Reading around also points to questions about Mimms too.
Ok. Let’s hear about it.
Reading around also points to questions about Mimms too.
Reading around also points to questions about Mimms too.
H_James said:Dingo, for an acute accént it often works if you press "Alt Gr" at the same time as the "e" (or other vowel) key.
First reaction of someone with no real problems with overpopulation or interest in nature will most likely find this an outrageous idea. Someone who has been interested in natures equilibrium, worried about the earth and animals might be quicker to agree.
“I do not see why man should not be just as cruel as nature”
“How fortunate for leaders that men do not think”.
Adolf Hitler
And as much as I would love to believe in some rural communal utopia - the reality is likely to more closely resemble midwest America - dirtpoor and isolated.
tonyblair11 said:Oh and karlmarxis, sorry but were aint be all dirt poor rednecks.
One horrified observer was able to make notes on the speech and our gratitude goes to Forrest M. Mims for bringing this sickening display to the attention of the world.
almond13 said:There are a couple of points that you don’t mention.
1) 1950 was just after WWII and you would expect the population to rise from that low.
2) The population of the UK is less now than it was in 1950 and this they tell me is due to reasonable living conditions. The very poor have large families for economic reasons.
3) The graph shows that the planet is capable of sustaining twice the present population.
4) If this is the case, then why not feed the poor and get them to reduce their progeny voluntarily.
lupinwick said:get rid of the capatilist system
DerekH16 said:almond13 said:There are a couple of points that you don’t mention.
1) 1950 was just after WWII and you would expect the population to rise from that low.
2) The population of the UK is less now than it was in 1950 and this they tell me is due to reasonable living conditions. The very poor have large families for economic reasons.
3) The graph shows that the planet is capable of sustaining twice the present population.
4) If this is the case, then why not feed the poor and get them to reduce their progeny voluntarily.
1) Numbers here:- World population rose from 1.6 billion in 1900 to 2.4 billion in 1950 - a 50% increase despite two world wars
2) The total population of the UK rose by 17 per cent from 50.2 million on census day 1951 to 58.8 million on census day 2001. Source
3) The graph has nothing to do with the planet's capabilities: it is merely a forecast of numbers.
Dingo667 said:What about letting nature take its way? How about living naturally and if ill take it with dignity and accept that this is the way?
So we don't want to die, neither does any animal [hence flight and fight responses] but when their time comes they just accept it.
Mythopoeika said:Well done for finding the facts and clarifying it for us!
I'm not sure they wouldn't if they could conceptualise or communicate such a desire. I would have thought that the will-to-live in animals would be if anything higher than in people - not many species match humans on suicide rates for example, I wouldn't think.That's what I mean, they hold on but they also don't start wingeing and begging us to connect them to a machine in order to keep them for another month.
Dingo667 said:Oh, ok, sorry I was wrong. Animals are not at all dignified when they die. They suffer in silnce, not able to make any facial expressions, not even able to talk, I wish they could all be like us humans... sigh...