The Population Bomb? | Retro Report | The New York Times 

Eh, they're kind of the worst lol

There is a Masterplan ‘‘ YES WE CAN 2016 - 2116 ‘‘ and it is an encouragement for mankind to save a sustainable biosphere on earth as our base of life by a free decision : ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-i48bb22fPdI.html And a sustainable biosphere is the most important HUMAN RIGHT .

HAHA go home language you are drunk :P

@@berttheace there's a depopulation, totalitarian green wash climate change agenda and it's because the powers that shouldn't be no longer need humans. A human right is not having our weather and climate modified, not being fried with wifi and 5G, not having food crops peverted, not being & not forced vaccinated.

Feels good to know Im not the only one who thought so as well.

8 billion now

Our global population has already been calculated to cap out at about 11 billion when every nation in the world is developed as much as the usa/canada/etc

@@pigio9033 7.9

u talking about someone specific??

@011011 0110111 Al gore is the reason no one takes climate change as seriously as it is. 1. He over estimated how fast the changes would be. 2. He kept using a term not many scientists used by calling it "Global Warming" which even back then, not many scientific circles called it that as it sounds like the world would just get hot (which the menian temperature of the entire earth is getting hotter but that actually translates out to wilder more unpredictable weather patterns and natural disasters like mass floods and more mass wild fires. It also means that places that once were grass lands will become either deserts or possible rainforests at the Climate shifts world wide, making areas once dry wet and areas once wet dry ect. The reason this is a catasrophe is that in normal timeframes of previous climate changes, these events took millions of years, which we are now seeing happen in decades. Meaning life has no real time to evolve with the changes.)

@@andrefu4166 Yea, Ehrlich. Not sure how much an expert he was in his field of Butterflies, but he's utterly failed at being a Doomsayer. Gotten rich and influential on being wrong but he's still stupid. His research is sketchy and his sources are either wrong, or too simplified. He's lost bets with more intelligent people that proves how wrong he is. He know longer has the courage to put his money where his mouth is.

If the facts contradict the legend, Print the legend

@@joelwillems4081 If we haven't found new means to increase yield of agriculture crops like wheat, and developed better seeds and fertilizers, I think we would have been doomed by now with by the +7 billions population of our planet.

He didn't predict the Green Revolution. Admittedly, without it, we'd be in a very tough spot.

Marebear thank you for saying that. It's a matter of ethics, and empathy, not just data.

@@Twilit601 there is ZERO proof to that

@@danielmayeux2251 What

why tho

its not. ask me I live in a shithole place. Ehrlich was so right.

Nothing wrong with that statement, it implies that we don't have a right to expect the environment to deal with whatever we throw at it. Ehrlich was right. I think your confusion is that you think people are being equated with trash. That they are useless and disposable. That is not at all what is happening. People are being equated with something that the environment has to work to support and that our society creates with abundance and unthinkingly. Fortunately, our society's reproduction levels have fallen below replacement in the first world so it's not as much of a problem. But just because the environment hasn't fallen apart doesn't mean it never will.

No, he made an excellent point. You cannot have everything you want. Self-control is a virtue.

silgcc you sir or mam need to rethink things

Reduce the population to 1/10 & there will be plenty of food for everyone,

I think you have it wrong. The USA produced an abundance of food (we sell a lot for food overseas) and thanks to fracking are producing almost all our own oil (Canada is our biggest importer of oil not the middle east) We import lots of non vital things though.

@Tylor US is the world biggest food exporter... May I suggest making basic research before trying to show off on-line?

Dr. Spectre the population is expected to peak at 11 billion so if we play our cards right we good

exactly i dont understand how ignorant people were this guy literally said just trust me and everyone did ahahah

Paul Ehrlich and others are some of the most vile human beings to ever live. The same goes for all the dumb sheep that followed them to a lesser extent.

