|
Termyn8or -> RE: Overpopulation (9/1/2011 4:01:22 PM)
|
To OP, even though I have read the responses up to this point in time.
The situation will correct itself. It's been proven in many clinical trials with animals, and at least once on an island with deer. The deer were placed in an environment with ample food, so that was eliminated as a variable. The overcrowding that ensued resulted in glandular changes in the animals and after a few generations the problem was corrected.
The subjects became very hostile and competitive during the time the overpopulation was the worst. They suffered more disease, and a few were felled and disected, at which time(s) the glandular changes were noted. During that time the reseachers noted that they were very aggressive. After the correction, which is probably still not completely understood, the animals' demeanor returned to what had been considered normal before the study.
But what wasn't reported was whether some members of the herd engaged in preventing certain others from obtaining food, like humans do. Despite the abundance, the aggresive tendencies really could've resulted in many things, which were not observed because nobody stayed to watch. They dopped the subjects off and returned later.
Similar studies were done with rodents in a laboratory environment and in these cases the subjects' behavior was noted. Increased rate of homosexuality, rape gangs and theft of food and even offspring were noted. Note that I did not group these observations together, the author(s) of the article and/or researchers did.
I don't base my conclusions strictly on one article of course, it's obvious for one that people are slightly different than animals. But you can see it in different geographical areas. You can see it in my town where people just get on one another's nerves.
One of the goals of communism is to even out the population density (little known), and actually it makes sense. When people are too crowded together, it is no longer just a matter of food. Physical resources are only part of the problem because as we know there is plenty of food wasted. And it is quite possible that it should be.
The fact is that you can't cure hunger. If people live in an area that cannot support life the law of nature is that they die. If you send food they will reproduce and you will have increased the amount of suffering. Sad but true. Harsh ? Try that world with 16 billion peole on it. I certainly don't want to be there.
You want to colonize the moon or other planets, get on the motherfucker because it's alot of work. Our only chance is Mars right now and that's a pain in the ass because of the lack of gravity to keep a decent atmosphere. Live in domes ? Then you invite the same problems.
Unfortunately, although nobody wants to admit it, death is the answer. Not extinction, but death, death aplenty. Don't like it, move to Antarctica.
T^T
|
|
|
|
