This is a city killer, not a continent killer. Wishing for few hundred thousand innocent people to die is just pure evil - it has no effect on overpopulation.
I’m so grown up that I don’t have to resort to slinging insults. Obviously it’s humans doing the consumption. I’m saying that 1, overpopulation has been a eugenicist talking point forever; and 2, that cold blooded, infinite growth, profits-over-planet consumerism is what makes our society unsustainable, not necessarily the population.
I’m so tired of the “overpopulation is a eugenicist talking point” argument. Just because a group of nasty people see a potential problem and propose inhumane solutions for it doesn’t mean the problem itself isn’t real. There’s nothing unethical about acknowledging that an ecosystem can only support a certain quantity of an organism in a sustainable way. If people are allowed to pursue their natural desire to have a comfortable lifestyle, the world can’t sustain the population we have. Regardless of what anyone wants, some combination of three things will happen:
The human population will decrease dramatically.
The average standard of living will decrease dramatically.
We discover ways to dramatically improve the standard of living that can be maintained in a sustainable way.
Most people focus on #3, but I see no way, in timeframe we have available, to even come close to achieving what’s needed to prevent a total ecological collapse that way. We’re on track to see 1 and 2 happen. The only people who make it through relatively unscathed will be the ones with the most access to resources (i.e. wealth), so by allowing wealth inequality to exist, we’re effectively choosing to cull the poor, which is not meaningfully different from eugenics. But without extreme authoritarian measures, we also can’t stop people from trying to improve their lifestyles in unsustainable ways. OTOH there are mountains of evidence showing that, just by educating women and letting them have bodily autonomy, we can completely halt population growth.
I fear it’s too late, though for that to save us, because the world population is already far too big. We probably can’t convince enough people to stop reproducing to bring the population down fast enough, and even if we could, it would cause a demographic collapse where they’re aren’t enough young people to support the elderly population.
In short, I think we’re fucked, but it would be really nice if the survivors would remember that we got here in part through unchecked population growth, and that it could be prevented from happening again by people voluntarily limiting their reproduction. We as a species are remarkably resistant to leaning though, so I didn’t have high hopes on that front either.
More a result of countries managing to get over the industrial revolution population spike, and getting into the modern age. Once you have access to modern medicine, and the birth mortality and child mortality rates plummet, people stop having so many kids.
It’s currently moving at about 12,000 kph and will be slightly sped up to 17,000 kph if it actually hits us. That is not a significant enough portion of C to be anything but a city killer. This thing isn’t even a Tsar Bomba in terms of energy output. More like a Mark 17.
Regrub just said can we make it go faster, so i guess it would need to be increased much much more than 17,000 kph, which seems slow for galactic/cosmic speeds.
This is a city killer, not a continent killer. Wishing for few hundred thousand innocent people to die is just pure evil - it has no effect on overpopulation.
Overpopulation is eugenicist propaganda anyway
Owls and rabbits aren’t the ones burning fossil fuels. Since I was born, 74% of the animals have gone.
Yeah, overpopulation is long past, we’re at apocalyptic now.
Sounds like a
capitalismoverconsumption problem more than populationJFC you’re a child. Who do you think is doing all the consuming? Hint: It ain’t rabbits.
I’m so grown up that I don’t have to resort to slinging insults. Obviously it’s humans doing the consumption. I’m saying that 1, overpopulation has been a eugenicist talking point forever; and 2, that cold blooded, infinite growth, profits-over-planet consumerism is what makes our society unsustainable, not necessarily the population.
I’m so tired of the “overpopulation is a eugenicist talking point” argument. Just because a group of nasty people see a potential problem and propose inhumane solutions for it doesn’t mean the problem itself isn’t real. There’s nothing unethical about acknowledging that an ecosystem can only support a certain quantity of an organism in a sustainable way. If people are allowed to pursue their natural desire to have a comfortable lifestyle, the world can’t sustain the population we have. Regardless of what anyone wants, some combination of three things will happen:
Most people focus on #3, but I see no way, in timeframe we have available, to even come close to achieving what’s needed to prevent a total ecological collapse that way. We’re on track to see 1 and 2 happen. The only people who make it through relatively unscathed will be the ones with the most access to resources (i.e. wealth), so by allowing wealth inequality to exist, we’re effectively choosing to cull the poor, which is not meaningfully different from eugenics. But without extreme authoritarian measures, we also can’t stop people from trying to improve their lifestyles in unsustainable ways. OTOH there are mountains of evidence showing that, just by educating women and letting them have bodily autonomy, we can completely halt population growth.
I fear it’s too late, though for that to save us, because the world population is already far too big. We probably can’t convince enough people to stop reproducing to bring the population down fast enough, and even if we could, it would cause a demographic collapse where they’re aren’t enough young people to support the elderly population.
In short, I think we’re fucked, but it would be really nice if the survivors would remember that we got here in part through unchecked population growth, and that it could be prevented from happening again by people voluntarily limiting their reproduction. We as a species are remarkably resistant to leaning though, so I didn’t have high hopes on that front either.
Well, it’s a problem that will solve itself. Most estimates say that the world’s popularion will peak around 2080 and start to decline after that.
I hadn’t seen those numbers, is it a result of anthropogenic climate change?
More a result of countries managing to get over the industrial revolution population spike, and getting into the modern age. Once you have access to modern medicine, and the birth mortality and child mortality rates plummet, people stop having so many kids.
Depends on how fast its going when it hits
It’s currently moving at about 12,000 kph and will be slightly sped up to 17,000 kph if it actually hits us. That is not a significant enough portion of C to be anything but a city killer. This thing isn’t even a Tsar Bomba in terms of energy output. More like a Mark 17.
https://lemmy.world/comment/15180729
Regrub just said can we make it go faster, so i guess it would need to be increased much much more than 17,000 kph, which seems slow for galactic/cosmic speeds.
Wonder how much more energy it would need.
Someone get Randal Monroe on this stat!
Lol
I think you’d need to nearly double the velocity for it to be remotely close. I think I saw something like 30-40k km/h before it’s at that level