@@wacktus8507 If we haven't found new means to increase yield of agriculture crops like wheat, and developed better seeds and fertilizers, I think we would have been doomed by now with by the +7 billions population of our planet.

😂😂

Marvel changed original idea and brought back malthusian idea for villain's purpose.

Just less logical

Tim Tyson Climate change proven over and over again. Take UN warnings seriously. If anything, climate change has been under reported.

​@@tdtvegas Climate change is provable by science, so your comparison is false. There are mountains of published evidence in peer reviewed journals that prove the existence of man-made global warming.

Leo Price how do you believe the UN? Bruh

Moe Yagz We are already suffering from the consequences of overpopulation . maybe you are not affected (yet) but many millions of people are. Don’t be ignorant and don’t call the ability to foresee problems “fear based”. It’s a sign of intelligence not to wait for a foreseeable catastrophe to happen but to do something to prevent it.

Its because stupid people like to latch onto causes, look at the climate hysteria and the people pushing it

I definitely noticed that. In addition, he only felt this anxiety upon seeing a crowded Dehli street. Sure, it's not explicitly a racial panic, and I don't think Erlich is a racist, but the undertones are unfortunately still there, and his plans have very racialized impacts.

Sub-Saharan African population has almost doubled in the last ten years from 900 million to 1.5 billion, in the next ten years it will be 3 billion, making up soon after that the majority of the population of the planet. Most of their population growth has depended on outside aid and has completely destroyed the efforts of the western entities such as the US to end poverty in the region, programs that have been in effect for most of the past three decades. Combine this with the failures of local indigenous populations to keep up with the supply of food by agricultural means by confiscating white owned farms and farmlands and handing them over the the indigenous peoples to operate, ie Zimbabwe and white farmers fleeing on mass from South Africa leading to the worst social and economic conditions seen in the region's lifetime. Plus the countries of Africa have been entirely decimated economically and credit-wise as well with massive debts being attributed to the local governments owed to larger entities such as the US, Europe and China, who are using Africa as collateral. And you have a bomb waiting to go off. But some believe that the native population will not just stay in their own countries to starve off until the population returns to a natural sustainable level before any economic or political recovery could occur, but that most of the 3 plus billion will migrate, not to the Middle East or Asia, parts of the world well known for their human rights abuses and general racial attitudes, but they will go up and flood Europe, whom if you have seen recently has been handing out aslyum to anyone and everyone. But these have only been a couple 100,000 or million people every year, imagine half a billion a year. Africa can get itself out of this but it must become self efficient and stop relying on western intervention.

I believe he meant better as in, if people have one child vs 3, they can better provide for the one and produce a more productive future adult.

@@danieldimos123 A lot of Oil and Diamonds come from the poor African Countries.

@@danieldimos123 that only happened in one country though

chris doheny true but our methods of farming and care in many countries has kept pace with that growth. A bigger problem now is a low birth rate.

Well, the jury is still out on that one. The planetary boundaries are well studied system limits, and the world is well past the danger zone on some of them. The timelines for geological changes are very long and feedback loops take a while to manifest.

If we haven't found new means to increase yield of agriculture crops like wheat, and developed better seeds and fertilizers, I think we would have been doomed by now with by the +7 billions population of our planet.

Most environmentalists say the planet is definitely overpopulated & therefore a low birth rate is good. Less people == less pollution & less global warming .

wrong it was the green revolution and the word is averted genius.

As family size shrinks and education period lengthens across the globe, population will decline in the long term like Japan or China.

Yeah and then we're going to be outnumbered by poor people in Africa and South America. Yippee.

And when Africa develops the population there will plateau

@@logic7374 And those people will be invited into North America and Europe under the guise of altruism. They're cheap labor, more dependent on government, more tribal, and less demanding of civil rights.

Logic That's fine. You know those are other human beings, right? They're not a different species

and his name is so german it's painful to ignore...

There's nothing wrong with a German name. While he might have been a little overenthusiastic, his message deserved attention.

