones to produce more milk but the side effect of the hormones on the humans that drink the milk are dangerous, and the dairy animals themselves have shorter lives as a result of being stressed in that way.

Our farmers are producing big strawberries, but have you tasted one or compared it to the small strawberries that grow wild?  The huge berries have little taste in comparison.  

Think of the earth as the one acre homestead.  We cannot expand it.  If we keep adding people to it, and resources are limited, we have to find ways to cope.  We can cope by cheating with the resources, but to what end?

Additional problems come about in that some people are not happy with their meager one acre and insist on having more, thus forcing others to get by on less space, or poorer land. 

If you had to live on one acre, and could only produce enough food for two people, would you have kids?  How many?

I should note too that food is not the only issue we need to consider in regards to human overpopulation.

Sending people to live on Mars is not the answer.  Killing people off is not the answer either!

The answer is for people to be more responsible.  Having children at a later age (no younger than 25) and limiting oneself to only having one child is a good solution to prevent further population growth.  It is also vital that people adapt sustainable skills, and stop demanding unnecessary things (useless home decor items, and other luxury items). 

People Overreact When I Mention Human Overpopulation

I am a bit behind the times; I only recently joined Facebook!   I have often mentioned human overpopulation on Facebook posts, such as when a person references pollution, or whatever.  Typically I am met with responses that are not only very defensive, but often a total overreaction to my comment.  Specifically some people jump to the conclusion that I am suggesting we kill off a bunch of people!

I have never suggested solving the concerns of human overpopulation by killing people.  

To that end I am actually afraid that at one point the world will be so overpopulated that killing people (much as we do with other species to control their growth) will be something that is talked about more openly.  I grew up watching shows such as "Logan's Run" and movies like "Soylent Green" in which overpopulation was a real concern and society had its own way of dealing with this.  

I absolutely do not want the human population reaching a point where our lifespan is decided for us.  Heck no!  That is why I warn about human overpopulation now and point out that we cannot bury our heads in the sand and pretend it is not a concern.  That is why I tell people that one child is plenty, and that putting off having kids until you are at least 28 is a very important thing to do.

Look around, human overpopulation is not about food, it is about what we are doing to our planet just by being here.  We have destroyed forests, we have driven thousands of other species to extinction, we have caused the destruction of many ecosystems, polluted rivers and lakes, and yet some people still insist we are living in harmony with the planet and that our numbers are not too large!

The city used to be farm land, the farm land used to be a forest... as soon as we destroyed the forest, we were overpopulating the area.  This is the city of Edmonton, Alberta.

I am not talking about depopulating the planet by killing people.  I am suggesting we realize that we are killing the planet by allowing our population to grow uncontrolled (we have eliminated many things that kept our population controlled, such as diseases, and predators).  We are living longer than ever before and that is in fact the problem because the birth rate is actually going down in many countries.  However the population grows because infant mortality is down, and (as mentioned) we are living longer so several generations of the same family are alive at the same time, whereas in the past the older generations would have died off, allowing for room for the younger generations.

Please do not put words into my mouth, I am not suggesting we kill people, I am just suggesting each one of us would be reproductively responsible and not have more than one child, and not have that child before we are over the age of 28.

I am sure that most people who talk about human overpopulation are met with the same overreaction by others who assume that just because you talk about there being too many people that you are automatically suggesting we eliminate some!

Shocking Photos that Prove Human Overpopulation

These are photographs that I have taken in the area around me.  The prove that there is a concern with human overpopulation, but if you do not understand the connection I will explain it below.

What do you see when you look at these photos?  Do you see farm land?  I would assume you do, but are you aware that only a few years ago this farm land was forest?  I was able to see some older aerial photos of the area which showed a lot more trees and a lot less open farm land. 

If the planet was not overpopulated the forests would be preserved, thriving, and being the lungs of the planet and the home of wildlife.  Instead we rape the forests for wood or chop them up and burn them to make room for agriculture to grow food for people or food for livestock.

The trees in the distance of both of these photos are not forests, rather they are rows of trees about 30 feet wide, not much more; a poor replacement for all the trees that used to cover the land.

Now I know there are some people who do not see this as an indication of human overpopulation but I ask "When does it stop?"  At what point do we say "Ya, enough trees have been chopped, it cannot all be farm land, we need forests?"  To me the fact that we are not sustainable and are still cutting trees to make more farm land is proof that we are overpopulating the planet.

