Baby 6,666,666,666

Baby 6 666 666 666 - Culture, Family, Travel, Consumer Reviews - Posted: 20th May, 2008 - 1:52pm

Text RPG Play Text RPG ?
 

Posts: 3 - Views: 635
Post Date: 20th May, 2008 - 11:08am / Post ID: #

NOTE: News [?]

Baby 6,666,666,666

Baby 6,666,666,666

World Welcomes Baby 6,666,666,666 But Overpopulation Not a Reality

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the world's 6,666,666,666th person was born on May 10th. The occasion gave rise to the usual calls for more population control to stave off a demographic disaster. According to Overpopulation.net, the only thing this number shows us is that we have "passed our sustainability," and that the population crash the world is now experiencing is, in fact, the fault of recklessly breeding humans. These humans are responsible for the downfall of the species because they "have yet to recognize the alarming facts that for the last 16 years we have passed the sustainable food limits that Earth can produce relative to population." The Sierra Club wants to redouble its promotion of population control. "If we are to achieve a more sustainable future," says its Global Population and Environment overview, "addressing the root causes of environmental degradation-- including overconsumption of natural resources, poverty, and population growth - is paramount." PRI begs to differ. In fact, the fear of annihilation at the hands of unstoppable population growth is an outdated scientific parlor tale, based in racism, eugencism, mathematical incompetence and demographic ignorance. Men like Thomas Malthus and Paul Ehrlich have long since been refuted.
Ref. https://www.lifenews.com/int750.html

Sponsored Links:
20th May, 2008 - 1:42pm / Post ID: #

Baby

Funny how they do not mention where they are born and that millions of acres of farm land sit unused. I guess that would not suit the purpose of abortionists.



Post Date: 20th May, 2008 - 1:52pm / Post ID: #

Baby 6,666,666,666
A Friend

Baby 6,666,666,666 Reviews Consumer & Travel Family Culture

Of course they will not mention those things because it will put a big damper on their little case study. I find it funny how they have not adding in the recent disasters that have taken out close to 250,000 people if not more. I wonder if that will put us back under what they consider the point where we are too many to feed? I am sure that other studies have been done on how many people the earth will support. I think they need to reference some of them too.


 
> TOPIC: Baby 6,666,666,666
 

▲ TOP


International Discussions Coded by: BGID®
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Copyright © 1999-2024
Disclaimer Privacy Report Errors Credits
This site uses Cookies to dispense or record information with regards to your visit. By continuing to use this site you agree to the terms outlined in our Cookies used here: Privacy / Disclaimer,