Yeah but what happened to those people at the end. John Clark gave them a good smack down

that's not PC.

I've got to agree with the population control idea. It seams quite obvious that population increase exacerbates anthropogenic environmental problems, as well as over-taxing natural resources. When we run out of clean water, clean air, food, or energy, the human race will be in big trouble. It's not a world I'd like to see, or to pass on to future generations.

The solution is a difficult one, however. How do you convince the world to have less children? China's "one child" policy is effective. Even though the motivation for having no more than one child is economic in China, Americans view it as intrusion into private life. I believe that education is key. The more people know that having 10 children is dooming those very children - and their offspring - to a bleak future, the more who might have just one or two. (Remember, 2 kids per family is less than repopulation, the population will slowly drop because not each of the 2 children per family will reproduce.)

Another key step in curbing overpopulation would be for the Pope to reverse the Catholic church's anti-birth control stance.

All the technology in the world is not going to save us from our current trend of population explosion.

Let's face it, the Catholic church would only further the agenda of Catholic church which is the domination of all people on earth by having more births. Did we forget the earth was square?

Only way is to genetically engineer a virus to curtail all population so every couple can only have 1 offspring.

Of course this will never be accepted. Just like instead of sending birth controls to Africa, we send food. So more impoverished children are born and the vicious cycle continues so poor Africans can never break the poverty cycle. How many times did you see 7 or 8 kids with parents died of AIDS? You start to wonder why 7 kids in the first place?

Religion is the fundamental problem of environment. Instead of facing reality, we wait for GOD to come and save us all.

Now we are encroaching on dictating people's lives... Kinda like telling people they can't clear the rainforests... It's a complicated issue to say the least. How can we tell other countries to have only 1-2 children when we have families here with 4-6? How can we tell someone they need to starve their families (because they cannot clear forests for agriculture) when we're all driving around fat and happy in our "rich" SUVs? All we can do is try to make other countries aware of the issues, and hopefully find a solution. In Africa (and China) for example, they have 7+ kids in some of these families because 3-4 will die from disease (they are exposed to more diseases in tropical climates). In the US and Canada, I think we have something on the order of less than 1% child mortality rate under 10 years old (we peaked around 10% sometime in the 1800's). In Africa (and China) they have, historically, had child mortality rates approaching 50% at their peak.... I wish there was an easy way to solve this, but the approach has to be multifaceted and sensitive to all community types.

Child birth rates are declining around the world. The population will peak around 2010 and then start a sharp decline.

I would never suggest that other countries around the world abide by this while the united states does not. I would like to see birth rates slowed in the US and abroad.

I also realize that 3rd world families often have more children for several reasons: to ensure survival of some offspring where infant mortality is high, to have more workers for a family farm or other business, to have more children to take care of them in old age. Also it would be a shame to promote the practice that plagues China of letting female offspring die (not sure if this happens as much as it once did).

It is certianly an issue that needs to be treated gingerly. I don't have the answer to the question "How can the people of the world be convinced that having less children will benefit society as a whole?" Education certainly, tax or other economic benefits for families with 1 or 2 children probably. The forbiding of birth control by certain religions definately doesn't help.

One thing I feel sure about: the rate that we develop technology and practices to lessen environmental impact and learn to conserve natural resources is not keeping up with our population growth, and this spells doom.


I'm very curious about this, sounds positive, where did you hear/read it?

I saw this movie as well and it left a lasting memory that has lasted more than five days.

Has anybody driven a Prius or more specifically a Highland Hybrid?

I wonder if they'd be able to give the 4Runner gas mileage of a camry (25-30mph).

I thought everyone would be interested to know that the Discovery Channel is doing a show on Global Warming tomorrow, Sunday July 16 at 9PM EST. The commercial claims "no politics, just facts" as they document a worldwide expedition to experiment on whether it is fact or fiction.

Happy viewing!

http://dsc.discovery.com/tvlistings/...=0&channel=DSC

Viewers travel to Patagonia where glacial ice caves are receding; then journey to the Amazon where clear evidence exists the jungle may be drying out, vastly reducing the Earth's ability to absorb carbon dioxide. Tom Brokaw separates fact from fiction.

Thanks!

It will be interesting to see how they determine that global warming, and not clear-cutting, is the root cause of the "clear evidence exists the jungle may be drying out." At first glance, I just don't see how they can do that without injecting opinion and assumptions into the findings.

I'll be watching but the decision to include the statement "no politics" in the promotion "doth claim too much, methinks".

RockyRoad,

Thanks for starting this thread and your post. I don't see anything wrong with being an environmentalist. Shouldn

I totally agree biglatka , you said it

Goes back to my point that over population is the root cause of environmental issues. No human, no polution.

Maybe we should destroy ourselves so the planet can revive itself from our ravaging, then dolphins and pigs can evolve to be the dominant species of the planet!

I watched about half of that Discovery channel special on global warming and fell asleep. It's just two hours of tom brokaw (spelling?) repeating himself. It would be informative to anyone who hasn't researched the subject.