14482 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
Many people have come to think that the world is becoming overpopulated. Any solutions?
Malthus and Ehrlich both had the same view. Both were wrong. Not that there aren't serious challenges to feed 7 billion souls.
The world can feed 7 billion people.
Human beings can do anything they want to do.
We have been to the Moon, and we are going to Mars.
Why not feed everybody on the planet?
Too many confederates living in Denmark, for sure!
Over population is a problem human beings never take seriously. The scariest part is that those nations least able to feed their population seem to have the greatest problem. Historically, epidemics and plagues seem to break out in such regions. This is not a pleasant prospect.
Over population is the root of all the worlds problems.
Why is everyone so scared about overpopulation when the world is supposedly going to end in 2012
The world will not end in 2012.
End of the world has been predicted regularly since antiquity.
We could feed all people on the planet, if we put our mind to it.
The problem is conquering greed.
If everyone would do with what they needed, we
could feed everybody.
I think we should manslaughter everyone who is not a farmer.Easy solution.Or make a law saying all people must be farmers.So so simple.
I think my Danish friend is right. We need not worry about this. Food is not becoming scarce and there is much more room than it seems.
The world is not over populated.8 billion people could live in the state of texas,and it would only have the population density of New York;that would leave the rest of the planet for agriculture and parks.
A glass of water or of wine can be half full or half empty.
To me it will always be half full. I am an optimist.
To you may be half empty, if you are a pessimist.
There are so and so many resources, and we can multiply them in time.
I do believe in technology.
The problem is sharing among us what we have on the planet,
and that is where we have to conquer greed and fear.
Fear of not having enough, and greed, which comes
'from fear, for when we are afraid of not haveing enough,
we may become greedy.
To you may be half empty
Human carrying capacity has not been reached yet. We're still growing
Look at it this way:
Imagine you ignore all the oceans and join all the land mass on earth together. Now you spread out the total population evenly over the landmass. with the current population, your neighbours would be about 98 meters ahead, behind, left and right of you.You have about 10,000 sq m on which to support your life.
Remember, you 10,000 sq m includes farmland, deserts, mountains, jungle, rivers, a good chunk of Antarctic ice fields, tundra, cities etc.
On this area you not only have to feed yourself with crops and livestock (remember, livestock need to eat too!) but you have to mine your minerals for manufacturing and energy, you need a space to live, a space to work, a space to relax, a space for waste products that wont contaminate everything else, you have to concede some of your space for factories, shops, infrastructure etc.
Over the past 20 years (Yes, in our own lifetime!) we crossed a threshold, we are now consuming more than the planet can regenerate. If the population doubles (75 years from now) that 98 meter distance becomes 71 meters, another doubling (150 years) and that distance is less than 50 meters. The arth does have a maximum carrying capacity for humans, and we've reached it.
Future wars and genocides will be about resources (including but not limited to food and water).
Superpowers will find excuses ( threats of terrorism, or whatever) to exterminate less advanced nations to win their space and resources for own use.
This is exactly the kind of thinking that got us where we are today.
Also, in my post the figures assume a fair and equitable distribution of resources.
That is not happenning. The earth can probably support many billions if everybody had the lifestyle of Somali peasants. But the fact is thar one West European or American family has the consumtion of an entire Somali village, and more. So the argument that "only countries that can't afford it are overpopulated" is a fallacy. We can afford more poor people, we can't afford more consumers.
POLITICAL DEBATE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (((GB)))
Wow... I guess I have started quite a ruckus.
Family planning, what else
London Chess Classic - Super 16 Rapid 2013
by trysts a few minutes ago
what the #$%^was he playing and how did he win?
by Somebodysson 120 seconds ago
Chess Sacrifice. ...??
by sammynouri 6 minutes ago
Need help analysing :)
by MarnixNL 7 minutes ago
Worst move for white after 1.e4 e5 2.nf3 nc6?
by DragonZenMaster 10 minutes ago
Me vs. Schaumburg (board 1)
by PlayChessWithASmile 13 minutes ago
Borislav Ivanov is BACK!
by ifoody 17 minutes ago
First win against phone app
by CP6033 17 minutes ago
why e4 is better than d4.
by JohnStormcrow 23 minutes ago
12/11/2013 - Topalov-Kramnik, Dortmund 1996
by Easeland 24 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2013 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!