I only had one child, that was plenty for me.  I live rurally and am allowing trees to reclaim part of the area in front of my house which was once known as a "lawn".  We need to stop the destruction of our environment and the only way to do that is to slow our population growth. 

I am Tired of the Ignorant who Deny that Overpopulation is a Problem

I read a news article on concerns of the growing human population and the problems of the human impact on the planet, mostly as related to the fact that we are at risk of overpopulating ourselves to extinction.

One person commented "Humans are too small of a species to cause any real impact to the planet", or something to that effect. I wonder how anyone can be so ignorant.

Anyone my age (I am nearly 50) has seen the world's population more than double and should be aware of the problems that have developed as a result (including urban sprawl).

Anyone who thinks humans do not impact things has never heard of the dodo bird, passenger pigeon, quagga, Tasmanian tiger, and so forth.

We know that cats are overpopulated.. humans are too.

Anyone who thinks humans cannot cause change has never been in a plane flying over a clear cut area, never seen an open pit mine, and has probably not heard of what we did to the Aral Sea.

It just boggles my mind how anyone can think humans are not damaging the earth.  These people are either ignorant or in denial, I assume they put their heads in the sand so they can justify living their life of excess, greed, and waste.

I think people just find it easier to deny these things than to admit that humans are not living in harmony with nature, we are not being sustainable. People do not want to change their ways so they simply deny that we are hurting the planet.

This article was originally published by me on Bubblews.

Is There a Conspiracy to Depopulate the Earth?

As humans, we control the population of many species on the planet, except our own. However there are people that suggest there are conspiracy theories in regards to depopulating the planet to a certain extent, in other words, killing off some people.

If you grew up in the 1970's you may remember a show called "Logan's Run" in this show human population was being controlled with a lottery type of system that involved killing off people who reached a certain age. Other shows and movies have suggested a similar fate in the future if we do not control the growth of our population now. What is fascinating is that when Logan's Run first came out human population was roughly 4 billion, and is now over 7 billion, and growing. We have done very little to prevent a future of problems.

Stop breeding like rabbits!  ©

Some depopulation ideas are, as mentioned, simply killing off people who are older, other ideas are more random, such as introducing a virus to kill off some people, and it has been suggested that the HIV/AIDS virus was designed just for that purpose.

Of course, I am not suggesting we do kill off masses of people, I am only pointing out that there are some people who are suggesting this, or are suggesting that governments of the world are considering doing this (many conspiracy theories about New World Order include reducing the population to 5 billion). Even the United Nations has said that human over population is a real concern. Many population experts suggest 5 billion is sustainable (we know 7 billion is not because we are consuming renewable resources faster than they can be renewed, this is only balanced by the fact that people in undeveloped nations are living well below what those in developed nations are consuming). The infamous Georgia Guide Stones and some others, suggest that 500,000,000 is sustainable, and not any more.

I personally have been concerned with human over population, probably since watching Logan's Run, and only had one child (when I was 30), partially because I do not want to reach a point where these scenarios become real. I do not want to be killed later in life just to make room for more people.

Anyone who thinks these conspiracy theories might be real should make sure they are not part of a contributing force; either not have kids, have kids later in life, and/or limit themselves to one child only. Yes, one child is growth, until you (or your partner) dies, you have added one person to the planet, there are now 3 rather than 2.

Food is NOT the Issue with Overpopulation

It always pisses me off when some ignorant person mentions food whenever human overpopulation is mentioned.

You know the ones, as soon as you say that the world is overpopulated they jump in and say "There is not a shortage of food, we produce enough food but it is not getting to the people who need it."

Wait, who said anything about food?  There are hundreds of concerns related to human overpopulation concerns and I would not even say food is in the top ten.

In experiments done in the 1950's and 1960's John B. Calhoun proved that food was not an issue.  He did experiments on rats and mice, providing them with an ideal environment, one in which food was never denied.  The populations grew and then collapsed.

In his experiments, Calhoun observed that as populations grew at first the subjects became more violent, had increased sexual behavior (including more sexual aggression), and some became anti-social.  He noticed mother animals became less nurturing and even started to show aggression to their own young, sometimes killing them.  Eventually the mother animals stopped mothering their young altogether, and the males stopped showing interest in the females, the animals behaved more like zombies than rats or mice.

