...
I do sort of wonder if feminism was designed by the social engineers in part to deal with the overpopulation problem by making women and men even more incompatible than they are by nature.
Guess that its a subject for yet another NWO thread
But I have similar feeling, if "they" could "they" probably did.
However is earth really overpopulated?
Take all the humans in the world at make them stand in a square of 1m² each.
They will create a square with a side of ~85K people, 85K meters = 85km
85K x 85K = roughly 7.3 billion means that all earths population can be placed in a average size county...
Inspired by other events to note this thread...
This really is an interesting question to me. Currently I have some real questions about it, and some real critiques of those to whom 'overpopulation' creates a ding-salivate response. And those who buy the former's propaganda. And those 'scientist' of the former group who are simply to lazy to do the math and/or ethical analysis. And those who live in pockets of overpopulation and have not traveled enough to look at the real world...or simply fired up Google Earth.
Thoughtful people who fall into one of the above categories would do well to ask themselves whether they are actually more close to a religion than they are to anything else.
I suspect that 'evil humans' actually did some significant modification to the earth and to Mother-Earth's inventory of species, but 'our destructiveness' apexed about 30,000 years ago when we started using fire to set ablaze anything flammable, and our impact has been declining ever since. And especially in the modern age where the groups of humans who have the real power to wipe things out are remarkably conscientious about not doing so.
Simple mathematics demonstrate that 'we' will provoke a 'crisis' at some point, but are we really near that point yet? The answer is, to me, a subject of considerable debate. 'We' change things wherever we operate, but other organisms and natural processes (meteors, solar shifts, etc) do as well, and there are both winners and losers in all such events. When organisms learned how to harness the power of the sun and started putting oxygen into the atmosphere, it 'destroyed' the planet on a scale much more violently than humans could muster. Oxygen is an extremely reactive element which lays waste to almost everything it touches including most of the species of a billion years ago and only a few of them adapted.
I believe that currently we are in a phase where a tiny tiny fraction of humans control economically most of the resources of the planet. These people have a choice:
- Expend the resources they control to provide a quality of life for the rest
- Reduce the number of the rest and thus extend the time before the resources they control are depleted.
Looks to me as though they prefer the latter and what we see are the impacts of a propaganda campaign (issued through resources that they also control. Educational systems, media, etc, etc.) This is, to me, a much better explanation of the overpopulation 'problems' we face than is the notion that we've run out of space.