Climate change and overpopulation

[Deleted member 76176]

I’m preparing a speech on climate change and overpopulation, and I need your input. What are some of the most convincing arguments or counterarguments you have heard or read about these issues? I want to address the common myths and misunderstandings that people have about them.

 

[TheEldritchGod]

There is enough carbon dioxide in the Siberian permafrost to equal the total output of all of humanity for the past 12,000 years...

TIMES SEVEN.

BTW, It is already melting.

 

[NotaNuffian]

We need to kill more people.

Not me, other people.

Jokes aside, good luck with the speech, it will be political real fast.

On the subject of killing other people, we can also solve the world hunger issue... not that there should be one in the first place when "first world countries" are wasting food like no tomorrow.

It is very easy to point at others for mistakes while not owning to one's.

And also, companies lobbying is also a major issue for climate change, just look at Australia. (oops, getting political)

 

[TheEldritchGod]

People who rant the most about climate change own the most oceanfront property.
it's almost as if they are trying to get the prices down,

 

[Sola-sama]

This two and a half minute video might help you.

 

[HelloHound]

...isn't it a bit obvious by now? with all the freak storms, fires and that time texas nearly froze to death?

 

[TheEldritchGod]

Positive feedback loops that exist in nature are few and far between. They usually don't happen. Usually, there are negative feedback loops. For example, the massive run off of water from Greenland is disrupting the gulf stream and is likely to cause an ice age if it shuts down.

 

[Deleted member 76176]

There is enough carbon dioxide in the Siberian permafrost to equal the total output of all of humanity for the past 12,000 years...

TIMES SEVEN.

BTW, It is already melting.

I couldn't find accurate data on exactly how much CO2 is trapped there, but nonetheless, the way you said it is a bit misleading.

 

[TheEldritchGod]

The fact of the matter is, we don't know. We just don't.

I couldn't find accurate data on exactly how much CO2 is trapped there, but nonetheless, the way you said it is a bit misleading.

It's all the dead and decaying plant matter. It'll take a couple of decades to finish decaying. Once it does, well, we'll find out of climate change is real or not. Oh, and don't expect to find the report online. That shit gets wiped ASAP. Don't want to make it sound like the carbon credits thing is pointless, now do we?

Oh, and before you go: YOU Paranoid! I would like to point out, that ONLY NOW, are we allowed to say on YouTube that maybe something fishy happened with the 2020 election... in 2023. Just remember.

CNN Tells you what you are allowed to say.
Fox News Tells you what you are allowed to THINK.

 

[Deleted member 76176]

We need to kill more people.

Not me, other people.

Jokes aside, good luck with the speech, it will be political real fast.

On the subject of killing other people, we can also solve the world hunger issue... not that there should be one in the first place when "first world countries" are wasting food like no tomorrow.

It is very easy to point at others for mistakes while not owning to one's.

And also, companies lobbying is also a major issue for climate change, just look at Australia. (oops, getting political)

I have considered that, and I’m avoiding discussing the issues in a partisan way. Besides countering misconceptions, I also want to explain why they are so politically relevant.

 

[Deleted member 113259]

Talk about cows, it's funny.

 

[Tyranomaster]

I think one of the most interesting studies I saw was that the more informed someone is about the actual science of climate change, the less alarmist they are.

Some of the reasons for this include: its practically impossible for us to actually wipe ourselves out with CO2 and other greenhouse gasses; although there are winners and losers, in the next 100 years the net effect of climate change on food production and economies are negligable.

Its called climate change, not climate extinction for a reason.

 

[Sola-sama]

Talk about cows, it's funny.

Yeah, I heard cows farts and meat-eaters are causing global warming.

 

[Jemini]

In terms of overpopulation...

In the 1800s, they were saying the streets would be unwalkable due to horse-poop being everywhere if the population continued to increase at it's current rate... That didn't happen, because the automobile was invented and people stopped using horses.

Later, there was a paper predicting that the population could not possibly exceed 1 billion because the planet's ability to produce food simply could not measure up to such a population, even if every single square-inch of arable land was converted to farmland.

Once again, this didn't happen. This was not due to the calculations being wrong. In fact, the calculations were pretty darn solid. Once again, the reason it didn't happen and the world's population is now around 8X what they said was the peak the planet could sustain is, again, because technology advanced in the area of food production, allowing us to produce more food with less land.