Universe 25 photo source

In fact in Calhoun's Universe 25 experiment on mice, after 600 days the mice no longer produced any surviving litters and even as their population started to fall the surviving mice never produced any young, they effectively became "extinct". All this while their health was cared for, they were given ample water, and food, the only thing that was limited was space.

Anyone who is interested can read up on "Behavioral Sink" which is the term Calhoun gave to his observations.

The point being that food is not necessarily an issue with human overpopulation, and that when we reach a point of being overpopulated there are other concerns - such as increases in anti-social behavior and violence (wait, haven't we reached that point?).  So, to anyone who is ignorant enough to still think that just because we have enough food we can continue to pump out babies, I suggest you open your eyes!

---

The 2006 movie "Children of Men" explores a future in which humans have also reached a point where they are no longer able to produce young. This movie was based on the book "The Children of Men" by P.D. James who most certainly must have been familiar with Calhoun's studies.

The Root of Many Activist Issues is Human Overpopulation

I am a member of a great activist type site, Care2.

On Care2 people can find activist petitions to sign, they can vote up causes they believe in and can even make their own petitions. One thing I have noticed though is that many of the petitions have a similar root problem.

• One of the petitions calls to stop clearing part of the rain forest to make way for a place to produce and process palm oil
• One petition calls for stopping the round up and potential slaughter of wild horses in the United States.
• There are petitions against killing seals, dolphins, and wolves.
• There is a “Save the Rain Forest Frogs” petition!
• You can find petitions against cruelty to pigs, dairy cows, and battery hens.
• Another petition demands a halt to an oil pipeline, another asks to prevent a gold mine in a nature sensitive area.
• There are petitions to end urban sprawl.
• There are petitions to end GMO crops and various "Cheats" farmers use to produce food.

Of course I do sign petitions that I support, and you can pretty much find petitions for anything. 

You name it there is probably a petition for it, but if you look at all of these petitions they are just addressing a small part of a greater problem. It would be better to address the driving force behind the problems that these petitions try to solve.

In some cases there is a place to make a comment, and I try to make a comment reminding others that if you want change, it is not the problem itself you have to consider but why the problem has developed in the first place.

Why do we need more palm oil? Growing human populations.

Why are wild horses being rounded up? To make room to graze cattle to feed the growing human population.

Why are rain forest frogs at risk? Because more people means more trees are needed, and more land must be cleared to grow crops.

Why are seals and dolphins being killed? Because they eat “our” fish, we need fish to feed the ever expanding human population.

Why are wolves being killed? Because they threaten livestock, the same livestock we want to kill to feed our own population.

Why is there cruelty to livestock? Because people want to eat, more people means shortcuts are taken to warehouse more livestock animals on less land, and transportation is pushed to get the animals to where they need to go while reducing costs.

Why do we need an oil pipeline? A growing, and greedy, consumer driven population demands more oil.

Why do we need another goldmine? Again because more people are demanding more gold, and nations need income from gold to grow.

Why are cities expanding? Urban sprawl is the result of continued growth.

Why are farmers using GMOs and other "cheats" to produce food? A rapidly growing population means farmers have less land on which to grow food, and are pressured into producing more food in less time.

As you see nearly every problem faced by the world today is human overpopulation and population growth. Some people ignorantly think that if they have 2 kids they have maintained a steady population; but 2+2 = 4! If you have two kids you have doubled your immediate population, doubled the needs of your family.  Chances are that your kids may have kids again before you have even died...

Two good ways to reduce the population growth are for couples to put off having children until they are in their 30’s and to restrict themselves to one child only.

Most governments do not like this, they want more people, more workers, more consumers, more soldiers, and more tax payers. Governments are not looking out for the future of the planet, only for the future of themselves.

The human population has more than doubled in the past 45 years. Huge natural areas have vanished forever. We are using renewable resources up faster than they can be renewed. We are killing other species only for our own continued survival and continued rape of the planet.

China is not everyone’s favorite country, and is often linked to animal cruelty, but at least they were smart enough to see the problems with unchecked population growth.

Other Reading:
About Care2 and How You Can Earn Credits to Spend on Things You Care About!

Thomas Malthus, the Man Who Warned the World About Overpopulation.

Addressing Diet to Solve the World Overpopulation Crisis

No doubt about it, the human population is in crisis, even if most people refuse to believe it. We are using up our non-renewable resources and are using the renewable ones faster than they can be renewed, we have a few solutions, one of which is to delay the age at which some girls are getting pregnant.

