Old Project Avalon Forum (ARCHIVE) - View Single Post

truthseeker · 03-31-2009, 08:24 AM

Hi Guys,

I Have not commented here for about 4 months, but am still following certain threads on this forum. This one does rather grab my interest as I have a great love of nature and the natural balances of ecology on this planet.

On the whole I agree with Rakar that there are simply too many physical human beings on this planet, though I do not feel a limit to procreation should be enforced. Education, Education, Education is the only way of getting the message across to the many peoples of this planet.

I feel many of the commentators here are missing the point. It may well be possible for 6, 7, 8 or even 9 billion people to live on our planet if the wealth and resources were spread more evenly. Indeed, with free energy available this would almost certainly be the case. However, I am less than convinced that the quality of life for individuals and groups concerned would be particularly high. Here I am referring to qualities of a spiritual, social and psychological nature rather than the physical comforts that we in the Western world today have as a result of having too much material wealth.

Also, as Rakar has already stated, human beings are not the only biological organisms that exist on this planet. If 7 to 9 billion were spread nice and evenly around the planet, what effect would that have on the rich variety of ecosystems on this planet? People would want to kill off any animals that competed with them for food, most notably many of the great predators and large herbivores on our planet, many of which are already rare or close to extinction. In this instance the planet would a least lose its rich variety of wildlife and diverse ecosystems. At worst whole ecosystems would breakdown.

The other alternative that seems to be being suggested here is to pack the 7 to 9 billion human beings into smaller areas. Australia was mentioned as an example, but I guess you could pick anywhere in the world. Yes we probably could do this, especially if free energy was made available to us. However, issues around the quality of life would become even more paramount in the areas concerned. How easy would it be for people to get away from the crowds and have a bit of peace and quiet in a wild place? Also, which ever areas you choose to concentrate the human population you will almost certainly destroy unique ecosystems and forms of wildlife.

It is all very well saying water the deserts and make them into green gardens and organic farms, but many species of plant and animal are uniquely adapted to the desert regions of our world. Do we have the right to bring such species to extinction just because we can not control our population? I think not. Australia has been suggested as an example of a large desert area that could be used in this manner. Australia has some of the most unique wildlife on our planet (much of which is already rare and endangered), do we really think that this is worth sacrificing for the sake of more and more human beings? Are we really that special as compared with all the other life forms on this planet? Again, I think not.

Also, what of the true native peoples of many of these desert areas, such as the Australian Aboriginal people and the Kalahari Bushmen. Their culture and way of life is already under threat. If we were to green and water the deserts for the sake of large numbers of people having a mediocre quality of life, such indigenous peoples would almost certainly be wiped out.

Of course if we were to go galactic, then overpopulation would cease to be a problem. However, until that happens it seems wise to at least begin to educate folk to have less children, especially in some of the so-called third world nations of our planet.

Finally, several commentators have referred to our right to be here as incarnate souls during this time of important transition. However, as I believe I am (and we all are) primarily a spiritual being, my physical incarnation here really is of secondary importance. I think we can overstate the importance of being here in physical form. As truly spiritual beings we could probably exist here (and probably do) in 10's of billions without having any physical impact on this beautiful collective physical being that we call Planet Earth.

Best Wishes

Truthseeker (Andrew)

03-31-2009, 08:24 AM	#52
truthseeker Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Near Halifax, W. Yorks, England Posts: 26	Re: END POPULATION EXPLOSION (petition) Hi Guys, I Have not commented here for about 4 months, but am still following certain threads on this forum. This one does rather grab my interest as I have a great love of nature and the natural balances of ecology on this planet. On the whole I agree with Rakar that there are simply too many physical human beings on this planet, though I do not feel a limit to procreation should be enforced. Education, Education, Education is the only way of getting the message across to the many peoples of this planet. I feel many of the commentators here are missing the point. It may well be possible for 6, 7, 8 or even 9 billion people to live on our planet if the wealth and resources were spread more evenly. Indeed, with free energy available this would almost certainly be the case. However, I am less than convinced that the quality of life for individuals and groups concerned would be particularly high. Here I am referring to qualities of a spiritual, social and psychological nature rather than the physical comforts that we in the Western world today have as a result of having too much material wealth. Also, as Rakar has already stated, human beings are not the only biological organisms that exist on this planet. If 7 to 9 billion were spread nice and evenly around the planet, what effect would that have on the rich variety of ecosystems on this planet? People would want to kill off any animals that competed with them for food, most notably many of the great predators and large herbivores on our planet, many of which are already rare or close to extinction. In this instance the planet would a least lose its rich variety of wildlife and diverse ecosystems. At worst whole ecosystems would breakdown. The other alternative that seems to be being suggested here is to pack the 7 to 9 billion human beings into smaller areas. Australia was mentioned as an example, but I guess you could pick anywhere in the world. Yes we probably could do this, especially if free energy was made available to us. However, issues around the quality of life would become even more paramount in the areas concerned. How easy would it be for people to get away from the crowds and have a bit of peace and quiet in a wild place? Also, which ever areas you choose to concentrate the human population you will almost certainly destroy unique ecosystems and forms of wildlife. It is all very well saying water the deserts and make them into green gardens and organic farms, but many species of plant and animal are uniquely adapted to the desert regions of our world. Do we have the right to bring such species to extinction just because we can not control our population? I think not. Australia has been suggested as an example of a large desert area that could be used in this manner. Australia has some of the most unique wildlife on our planet (much of which is already rare and endangered), do we really think that this is worth sacrificing for the sake of more and more human beings? Are we really that special as compared with all the other life forms on this planet? Again, I think not. Also, what of the true native peoples of many of these desert areas, such as the Australian Aboriginal people and the Kalahari Bushmen. Their culture and way of life is already under threat. If we were to green and water the deserts for the sake of large numbers of people having a mediocre quality of life, such indigenous peoples would almost certainly be wiped out. Of course if we were to go galactic, then overpopulation would cease to be a problem. However, until that happens it seems wise to at least begin to educate folk to have less children, especially in some of the so-called third world nations of our planet. Finally, several commentators have referred to our right to be here as incarnate souls during this time of important transition. However, as I believe I am (and we all are) primarily a spiritual being, my physical incarnation here really is of secondary importance. I think we can overstate the importance of being here in physical form. As truly spiritual beings we could probably exist here (and probably do) in 10's of billions without having any physical impact on this beautiful collective physical being that we call Planet Earth. Best Wishes Truthseeker (Andrew)