Every time it's predicted we are reaching a population cap for various reasons, new technology is invented that allows us to break past those previous limits.

 

[Theirl]

I’m preparing a speech on climate change and overpopulation, and I need your input. What are some of the most convincing arguments or counterarguments you have heard or read about these issues? I want to address the common myths and misunderstandings that people have about them.

Climate change i wont even boder anyone know pro argument. Against it its the natural circle of colling and heating of earth. This circle is so long that is hard to really know if the warming of earqh is true or not. Overpopulation there is a lot of in favor just use china and india, as exemples and speak about lack of jobs and social convulsions vecause of it. Agaist i dont know the name of the graph i actually forgot the name of the movement but its about that overpopulations can be solved with tecnology, and actually there is a correlation betwen the number of people and higher rate of quality of life. We live in the most properous society with the most number of people on earth

 

[Deleted member 113259]

Climate change i wont even boder anyone know pro argument. Against it its the natural circle of colling and heating of earth. This circle is so long that is hard to really know if the warming of earqh is true or not. Overpopulation there is a lot of in favor just use china and india, as exemples and speak about lack of jobs and social convulsions vecause of it. Agaist i dont know the name of the graph i actually forgot the name of the movement but its about that overpopulations can be solved with tecnology, and actually there is a correlation betwen the number of people and higher rate of quality of life. We live in the most properous society with the most number of people on earth

Huh, didn't realize you were on the forums.

 

[TheEldritchGod]

Here's the only REAL take:

When MONEY is involved, we should be very careful about making any radical change.

Example: The covid-19 vaccine. If you know how it works, you wouldn't take it AND sign the waver. I refused to sign the waver, but was willing to take the shot. They would not give it to me. Guess what? For every person it saved, it looked like it killed 4 people.

We rushed into the COVID Vaccine which is a LIVE VIRUS (they lie about it being 'dead' by playing around with the definition of 'live'. if it injects itself into your cells and reprograms your DNA, it's a live virus, Got it?) How much money to be made in the single most sold product in human history? We rushed into that over money.

Now we got idiots trying to slaughter all the cows to prevent farts. They want to shut down oil wells and basically murder billions to 'save the world'. The world is gonna be just fine. Humanity will be just fine. Earth could support 40 billion people, easy. (EDIT: We don't have production problems. we have DISTRIBUTION problems.) We're never going to break 9 billion at this rate, most likely gonna top out of 8.

If you understand the Pareto distributions, that's bad.

The rich don't understand you NEED those billions of poor to prop you up. If there are only a billion people on the planet, the standard of living for everyone DROPS. Everyone suffers. There isn't more STUFF, because of the way supply chains work. fewer people means fewer workers, means fewer products means less GDP and a declining standard of livings for everyone.

There is nothing we can do to try and stop or encourage climate change without, possibly causing MASSIVE problems. Okay, a cleaner environment is good. I'm down with that. But if you REALLY are anti-carbon, why are so many climate champions anti-Nuclear power plants? With Breeder reactors, we can basically eliminate 80% of the carbon emissions within 5 years, maybe 10.

OH NO! NUKE BAD.

No. Nukes will make the oil companies broke. Lowering carbon emissions doesn't hurt oil companies. It drives up prices so they make MORE MONEY. If you are against climate change AND against nuclear power, you are just an idiot who is a member of a death cult.

 

[Jemini]

We live in the most properous society with the most number of people on earth

You might want to parse that out a little better. The United States is the most prosperous society on earth, while China is the most populated as a nation with 3X the population and around 1/2 the GDP. Meanwhile, India is the most populated per square-inch of livable land, and is really not in the same realm of prosperity as the previous two nations at all.

 

[TheEldritchGod]

Yeah, I heard cows farts and meat-eaters are causing global warming.

vegans fart more, actually.

 

[Rezcore]

I'm not touching climate change.
But overpopulation is a myth. Birth rates and fertility rates have dropped drastically, urban centers are over packed, leaving non farmable land empty. Even if we were to subtract national parks, graze lands and farm land, everyone could be safely removed from cities. That said, the only real solution for each of the issues such as hunger, require tailored responses, as what would work in Djibouti won't work in Kenya, won't work in Myanmar, won't work in Venezuela and so on.