Meat

It has also been suggested that a high meat diet in general contributes to early puberty, particularly in girls. Indeed there are many nutritionists who suggest most people in the western countries eat as much as 4 times more meat than they need. Studies have linked early puberty in girls to a diet that is high in meat. Perhaps the meat based protein is a contributing factor, but it could be something “in” the meat that should be considered.

Growth Hormones

Growth hormones are being used in the production of meat and in some countries in the production of milk. The USA allows hormones to be used in the dairy industry, while many other countries, including Canada, do not allow this. Other livestock, with the exception of those sold as “organic”, are often pumped with growth hormones to get them to the market sooner and for a higher price.

The consumption of food products loaded with growth hormones could be to blame for causing both girls and boys to come into puberty sooner. The sooner people enter puberty the greater the risk for early pregnancy, and the younger people are when the have kids, the quicker the population booms.

Fat

Many people also consume more fat than they need and this too has been suspected as having a strong relationship with the early onset of puberty.

Processed foods

As processed foods are often loaded with chemicals, they too have been linked to leading to causing earlier puberty in girls and maybe even in boys too.

As a group we can lobby against allowing growth hormones in meat and dairy. We can select better foods for our families.   This is not just for health reasons, but as mentioned, if we can delay puberty we can hopefully delay some pregnancies and this should be a positive step in controlling the population growth.

If you are a grocery store owner you are perhaps one of the most powerful people in regards to preventing human overpopulation. The food industry is not going to change for the sake of humanity, each entity of the production line wants its share of the pie, and none are going to admit they are part of a problem (again there are many people who refuse to believe there is a problem at all). Grocery store owners could insist on organic meat and dairy as well as reducing the amounts of processed foods they sell in hopes it will make a difference.

Can Somebody Build Small Homes Please?

Recently my husband and I went to look at some show homes, they were all pretty massive. I am claustrophobic, but I admit I found this homes horrifically huge, I wondered how many trees fell to build these monstrosities of mostly empty space.

These new homes have more than 1,000 sq feet of space per occupant. They have rooms called “Great rooms”, which are not so much great as they are a waste of space. 

The world does not need more three, or four, bedroom homes. We need one and two bed room homes. We need homes that provide people with yards to grow their own food and restrict the growth of the family. In short we do not need more people on the planet, so why make it easy by building monster homes?

We need homes that will cater to the kind of family people should be having, that being a family of one, or no, children. Yes, I would make a good evil dictator I am sure!

Before you freak out and insist I am wrong, you may want to note:

Currently the world has a human population of more than 7 billion people, while you may be living comfortably in your cozy home, others are not. But the world has limited resources, and as we are currently relying on non-renewable resources, and using renewable ones faster than they can be renewed, there will be a point where everyone is in trouble.

We seem to think it is okay to control the growth of other species, killing seals, unwanted pets, and other animals, yet we ignore our population growth.

You cannot eat your house, and you cannot grow enough food to sustain your family when you have a postage stamp size yard. We need smaller homes, bigger yards, and fewer kids. The population has more that doubled in the last 40 years, sky rocketing above the 1 billion it sustained for a relatively long period of time.

Improved health care, and the industrial revolution, proved good in some ways, but bad in others; now our own population is potentially our biggest threat to survival of the human race.

Will the city planners see this or will they continue to encourage large populations? Well if you know anything about the world you know that the government does not give a darn about 100 years from now. It only cares about itself, getting re-elected, and retiring wealthy. The government is happy to have more people, it means more taxes!

The architects want to design big lavish homes that draw attention, earn them acclaim, not save the world. I would love to win the lottery, take some land, build 2 bedroom homes; small, simple, practical, homes, and give them away to similar minded people, people who care about the future of the world and the survival of the human race.

There is no need for anyone to have 3, 4, or more kids, even farmers no longer need big families, they have machinery. What we need now is responsible family planning, smaller homes, and more trees.

Schools Should Give Condoms for Free to Prevent Teen Pregnancy

Teenage pregnancy is a problem that many parents, or religious groups, do not want to take seriously. They live in a bubble, a bubble where they can just tell teens to say “no” and the teen will be able to turn off their hormones and resist their desire to have sex. This is made worse by those that preach that masturbation is a sin.

Many of these people think that by giving teenagers condoms (or other birth control) it encourages them to have sex.  What a load of...