"Tue Le" Why would Ehrlich's genocidal message deserve any attention other than to be aware that his madness exists in the world?

Are you kidding me? Unethical? What is unethical is there being 7 billion people on this planet sucking it dry. Fortunately due to urbanization, the world population should stabilize at around 11 billion in 2100. However, the earth is only sustainable (>1000 years) for humans at a population of 1 billion or so. SO TELL ME HOW HE IS UNETHICAL

Technology bought us a little more time nothing more. We are not in balance with nature. Instead we are basically sucking the life out of the planet to sustain 7.5B people. We are emitting massive amounts of carbon, ripping down forests, depleting the soil and fishing out the sea all while poisoning the planet. We are a ticking time bomb.

You know... for a lot of people it did. I mean, when a child with several siblings dies from starvation, the world did end for him, before he grew up

It turned out he was wrong.

A person dying prematurely =/= the world ending. Life will continue onward another 500 million years just as it has existed the last 500 million years

@@phoque121 Who are you talking about?

😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊

Maybe leave everyone's family business up to them? You have your opinions, I respect that. Everyone has the right to have big families. Not everyone is guilty of having a good, happy life. I'm not...you only get one, so enjoy it. People are too worried about what's wrong, instead of what's actually good. If you have 10 siblings, you're probably fine. Stop with the guilt, it doesn't solve a thing. You can't save babies half way around the world. I wish we could...but it's out of our control. It's just the way of the world. Do what YOU can, leave others be. In a world where children get bone cancer, brain cancer, IN AN ONLY CHILD HOME, fair doesn't exist. Some of us are just doomed. Accept that you're going to die, your life will be better. No fear. Sorry for the doom and gloom.

sydIRISH It’s disgusting that people willingly bring children into this world knowing that they can barely afford to take care of their self.

Ugh im sorry. If i were you I'd be slipping birth control in all your siblings food.

@@TheMedicatedArtist right?? People should have to take a common sense test before they're allowed to breed. As well as prove they can financially take care of it. An iq test would be nice too... And people should have to adopt a child if they just muuust be selfish and make a little them. It's like theres million of kids with out parents thst would love to have a mom and dad. Why do you NEED to pass down your genetics? People think they're so special and the world needs to have a piece of them in it when they pass on. It's like no, no you don't.

Consider that you are brainwashed fool

Until we havent found an other planet to live on or the transportation to get there, we better not include this into our options. But yes we have now more technology we had back than, which changed a lot of the predictions made and we probably can support more humans on earth.

It is different now compared to back then due to urbanization

He's not concerned with what anyone wants, he's concerned with acquiring the megalomaniacal power to choose for them.

Ava Masquerade yes indeed, that's exactly what he and his many elite cohorts want a one world order totalitarianism under the governance of the UN. Meet Paul Ehrlich, Pseudoscience Charlatan- ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-ZS6EGoTuWNY.html Why Big Oil Conquered The World - ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-0wlNey9t7hQ.html

The only difference is the birth rate is DOWN.

theanimerican Yeah, we already have a natural deterrent: the actual birth process lol. Usually it’s the man who wants to “carry on the family name” or something. Easy for him!

They cleaned up the weather?

Last time I drove through Boston I saw multiple people wearing banana suits in 80 degree weather

yeah, you just export it to China and Vietnam. Happy?

Lol where did you get this info from? Fox news? Have you been to salt lake? During the winter when wet gret inversion, the air is considered worse than Beijing. Have you been to LA lately?

Nikki Píŕáťé Most of LA’s air pollution blows in from China

People who have several kids and can't care for them should be offered money to be sterilized

Indeed. It would be deeply ironic for humanity to reproduce itself into extinction, wouldn't it?

Overpopulation is 100% fantasy.

The thing is, the people with the highest population growth (developing countries, people in poverty) are not the ones destroying nature and wildlife and are not the ones primarily responsible for climate change.

