Natural Cause or Plague
Posted 6/4/14
I know this is crazy..

The population of earth has worsened...
Animals decreasing
Land forms became smaller..
Water is not enough
Food is limited..
Weather changing
Children starving...

Humans are very abusive in many ways, consciously,subconsciously,unconciously...so heres the thing...

The smaller the human count, the more abundant the resources are..but its a sin to just mass kill everyone..

So..is creating a plague that would kill millions,billions of people prefferable than of dying of natural causes?(i.e, sickness,wrath of mother nature)???
114162 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / in a world where...
Offline
Posted 6/4/14
personally, i won't mind as long as we can control it once we're done, but you just know that there are going those that take the moral high ground on this saying humans shouldn't be killed by any means

i think we just need to control our breeding by abstinence/celibacy, surgical operation, medication, etc.
Posted 6/4/14
just stick to watching anime
21580 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
48 / M / Reston, Virginia
Offline
Posted 6/4/14

severticas wrote:

just stick to watching anime


I love your response.

Seriously though, the world will recover from whatever the human race does to it. If humans die out due to our own stupidity then mother nature will move on and slowly adjust things back and life on Earth will still go on. Pretty much anything we do to mess up the world will take decades, and more likely centuries to play out. As the world gets worse, I'm sure the human population will likely fall in response. There is no need for a plague or other conscious action from man to produce that result.

Posted 6/4/14 , edited 6/4/14
It won't continue increasing exponentially forever and could stabilise soon enough because of socio-economic factors. Crudely put, increase in literacy levels = decrease in birth rate.
Posted 6/4/14

severticas wrote:

just stick to watching anime


Ohh..exotic..awesome..i wish all people would like watching anime..there are those who thinks we need to get a life than watching anime..i get furious..djjssjjs
8425 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / Honnouji academy
Offline
Posted 6/5/14
Is this a hypothetical situation ?

Food is absolutely not limited
Animals aren't decreasing either
i don't know what you mean by " population of earth worsened"
humans were a lot more abusive and could get away with a lot more shit back then, i think this are getting better ...
Now, if your description was a hypothetical situation, excuse me
Posted 6/5/14

outerheaven139 wrote:

Is this a hypothetical situation ?

Food is absolutely not limited
Animals aren't decreasing either
i don't know what you mean by " population of earth worsened"
humans were a lot more abusive and could get away with a lot more shit back then, i think this are getting better ...
Now, if your description was a hypothetical situation, excuse me


no this isnt a hypothetical question,its just a collection of opinions cuz..(idrc if we all die,natural or man made event)


Are you sure that food is not limited? How can you tell?
and I meant that the population is gradually increasing(people having sex then get pregnant then doesnt know what to do anymore, fml..-__-)
42339 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / F / New Jersey, USA
Offline
Posted 6/5/14
Meanwhile, as I wait for an asteroid to hit the planet.
8425 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / Honnouji academy
Offline
Posted 6/6/14

bhikiragi wrote:


outerheaven139 wrote:

Is this a hypothetical situation ?

Food is absolutely not limited
Animals aren't decreasing either
i don't know what you mean by " population of earth worsened"
humans were a lot more abusive and could get away with a lot more shit back then, i think this are getting better ...
Now, if your description was a hypothetical situation, excuse me


no this isnt a hypothetical question,its just a collection of opinions cuz..(idrc if we all die,natural or man made event)


Are you sure that food is not limited? How can you tell?
and I meant that the population is gradually increasing(people having sex then get pregnant then doesnt know what to do anymore, fml..-__-)



Yes, i'm sure that food is not limited, just the North American food companies could produce enough food to give a meal out to every person on the planet, the problem isn't having enough food, do you think people starve in Africa because there's not enough food to give it to them ? there's no way to reach them, a lot of places in Africa are surrounded by rebel/bandit/terrorist( whatever you wanna call them) camps, and they intercept humanitarian planes and any help really, people that are starving are doing so because you need money to buy food, it's that simple !
And i don't know why you think increasing population is something bad, the problem isn't the amount of people, the problem is the concentrarion in Urban areas, for example, i live in a fairly small city, but it has a 11 million population, there's plenty of room on the planet, a growing population isn't something bad, not to mention i recently read that the growth is starting to stabilize, a lot of people are deciding not to have children ( including myself ) i think this having children and grow a family mentality is dying off in some places, a lot of people are realizing you don't need to have kids and get married in order to be happy.
Also, the controlled disease thing, it already happens, but it's used for profit, it has been proven that a lot of companies do vaccine testing in Africa that ends up killing hundreds and thousands.
Posted 6/6/14
i wouldn't say creating a plague (biological weapon) would be as immoral as genocide. i would say that as a race we have become too technological advanced to where we are extending our lives beyond what nature intends. we have ways of creating food, treating illness, curing diseases.

events like the black plague or influenza outbreak served as nature's way for population control. well that and ww 1 & 2 help curb human populations. now we really do not have outbreaks like that on a global level that have a massive effect on populations. from my own view point that is good because i want to live but if you look at it from a natural resource standpoint..then things are iffy.

it's tough because as a race you want to thrive but thriving me consuming resources. we just need to start being smart about how we do it and i think in first world countries you see this to some extent. the next phase is getting those mid-level (2nd world?) up and coming countries/economies to see the good in conservation versus expending resources for the sake of growth.
39645 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / Anywhere Gatcha!
Offline
Posted 6/8/14
Hmm it really depends. It's not right to kill anyone perhaps, but we need a way to control the size of any population with an equal and enough amount of goods (food, water, electricity, etc). I don't like the idea of creating a plaque as an option or is preferable than dying of natural causes to kill millions of people. The idea idk is sad to me if every living thing starts dying. Though, it's true we need a better life here.

Isn't the rate of people being born is equal to the rate of people dying in theory? People need to be smarter and be aware of such things happening to our environment. Environmental awareness and such. Places and people's attitudes are changing due to mass media and because of advanced technology with medicine and such. There should be a solution.

This whole concept of saving one's resources is environmental sustainability (?)- where it is the practice of living on Earth in a way that allows humans to use resources without depriving future generations of these resources. Unless people want to die... [Humans might be one of the causes for their own 6th mass extinction]...

This is so complex when it does not need to be. I wish there was a faster and convenient answer to everything.
6046 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / F / Indiana
Offline
Posted 6/8/14
It's hard to think in such broad and general topics. The idea is that, so long as you can convince everyone, you can start a movement and make changes that will change the world.

However, it's easy to see that a lot of these movements are met with resistance. The strength of the movement has to overcome that of the resistance, whether aggressive or otherwise.

Or you can just "do what you can" and hope that your effort inspires others and eventually the world is a better place.

In the end, though, change is a very tedious and difficult thing. Sometimes, it can come naturally. I hear birth rates are down, probably because a lot of us now are so much more aware of the problems of our generation and/or have come to a more intellectual reasoning as to why we don't want kids (in terms of population control, at least). As far as just destroying a portion of the population? How can you even think about doing such a thing "for the betterment of life itself" when it clearly contradicts the original notion? How would you decide who to kill? Is it ethical? Making peace with that kind of cognitive dissonance and taking an extreme reaction would lead to a lot of guilt or severe sociopathy. In my opinion, if you were going to make that kind of decision, you'd be forced to forfeit your own life as part of the price.

I don't know, it feels kind of pointless to think about. Whatever happens will happen. I can only control what I do. If that inspires other people, wonderful. If not? I won't let it get me down.
Sailor Candy Moderator
200584 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28
Offline
Posted 9/2/14
OP Nuked.
You must be logged in to post.