It is ignorant to think that teenagers are not engaging in sexual activities. Even if “your” teen is not having sex – others are, and why shouldn't they have access to free condoms and birth control information?

There are over 7 billion people, our own population is our biggest threat to our continued existence, and if you deny that then you really are an ignorant so-and-so. One of the ways people can help reduce overpopulation is by putting off having children until they are at least 25. Having kids as a teenager places more people onto the earth at an earlier time.

Overpoulation issues aside, there are other reasons why we should try to reduce teenage pregnancies.  Most teens (despite their best intentions) are not ready to become parents. They are not financially secure, many still want to party and have fun with their friends and are not ready to “settle down and raise a family”. Teens rarely have the emotional skills to deal with a screaming baby, and so forth.

Why should you care? Because your tax dollars are very likely paying for most babies born to, and raised by, teenagers. If you do not care about world overpopulation perhaps you should care about having to fund babies born to teenage mothers.

Condoms should be available free to teens in school. Putting your head under a rock and insisting that teens should just not have sex is stupid, especially in this day and age when most teens come home to empty houses because both parents are at work. Some teens struggle after having their parents divorce; picture the teenage girl desperately looking for a male figure in her life, and turning to the first boy that shows any interest in her, even if it is purely sexual.

Handing out condoms in school does not encourage kids to have sex, they are already having sex, but it does encourage safe sex. The fact that most parents are not involved in their kid's lives encourages kids to have sex. I think it is time we deal with the reality, not live in some fantasy world where we can just expect teens to be abstinent.

Maybe the Rapture is a Good Thing

For the most part I do not believe in “The Rapture” (I often thought it was just one of those bribe / threat things used by some religions to control people), however I started to think about it and maybe it would not be such a bad idea after all. In an instant a small percentage of people would vanish, and, if it is anything like in the movies, their clothing would be left behind in a neat little pile.

Not only would we benefit by losing these “holier than thou” folks who look down on everyone else, but this is a great way to reduce the population without having to do anything drastic.

By all accounts the Rapture could whisk away between 30 million and 100 million believers. While not enough by some standards, it is still a dent in the population.

Another benefit, if the Rapture is actually real (and not the delusion of a teenager Margaret MacDonald), is that many of the people who would be “taken” are those who are least concerned with the environment. If you watched the 2006 documentary Jesus Camp, you saw how some parents were home schooling their children, telling them that global warming is real, is human caused, but not to worry about it because Jesus will return and save them from the mess they have created upon the earth. They are the head-in-the-sand kind of people that really have chosen to live in denial so they can excuse their wasteful or greedy lifestyles.

A lot of the people who believe in the Rapture are also those who think that the more kids they have the more God will favor them, so they are not really the kind of people the planet needs in terms of sustainability.

So, while I have never believed in the Rapture, I am starting to think that maybe it would not be such a bad idea after all.

Overpopulation is a Life Changer

This is just a rant.  A rant about people and how they (we) live their (our) lives.

I remember hearing this summer about a drought in Texas, farm animals were starving to death because there were no crops.  If we suppose this is an act of global warming and we can link it to human activity, I wonder how many people affected by the drought changed their way of living. 

Did any of them drive their car less?  Did any of then consume less junk that they do not need anyhow just for the benefit of reducing factory emissions, or did they continue their consumer happy, greedy, lifestyle? 

Did anyone in Texas think "Whoa this is getting worse, gotta do something."?  Probably not.

A lot of people only live for the here and now, I want this, I want that, they do not think of long term implications such as destruction of the planet used to make the item, waste, or even debt.

The same thing is true of family planning, or more correctly, lack of family planning.  "I want a kid" is the thought, never mind if the person is ready (financially, emotionally) to be a parent, or if the planet even needs more kids.  All that matters to a person is that they want a baby, then another, and another.  The next thing you know they are complaining about how tired they are, how much work three kids are and how they have no money.

How is this connected to the drought in Texas?   I almost forgot.  I guess what I am saying is that if we are having more weather problems, and if they are related to human activity, why would anyone who is so concerned continue to pump out children?  If thousands of cattle are dying because we cannot feed them, what are we going to feed our people if we have drought after drought knocking off cattle, and more and more people wanting to be fed? 

It's a no brainer really, less people equals fewer problems, but most of us will be dead before the real crisis hits, it will be felt by our kids and grandkids - and the more of them we have made, the sooner the real problems will be realized...

