There Needs to be Some Serious Depopulation in This World
 

Just sayin'

i am prodepopulation

i'm not as misathropic as before, but a few years ago i was of the idea that the working class should stop having children to better the world and that people who can't score a certain grade on intelligence tests (not just iq, but like aptitudes tests and acquired knowledge tests) should be killed.

haha. good thing that rule isnt in effect. i didnt do my best at school. i am smart though. believe me

Can't we just put more effort into colonizing Mars? Sure it's only a temporary solution but it is a lot less messy/morally bankrupt.

shut up

we dont need less people, we need to relocate.

death is the only way.
idiots convention in the sahara desert, a bomb on those idiots.

problem solved

Define idiot.

useless to the evolution of things.
things being music, art, culture, cures for diseases and what not.
anything that changes. usually for the better

trolls made some money in the late 90s. unfortunately shut the fuck up.

If anything, we need to breed even more...A LOT more...just saying.

But if these people didn't exist, who would we get to fight our wars?

I think the world's OK for kids for twenty years or so. Then we can start having a few more here and there again.

Even though the natural assimilative capacities of the planet are being stressed, the world doesn't need less people necessarily. It does, however, desperately need less dumb people living under the rule of dumb leaders.

And, of course, you can't just kill them all. All one can do is hope that we will learn from the suffering that we inevitably bring upon ourselves in our ignorance.


Well, eventually we will need to relocate if we are to survive as a species. And we'll perhaps need to do it sooner rather than later because our behaviors are demolishing our life-sustaining atmosphere and we are already well on our way to transforming this planet into a literal biblical hell-on-earth like the conditions on Venus.
And assuming that we can avoid extinction due to climate change, we'll still need to abandon this galaxy before the Sun goes supernova in a few billion more years.

Vasectomy, check.
No kids, check.

I don't know what else I can really do.

kill your friend's kids

One of those kids has already tested out at some kind of super-genius level, and I don't really want to increase the percentage of dumb people in the coming generations.

ok, well just go round a maternity ward with a hammer then

time and date?

I do wonder, that how are people in the time when the sun explode, are going to handle that?

kill these people:

you first


you second


you next?


you first


you second


you next?


you go, i'll keep your property. send me directions.

You are going to go with me, I know where arizona is at, it is not hard to steal a nuke, you know.

just saying-- those who want "depopulation" should speak for themselves.

like the clone & his permanent spermicide

Well, to be fair, there have been plenty of crowds I have found myself in where I have thought to myself "It wouldn't be so bad if a bomb hit here right now and if I have to be killed as well, so be it."

But the vasectomy is preferable for sure.

im going to shoot my genes forth-- oh yes

when i realize im a direct descendent of the first life forms on earth, fucking awesome-- i dont wanna quit.

me first.

I know quite a few intelligent people who are serious cunts. A larger brain capacity says nothing.

Of course there will be other consequences of climate change before the atmosphere goes completely. Unpleasantness that many of you are no doubt also aware of...continental plates moving around, a lot of earthquake and volcanic activity, superstorms and massive floods, all that. Experts say we have millions of years though before our planet goes the way of Venus completely. I'm not convinced the experts are correct though, because if humans died out then it seems feasible that nature might be able to correct a lot of the damage. I'm thinking of the microbacterial organisms, the blue green algae and stromatolites and all that.
-----------------------------------------------------
http://www.ux1.eiu.edu/~cfjps/1400/atmos_origin.html

Throughout the Archean there was little to no free oxygen in the atmosphere (<1% of presence levels). What little was produced by cyanobacteria, was probably consumed by the weathering process. Once rocks at the surface were sufficiently oxidized, more oxygen could remain free in the atmosphere.
During the Proterozoic the amount of free O2 in the atmosphere rose from 1 - 10 %. Most of this was released by cyanobacteria, which increase in abundance in the fossil record 2.3 Ga. Present levels of O2 were probably not achieved until ~400 Ma.

Stromatolites - These are finely layered, mound-shaped accumulations of mud trapped by growing mats of cyanobacteria (blue green algae). Cyanobacteria are very primitive photosythetic procaryotes (bacteria) that grow in marine environments, producing mats of cell filiments that can mound-up with marine mud to produce structures several meters high. Stromatolites are rare in the early Archean but become increasingly common in rocks from the middle and later Archean.

I'm wondering why we don't just spawn and distribute as much of this stuff as possible (Stromatolite mounds, Dolemite crystals, cyanobacteria (blue green algae)) into the coastal shorelines and wherever and reforest as much as we can as part of a global effort. I realize that it was a process of billions of years to compose our atmosphere, but still, these are the types of primitive plants that did it. Governments can't get along and they don't have the money to spare for such projects, I suppose.

This whole phytoplankton thing is a puzzle:

http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s735612.htm

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/01/business/01plankton.html?ex=1335672000&en=76f2d30159363fcc& ei=5090

--------------------------------------------------
Carbon Dioxide
SourcesReleased by the combustion of fossil fuels (oil, coal, and natural gas), flaring of natural gas, changes in land use (deforestation, burning and clearing land for agricultural purposes), and manufacturing of cementSinksPhotosynthesis and deposition to the ocean.ImportanceAccounts for about half of all warming potential caused by human activity.

Methane
SourcesLandfills, wetlands and bogs, domestic livestock, coal mining, wet rice growing, natural gas pipeline leaks, biomass burning, and termites.SinksChemical reactions in the atmosphere.ImportanceMolecule for molecule, methane traps heat 20-30 times more efficiently than CO2. Within 50 years it could become the most significant greenhouse gas.

Nitrous Oxide
SourcesBurning of coal and wood, as well as soil microbes' digestion..SinksChemical reactions in the atmosphere.ImportanceLong-lasting gas that eventually reaches the stratosphere where it participates in ozone destruction.

Ozone
SourcesNot emitted directly, ozone is formed in the atmosphere through photochemical reactions involving nitrogen oxides and hydrocarbons in the presence of sunlight.SinksDeposition to the surface, chemical reactions in the atmosphere. ImportanceIn the troposphere ozone is a pollutant. In the stratosphere it absorbs hazardous ultraviolet radiation.

Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs)
SourcesUsed for many years in refrigerators, automobile air conditioners, solvents, aerosol propellants and insulation.SinksDegradation occurs in the upper atmosphere at the expenses of the ozone layer. One CFC molecule can initiate the destruction of as many as 100,000 ozone molecules. ImportanceThe most powerful of greenhouse gases — in the atmosphere one molecule of CFC has about 20,000 times the heat trapping power on a molecule of CO2.

http://www.globalchange.umich.edu/gl...evolution_atm/