Crowded planet Earth?

philosophical debates and companies.
the middle
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 4075
Registration: 12/01/07, 08:18
x 4

Crowded planet Earth?




by the middle » 28/01/09, 16:10

I could have put another title:
Will they do it?
Let a virus like cholera develop, or another more devastating one.
For a few years, we have been warned: beware, a new virus can appear at any time and kill a lot of people ..
A vaccine will be developed, but will be first served doctors, politicians, engineers ... (ARTE)
The others after ...
This is the simple solution to the pollution of the planet.
In this case, the rich will be "saved" ... the planet too ... maybe : Cheesy:
That's it, I started a topic with the con, but .... :? may be well programmed by the rulers. :?
0 x
Man is by nature a political animal (Aristotle)
User avatar
highfly-addict
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 757
Registration: 05/03/08, 12:07
Location: Pyrenees, 43 years
x 7




by highfly-addict » 28/01/09, 19:17

There are too many, okay.

But to think of a plot that would project to eliminate a significant fraction of the population through a virus, it seems big anyway!

Too many risks of losing loved ones .....

:frown:
0 x
"God laughs at those who deplore the effects of which they cherish the causes" BOSSUET
"We see what we believes"Dennis MEADOWS
User avatar
Gregconstruct
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 1781
Registration: 07/11/07, 19:55
Location: Amay Belgium




by Gregconstruct » 28/01/09, 19:30

Do not watch too much movies like Army 12 monkeys, I'm a Legend, 28 days later ...

Epidemics and viruses do not need humans to appear.
In case of overpopulation, the mechanism of natural selection is inevitably started.
This is true for the whole animal kingdom (including us) and also for the vegetable kingdom.
0 x
Every action counts for our planet !!!
User avatar
Former Oceano
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 1571
Registration: 04/06/05, 23:10
Location: Lorraine - France
x 1




by Former Oceano » 28/01/09, 22:17

It seems to me, old memories of college, that cholera is bacterial, due to cholera vibrio and therefore not viral.
Otherwise, with regard to viruses, the most dangerous are the ones that are deadly, but not too much. If the subject dies too quickly, it will not infect many people. Whereas if the virus kills slowly, the wearer can contaminate many people.
Finally, even in the case of haemorrhagic fevers, there is a percentage of people who survive the infection.
If it is 10% of the population, we will fall to less than a billion. This will make a big reset to the human population ...
Last edited by Former Oceano the 28 / 01 / 09, 23: 12, 1 edited once.
0 x
[MODO Mode = ON]
Zieuter but do not think less ...
Peugeot Ion (VE), KIA Optime PHEV, VAE, no electric motorcycle yet...
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972




by Christophe » 28/01/09, 22:39

If it's batérien antibiotics, ketotomatik !!!
Hihihihihi !!

Good remark Oceano! The "more better" level of mortality are the retroviruses contagious by air ... where then the viruses with a long incubation period but while being contagious (not know the exact word) ...

Of this kind there:

http://www.stephenking-fr.net/articles.php?lng=fr&pg=81
http://www.allocine.fr/film/fichefilm_g ... 26113.html

Otherwise there is junk food and oil ... but it takes longer ... : Mrgreen:
0 x
User avatar
elephant
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6646
Registration: 28/07/06, 21:25
Location: Charleroi, center of the world ....
x 7




by elephant » 29/01/09, 21:51

That's right, there are about 4 billion human too many ... as to whether it's the poor or the rich ..? : Cry:
I propose a collective suicide: I have already started: alcohol slowly kills :D
0 x
elephant Supreme Honorary éconologue PCQ ..... I'm too cautious, not rich enough and too lazy to really save the CO2! http://www.caroloo.be
User avatar
Flytox
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 14138
Registration: 13/02/07, 22:38
Location: Bayonne
x 839




by Flytox » 29/01/09, 23:12

The problem with this kind of talk from Doctor Strangelove is that some populists will want to carry it out easily, of course putting others in the "to be deleted" category. And of course there will always be an audience to applaud, those who knew how to put themselves on the "right" side at the right time ....: Shock: : Evil:
Honestly, how many bastards (diminutive!) Have used this scheme to make wars ????? .......
0 x
Reason is the madness of the strongest. The reason for the less strong it is madness.
[Eugène Ionesco]
http://www.editions-harmattan.fr/index. ... te&no=4132
User avatar
elephant
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6646
Registration: 28/07/06, 21:25
Location: Charleroi, center of the world ....
x 7




by elephant » 30/01/09, 09:12

Certainly ! To govern (or to be governed) is to foresee!

Apparently, the leanest people pollute the least, because they are poor, so it is they who must be kept. Maybe we could eat the biggest ones. The opposite is less interesting: yes, there is a lot of malnutrition on earth, but there is almost nothing to eat on it.
In short: By the time we finish eating the obese Americans, I will have had time to diet and give up the aperitifs. :D

In fact, I'm not sure if there are 4 billion more people on Earth or 1 or 2 billion in some countries.
0 x
elephant Supreme Honorary éconologue PCQ ..... I'm too cautious, not rich enough and too lazy to really save the CO2! http://www.caroloo.be
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972




by Christophe » 30/01/09, 11:01

elephant wrote:Apparently, the leanest people pollute the least, because they are poor, so it is they who must be kept.


Yes, but in the same genre there is an "ecological attitude" which consists in always saying: it is others who pollute.

So for an owner of an 4x4 SUV, the one that pollutes is not him because he uses a new engine so clean. For him, whoever is the most is the smicard with his 205 80 years.

Conversely for the smicard they are all rich with their big 4x4 and who fly all 4 morning pollute the most.

I think the smicard is more right : Cheesy:
0 x
Hydraxon
I understand econologic
I understand econologic
posts: 183
Registration: 17/02/08, 17:07




by Hydraxon » 30/01/09, 11:55

There does not seem to be a virus so effective in transmission and so virulent that it would seriously threaten the human species.

Here, you remind me of the declaration of Apocalypse (X-Men) at the UN, in which he orders the leaders to slaughter 90% of their herd (sic), otherwise he will release a gas that will kill 100%.

Otherwise, the Earth does not seem overpopulated. We produce more food than we need to feed everyone (the economic system prevents it from being distributed in such a way as to feed everyone, yes), and in any case it is obvious that the Earth would support 9 billion better. of Chinese than Americans 1.

Given the demographics of the ultra-consumer rich countries, the planet is not so badly barred.
0 x

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "Society and Philosophy"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 204 guests