Will Water be More Valuable than Gold?

Have you ever wondered what substance on earth is the most valuable? Is it oil, is it uranium, is it gold or diamond? The things we value today will not be what we value in the future, because in the future there is one substance that will very likely be more valuable than oil, uranium, gold, or diamonds, and that substance is water!

Although we often think our planet will never fail to provide us with enough drinking water, this may not be true, at least not if we continue adding people and polluting our water. Even today some people pay more for bottled water than they do for gas for their car.

It's not just drinking water we need, we also use water in agriculture; to grow plants, and for our livestock animals. As we add more people to what many would say is an already overpopulated planet, we will continue to require more fresh water.

How Much Fresh Water is there?

About 98% of our water is in the oceans, leave 2 % as fresh water, of which 1.6% is frozen in icecaps and glaciers. 0.36% is ground water, leaving only 0.036% available to us in our rivers, lakes, and streams. Other water is in cloud form, or actually in the bodies of animals, and in plants.

Many people look naively at the oceans and think we have an unlimited amount of water. Even those that are smart enough to realize our fresh water resources are at risk sometimes are ignorant to the risks that our oceans face, and the problems of relying on ocean water to solve the impending crisis of not having enough fresh drinking water. In other words desalinization plants may not be the answer if we continue to add to the population at the rate we currently are.

The Water Crisis will be Fueled by Human Overpopulation

Today we live in a paradox, we are finding ways of bringing fresh, safe, drinking water to more people, but industrialization is resulting in more and more chemicals finding their way into streams, rivers, and eventually the ocean. More people means more demand for fresh water, and it means more people polluting the water we have.

People in some nations (such as El Salvador) are spending over 10% of their total income on safe drinking water. In a world with a growing population and increased pollution, water is becoming a premium resource. For now it might seem that we are improving the supply of fresh water to people who have not had it in the past, but at the same rate we keep adding people to the planet, and making demands of a valuable resource.

Terra Nova got it Wrong

If you have been watching FOX network (American TV) show Terra Nova, you will have seen an overpopulated, over polluted planet in the year 2149. The show is fun to watch but has some flaws, one flaw being that while the people in 2149 live in domed cities and require masks to breath the air they sent people back into the past (through a portal in time to the time of the dinosaurs) to rape the planet for minerals. It seems far more likely to me that the resources they would most want would be fresh drinking water and perhaps even a few dinosaurs to feed all the people.

A Wake Up Call

I just know somebody who is reading this is probably thinking: “What about desalinization?”, Sure we can remove salt from the sea, but desalinization plants cost money how far inland will we pump the water, how much will it cost the consumer, will coastal countries pump water inland to countries that do not have coastlines?

photo source - Whitechuck glacier, Washington - 1973

If you think we can rely on streams, and rivers to continue to supply us with our water, think again. Thanks to global warming glaciers are melting at alarming rates, this includes glaciers in mountain ranges. Snow fall is less and less, and drought is more and more common. Eventually the streams and rivers will run dry for most of the year. Some of our world's glaciers have already vanished, others have shown great rates of retreating since 1980.

The images shows an area of the Whitechuck Glacier, that has retreated more than 1.2 miles (1.9 kilometers) between the times these two photos were taken.

photo source - Whitechuck Glacier - 2006

Have you ever heard of the Aral Sea? If you haven't it is probably because the sea barely exists anymore compared it to what it was years ago. Although it is in a state of recovery now (due to pressure to save the Aral Sea) it was almost gone, due to water being diverted from it for agricultural purposes. It is still mostly too salty for life (having become salty due to the lack of fresh water reaching it for years). It is alarming that so few people have even heard of it since, at one time, the Aral Sea was one of the four largest lakes in the world.

As such I suggest that the most valuable substance on earth is not oil, uranium, gold, or silver, but is one thing we take for granted:  Fresh water.

Human Overpopulation, what do we owe Nature?

As human populations increase, populations of other species fall.  Although few people are aware, we are living in a time scientists have called the Holocene extinction event.  Plants and animal species are going extinct at alarming rates. Undoubtedly some species have gone extinct before we were even aware of their very existence. Other species we wiped out and watched them vanish from the face of the earth, the passenger pigeon being a perfect example of such an extinction.

Some scientists have suggested that over 50,000 species are going extinct every year. Most of these extinctions will be unnoticed and undocumented as they represent flora and fauna we never even knew existed.

