All Solar, Et Al, In 12 Years?

[Carnivore]

I am making an argument that Global Climate Change is actually world over-population. So matter what you do with Consumption of Energy; i.e Making it more efficient, converting to total Solar etc etc the problem will always keep getting worse if we don't start limiting population growth.

http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/

 

[Randolph Kinney]

I am making an argument that Global Climate Change is actually world over-population. So matter what you do with Consumption of Energy; i.e Making it more efficient, converting to total Solar etc etc the problem will always keep getting worse if we don't start limiting population growth.

http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/

people = pollution

more people = more pollution

less people = less pollution

less people = less energy

less people = less consumption

All the climate scientists have to do is convert the population equivalents to CO2 levels desired and therefore control global temperatures and climate.

problem solved!

 

[Carnivore]

That's where I was going with this.

Every human is an Oxygen, Fresh Water - Consumer

Every human is also a CO2, Methane , Fertilizer Producer.

We are pretty efficient at the above. We do it 24/7 for 60-80 years each.

What is the Solution.

Take the top 6 filthiest US cities in the US and Euthanize lets say 50% of them.

Sterilize 50% of all women in the top 6 filthiest cities in the US. Maintain that balance by Sterilizing 50% of all female babies.

Planned Parenthood could probably do that job fairly efficiently.

 

[Randolph Kinney]

That's where I was going with this.

Every human is an Oxygen, Fresh Water - Consumer

Every human is also a CO2, Methane , Fertilizer Producer.

We are pretty efficient at the above. We do it 24/7 for 60-80 years each.

You do know the earth has warmed and cooled throughout time before humans?

Therefore exterminating all humanoid life-forms on earth cannot control climate. The earth does what it does, naturally. Humans are just another life-form that exists because of the symbiotic systems that are in place that support life of all kinds on earth.

 

[Randolph Kinney]

Carbon Dioxide Content of Earth's Atmosphere

 

[Meandering]

That's where I was going with this.

Every human is an Oxygen, Fresh Water - Consumer

Every human is also a CO2, Methane , Fertilizer Producer.

We are pretty efficient at the above. We do it 24/7 for 60-80 years each.

What is the Solution.

Take the top 6 filthiest US cities in the US and Euthanize lets say 50% of them.

Sterilize 50% of all women in the top 6 filthiest cities in the US. Maintain that balance by Sterilizing 50% of all female babies.

Planned Parenthood could probably do that job fairly efficiently.

Sterilize the men,
They are the ones making babies, some, with many different women.

Plus it's easier and less expensive to sterilize men.

Men lose no hormone producing organs in the process and suffer less side effects, while woman have to be maintained on artificial hormones for the rest of their lives.
.
10 minutes a band aid and men are done.

Why perform major surgery on women? 4 hours plus 2 days in the hospital, plus medications for life?

.

 

[Meandering]

Therefore exterminating all humanoid life-forms on earth cannot control climate. The earth does what it does, naturally. Humans are just another life-form that exists because of the symbiotic systems that are in place that support life of all kinds on earth.

But if we cut down half of the population, we could have a Renaissance, like what happened when the plague wiped out a large portion of the population at the end of the Dark Ages.

.

 

[Randolph Kinney]

But if we cut down half of the population, we could have a Renaissance, like what happened when the plague wiped out a large portion of the population at the end of the Dark Ages.

.

Hmmm ... population size and distribution (density).

Why not eugenics (improve the genetic quality through selective breeding)? Set a minimum standard for existence? Productivity?

Climate change won't stop, however.

 

[Pittsburgh Pete]

people = pollution

more people = more pollution

less people = less pollution

less people = less energy

less people = less consumption

All the climate scientists have to do is convert the population equivalents to CO2 levels desired and therefore control global temperatures and climate.

problem solved!

Or reduce the output across the board. Such a practical approach doesn't fit into the denier's ideological construct (or not smart enough to acknowledge it)!

 

[Randolph Kinney]

In population ecology and economics, maximum sustainable yield or MSY is theoretically, the largest yield (or catch) that can be taken from a species' stock over an indefinite period. Fundamental to the notion of sustainable harvest, the concept of MSY aims to maintain the population size at the point of maximum growth rate by harvesting the individuals that would normally be added to the population, allowing the population to continue to be productive indefinitely. Under the assumption of logistic growth, resource limitation does not constrain individuals’ reproductive rates when populations are small, but because there are few individuals, the overall yield is small. At intermediate population densities, also represented by half the carrying capacity, individuals are able to breed to their maximum rate. At this point, called the maximum sustainable yield, there is a surplus of individuals that can be harvested because growth of the population is at its maximum point due to the large number of reproducing individuals. Above this point, density dependent factors increasingly limit breeding until the population reaches carrying capacity. At this point, there are no surplus individuals to be harvested and yield drops to zero. The maximum sustainable yield is usually higher than the optimum sustainable yield and maximum economic yield.

Soylent Green has the right solution; convert a portion of the population into food to feed the others. Therefore no need for farm animals.