Laura Athena the fear should be that they will get to that point, following in the path of developed countries.

Tue Le ....interesting thought. Truly.

The third thing he got wrong was the ability of humans to change their behavior when circumstances change. As developing countries urbanized, families were never going to choose to have as many children, because they become a liability instead of the expanded labor they are in agrarian societies.

and today those cities are overcrowded, struggling, all have slums with millions in poverty and are disgusting.

The truth is that Capitalism causes malnutrition and poverty -_-

Favorite comment

A lot of people fell for the experts' drivel in the past few years. I hope you didn't 👍

Yep, climate change has become inevitable and it's gonna cost us all (well almost all anyways).

Yes! I felt quite very uneasy about him once I heard that. Because it's not like it's solely women who want children or are responsible for the production of children. And the fact that his work directly led to the forced sterilization of poor women seems like it's really been about the control of women's bodies more than anything rather than changing people's behavior.

People complain about eugenics, but they also complain about taxes and paying benifits!

A science turned into a religion where the believers still cling to the doctrine, making new predictions to justify the original theory.

How do you suggest we quantify Earth's resources?

People have quantified this and for sustainability (>1000 years) we got enough stuffs for about a population of 1 billion

Mayan Tanshu it would need to be a cross-discipline study to get a rough estimate of how much resources the earth can produce. One factor to study would be the economic side of the equation to figure out roughly how much food and materials the world is currently producing. That would be the easiest by far to quantify but also surveying farmable land across the planet. Thanks to technology though that mapping could probably be at least partially computer-assisted. Another set of numbers to gather would be the rough average of what a person will consume over their lifetime, the housing available in their countries, and what this average person would contribute to food and material production. That would still only be part of the measures to ensure that there is enough rations for everyone however since without government oversight no amount of research will be able to be put into practice across the entire planet.

The global recovery equilibrium date has been established at near 1860. We've got some making up to do.

A lot of people complain about over population but most of the land on earth is still not being used

Hong Kong attracts people who don't want to live in China and don't have the resources to elsewhere. Villages are emptying. The decimation of wildlife is greed. Our birth rates are below replacement levels all over the world. It's our death rates that have fallen causing the "growth". We're living longer all over the world. And we're staying old longer. Our bigger problem is our greed and lifestyle choices. Diets high in meat, disposable fashion, one use plastics, bizarre assumption that if it's recyclable, then it's okay, complete disregard for the other parts of the 3 R's. Recycle *reduce and reuse*. But we sure won't recycle water, no matter how safe it is. It's not a problem of how many children we have. If we everyone lived like the poor in Sierra Leone, the planet could support billions more people. The problem is how wasteful and destructive our lifestyles are. We find out how bad cars are for the environment but only address one part of the damage cars do to our environment, fuel. Instead of discussing our to make our cities more environmentally friendly, we get excited about electric cars. Electric cars are a band aid solution. We don't have ZPG, we have shrinking population but it doesn't matter how much your population shrinks if you are greedy and destructive and disrespectful to the environment.

Yes , but some fools deny this !

Seriously. 0 or 1 would be preferable. Or just adopting if you really feel thr need to raise kids.

Thank you for this sensible comment!

Reality... it's actually kinda scary. People are having babies on whims. Life has to be put in check if not we'll destroy ourselves.

Geeze, no wonder people died. Not to mention the doctor being tired from performing so many surgeries.

Where u from

he really said trust me and everyone did

Everybody produces trash, don't they?

That also surprised me. I don't know why he found it necessary to specifically mention one gender in his supposed population concern.

Faizan Ali: Maybe it's because women are capable of something men cannot do: giving birth.

Tue Le women are incapable of conceiving without men.

Eikyuu, but women decide whether or not to give birth.

exactly right.... Erlich was essentially correct about everything!

@@ShivaShaktification still so many deniers in this section