Today we continue to control the populations of other species; sometimes directly as when we control the population growth through systematic slaughter, culling, and spay/neuter programs, sometimes indirectly, as when introduced species become invasive and kill other species.

We select which species are important to us, which we dislike, and have decided that the human species is the most important of all. It is extremely ironic that our own species is allowed to reach the numbers it has, topping 7 billion people as of October, 2011, while we try to control so many other populations.

We find it easier to kill off seals so they do not eat “our fish” rather than restricting our population growth, or our consumption of fish. For some reason we have decided that we need to cut the rain forest at a rate where we consume nature faster than it can recover. We decide what are weeds, and remove them because they do not benefit us.  We have allowed humanity to build a large dept to nature that few are interested in repaying.

Do we have the right do destroy other species to maintain our own?

What Debt do we Owe Nature?

I beleive we owe nature a huge debt, one which it seems only a few are trying to repay by living a more sustainable existance, while others are content to consume all they want, have all the kids they want, and live like there is no tomorrow.  Indeed there may be no tomorrow if people do not change their ways.

Controlling our own population is key to our own survival.  If we continue to destroy the environment we doom ourselves to extinction.  Sadly many people reject the notion of human overpopulation, they see it only as an issue of food, not an issue of larger proportions.  If we can control the population of so many other species why do so few people realize there is an issue with the population of the human species and the impact it has on nature?

We owe it not only to nature to control our population, but to ourselves.  We need to realize that we need nature for our own survival and cannot continue to upset the balance of things.  A good example of this would be the Aral Sea, were an entire ecosystem was destroyed, just so we could have a bit of cotton.

We need to realize that it is nature that keeps us alive, not the dollar bill, or large house we live in, or the car we drive.  We need to place the same interest on controlling our population as we do that of other species if we want to continue our existance here, because currently we are consuming resources at alarming rates and driving other species to extinction, and for what?

What debt do we owe nature?  We owe nature our lives.

The Georgia Guidestones Rule of 500,000,000 People

Created in 1979 and unveiled to the public in 1980, the Georgia Guidestones have held a sense of mystery.  Made from 6 granite stones weighing more than 110,000 kg (240,000 pounds) these stones have been inscribed with a message not only written in English, but in 7 other language as well, and shorter messages written in 4 older languages such as Sanskrit.

The Georgia Guidestones stand on a hill in Elbert county, Georgia, approximately 140 km (90 miles) to the east of Atlanta.  They can be accessed from Georgia Highway 77 via Guidestones road.

The 10 inscriptions on the Guidestones are mostly about treating others well, and being respectful of the environment, but the one line that gets the most attention, is the first one, which states: "Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature."

Georgia Guidestones

 Some people fear that this suggests an extermination of roughly 6.5 billion people on the planet and have called the writings Satanic.  Others feel no such genocide is being called for and rather the suggestion is made to naturally reduce our population overtime, and simply not allow it to expand beyond that number.

The Georgian Guidestones are not the only place a population of 500,000,000 is suggested.  Philanthropist, and media mogul, Ted Turner, has been linked to the stones through speculation due to him reportedly suggesting a sustainable world population of 500,000,000.  But Ted Turner was not the only one to publicly voice this idea.

A religious group known as the Rosincrucians have often suggested a sustainable world population of 500 million, they too have been linked to the stone through speculation.  Other people, scientists, and people of intelligence, have suggested the same number.

When was the world human population last at 500,000,000 people?  Surprisingly only only 600+ years ago, around 1500.

October 31, 2011, The Scariest Day So Far

October 31, 2011 is not only Halloween, but it shall go down in history as the day the earth's human population hit 7 billion. You might not think that is any amount, but when you consider that the population has more than doubled in the last 30 years, and stop to think about what that means for the future, you may see the reason why so many people are concerned.

Population clocks count off the births faster than people can count. In the short time it has taken me to write this page so far, over 1000 people have been added to the planet. Thousands more are born every day than are dying, millions in only a matter of days.

A lot of people live in denial that world human overpopulation is an issue, they insist there is food for everyone and it is just not reaching those that need it. While this is true, it is not the only issue that people are concerned about. Fresh water is a limited resource and actually becoming more scarce every day. Pollution levels increase as populations boom. Of great concern is the population being so much greater than the earth's ability to sustain it for long.

