@sonhouse said
@Metal-Brain
So you can't figure out how many acres it would take to sustain a human? Turns out to be about 10 acres per person, this is not rocket science.

So we need 80 BILLION acres to sustain 8 billion people.
And there are only about 120 billion acres of land mass on the whole planet.

That says a lot right there.

We need to have LESS than a billion humans on ...[text shortened]... g in Russia, all those 30+ million killed of their own folks didn't do much to lower the population.

@mghrn55 said
I read some article a while back that the earth could sustain about 12 billion people maximum.
That being said, you would also need to factor in improving the standard of living amongst the poorer areas of the earth.
I'm not an expert in the field, but I would imagine that just bringing China, India and Africa up to the same standard of living as the US would be like adding ...[text shortened]... he US is a country with 5% of the world's population consuming 25% of the world's natural resources.

@moonbus said
Every time you ask that, you get your nose bloodied. Every time you provide your source, you get your nose bloodied. You just don’t learn, do you ?

@metal-brain said
You are such a liar. Every time I ask that nobody provides their source of information. His numbers are lies. If 10 acres per person is enough his land number is wrong. There is more than enough land per person in the world based on his own 10 acre assertion.

Sonhouse is spreading misinformation like he always does. He loves to spread lies while advocating censoring th ...[text shortened]... ons kill wealthy people. Poor people are not the problem. The solution to global warming is Marxism.

@moonbus said
There are five remaining Marxist states in the world: China, N. Korea, Viet Nam, Laos, Cuba.

Carbon prints by country, China (highly insufficient):

https://climateactiontracker.org/countries/china/

Viet Nam (critically insufficient):

https://climateactiontracker.org/countries/vietnam/

I did not trouble myself to look up the data for the other three countries. ...[text shortened]... o think Marxism is so great, I suggest you go live in N. Korea. I eagerly await your report on that.

According to Harari, who was promoting his new book, the big political question of the 21st century is “What do we need so many humans for?”

And it’s not even the first time Yuval Noah Harari has let slip regarding their plans for humanity. He recently declared that the WEF considers the vast majority of the human population to be obsolete, useless and redundant.

According to Harari, so-called “common people” are right to be fearful of a future in which they will be made “redundant”.

The WEF advisor assessed the widespread anxiety among “common people” as being rooted in a fear of being “left behind” in a future run by “smart people.”

Such fears are justified, according to Harari, who spoke on behalf of the elites and confirmed “We just don’t need the vast majority of you.”

https://newspunch.com/evil-wef-leader-caught-planning-mass-extinction-event-to-inner-circle/

https://rairfoundation.com/exposed-leaked-hospital-email-reveals-explosion-of-stillbirths-video/

@moonbus said
World Population is rising, only locally is it falling in some places.

https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/

@mghrn55 said
I read some article a while back that the earth could sustain about 12 billion people maximum.
That being said, you would also need to factor in improving the standard of living amongst the poorer areas of the earth.
I'm not an expert in the field, but I would imagine that just bringing China, India and Africa up to the same standard of living as the US would be like adding ...[text shortened]... he US is a country with 5% of the world's population consuming 25% of the world's natural resources.

@mghrn55 said
I read some article a while back that the earth could sustain about 12 billion people maximum.
That being said, you would also need to factor in improving the standard of living amongst the poorer areas of the earth.
I'm not an expert in the field, but I would imagine that just bringing China, India and Africa up to the same standard of living as the US would be like adding ...[text shortened]... he US is a country with 5% of the world's population consuming 25% of the world's natural resources.

@metal-brain said
Sen. Schumer Calls For Amnesty For 11+ Million Illegals Because American Population 'Is Not Reproducing On Its Own'.

http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=63469

We need them to immigrate here according to Schumer. If they don't social security will implode.

@AverageJoe1
By god you get it. Isn't the hypocrisy ridiculous?
As if unwanted babies cannot be adopted. Why is it politically incorrect to talk about abortion and adoption in the same conversation? Is it too solution based?

@mghrn55 said
I read some article a while back that the earth could sustain about 12 billion people maximum.
That being said, you would also need to factor in improving the standard of living amongst the poorer areas of the earth.
I'm not an expert in the field, but I would imagine that just bringing China, India and Africa up to the same standard of living as the US would be like adding ...[text shortened]... he US is a country with 5% of the world's population consuming 25% of the world's natural resources.

@metal-brain said
The gene vaccines are changing that. Depopulation has begun.

https://www.newstarget.com/2022-11-17-australia-63-percent-drop-births-covid-vaccines.html

Now they can start WW3 and dominate the world.

@averagejoe1 said
If I may,,,,,,but doesn’t Schumer, et al, promote aborting babies in this country, while at the same time, saying that we need to have more babies? God, this is such a simple question, why can you liberals not answer something so simple. Please someone answer this question.