Currently we rely on non-renewable resources very heavily. We also consume non-renewable resources at a pace faster than they can be renewed. Eventually we will reach a wall, a time when their simply will not be enough to go around; some say we have already reached this point.

Fingers are often pointed at population growth in Africa (and India, or China) as being part of the problem.  But those people typically consume fewer resources than do the people of developed nations.  True, birth rate is a problem, but so is consumer demand!

While birth rates are falling in some areas the real problem is also that we are living longer and infant mortality rates have dropped. For the first time in history it is not uncommon to have four generations of a family alive at any time. A large part of the reason why human population is growing as fast as it is that we are not dying as young as we use to. Now, since nobody wants to start slaughtering people in massive numbers to control the population, we must think of other things to do.

What can you do?

We can control our population growth by having smaller families. We need to recognize that even one child born is growth, and remains an additional consumer, and resource taker, until we die when that child replaces us. If our child has children before we die, we need to see how more growth has occurred.

We can put off having children for a few years, waiting at least until our mid 20's rather than rushing into it young. You can pledge to have only one child and then take measures through sterilization to ensure we do not have more.

Fertility doctors should be bound not to implant so many embryo's into a woman as to risk the high numbers seen in some multiple births.

Birth control should be free and available to everyone. This applies world wide, it is not enough that we feed people in other nations, we need to provide them with education, and tools to control population growth.

People must be accountable for the children they have.

We also need to learn how to live with less.

Imagine you are a parent, you and your spouse have a couple of kids. You have a small garden and a few hens. Your sons bring their wives to live with you, in your house, they have children, and your grandsons bring their wives to live with you, in your house. Can your garden sustain all of you? Think of the planet as one house. It cannot continue to support more and more people.

Spread the word before things get more scary!

It is hard to Write about Human Overpopulation

Well, I haven't really written anything on this blog for some time, so I thought I should. Overpopulation has been a concern of mine since I was young. I think I was tuned into this global problem after watching a television series called Logan's Run (it was also a movie), and watching the city I grew up in flood over onto farm land reinforced my concern.

I think I have been ignoring this blog because it seems like I am only preaching to the choir, other people who know what the problem is and are equally as powerless to stop it. The frustration behind seeing a problem that so many are in denial of is exhausting. I cannot help but wonder why so few people are aware that human overpopulation is a real problem. So many people say “Overpopulation is a myth, we are no where near the earth's maximum population”. I think perhaps they are in denial, then I think perhaps they are just stupid, or really bad at math.  No, you really cannot fit all of the earth's people easily onto a state the size of Texas. 

I guess some people think that the maximum population situation is when one person too many is born and God steps in to shut down the planet or something. They do not realize that we are already in a crisis, already relying heavily on non-renewable resources (the ones we never get back), and using up renewable ones at a rate faster than they can be renewed (do the math, that doesn't look good).

People are living mostly for the here and now, and not thinking of the future, after all most of us will be dead before things are so bad that drastic action will have to be taken. Oh wait, drastic action has already been taken, has it not? One-child policies? What about famine? Is mother nature taking drastic action just as Thomas Malthus predicted over 100 years ago?

Most countries will do nothing to stop population growth, more people mean more tax dollars flowing to the top, and of course it would be political suicide for any elected official to suggest population control measures.

What can we, as people on a planet flooded with 7 billion souls, do? I guess we can try to educate others. Educate others to be responsible, consume less, reproduce less, and maybe not try to live as long. Educating others to adopt our ways of thinking on the problems of overpopulation is really the toughest part, its easy to preach to the choir, but to get others to sing along is a bit tougher.

I guess that is why I have not written here for so long. Writing to my pet advice blog is easy, people come there looking for help, looking for information, people just do not spend the same time looking up information on overpopulation unless it is already something they know about.

The Population Institute

The Population Institute is an international non-profit that educates policymakers and the public about population, and seeks to promote universal access to family planning information, education, and services.  Through voluntary family planning, we strive to achieve a world population in balance with a healthy global environment and resource base.

The Population Institute is a non-profit International organization that is working to spread awareness of family planning and birth control measures.  While you are on their site you can watch a count of the population growth in real time.  If you are there for a few minutes you will be alarmed at the population growth that will occurr in that short of a time.

Through education they hope to teach people that by having smaller families they will be better able to cope in poverty striken areas.  They coach population activists, and try to educate others in regards to why extreme population growth is a problem.

All donations to the Population Institute are tax-deductable.


Read more at The Population Institute