Second Turnback This Week Due to Unruly Pax

[Gabriel]

And it soon will, just different land as current croplands dry out and deforestation provides new croplands that will only accelerate the problem. TeeVee is right about one (very obvious) thing: if we don't reverse the trend in population growth, nothing is going to prevent massive malnourishment and famine. How is that done: education, birth control and social opportunity: things largely missing in the underdeveloped world. Margaret Sanger founded Planned Parenthood on this very idea, but her encouragement of voluntary measures have been compared to forced eugenics and even genocide by dimwitted reactionary groups and she was recently 'cancelled'. And we also have resistance from moronic bible-bangers on the right. So we have ignorance on all sides impeding efforts toward education and that ignorance just reproduces at an ever-faster rate.

If we can't reverse population growth through education, birth control and social opportunity, humanity will reverse it through war, famine and man-made disaster. Using technology to feed populations without also educating and improving them only hastens that end.

Are we off-topic enough?

Or... we can all go vegan and the problem is solved for the foreseeable future even if the population keeps growing, all that while using some excess land for biofuels and some for reforestation. Because... most of the agricultural land is used to feed animals that are a whole order of magnitude less efficient than direct plant food in land-to-calorie and land-to-protein conversion.

But... instead of holding ourselves accountable and fixing the issue ourselves with things that all of us can actually do, let's better blame the governments.

And to be clear, I am guilty too. Just trying not to be so hypocritical of blaming the governments and telling the poor people to stop having children and to go die if they can't feed themselves, all from the comfort of my couch in my nice house with temperature controlled by my climate-destroying air conditioner and enjoying my hyper-inefficient Cowboy T-bone.

[Evan]

Or... we can all go vegan and the problem is solved for the foreseeable future… Because... most of the agricultural land is used to feed animals.

Because we aren’t all vegan. It all comes down to resources and rate of consumption. I’m not being hypocritical. I got off red meat years ago, but I’ll still indulge on rare occasions (pun not intended). There are simply too many of us. The global population has doubled in one generation and that growth is exponential and I don’t have to tell Gabriel what that means. If every adult person has one offspring, the population is reduced. If they have two, the population remains steady, They must have three or more to grow the population, and that is before factoring in infant mortality rates. Certainly we can slow population growth without oppressing people or depriving them of families. But, yes, it will take governments to provide the necessary resources. That, by the way, is what governments are for.

[3WE]

Are we off-topic enough?

Every crop duster I’ve known has crashed.

[Evan]

Every crop duster I’ve known has crashed.

Ban them. Fixed.

[Gabriel]

Because we aren't all vegan.

Well, we should be. There is no good reason or excuse not to. And I am being inconsistent because I am not.

There are simply too many of us.

Measure against what? What is the spec or tolerable limit? The planet has the potential to sustain much more of us with much less impact on the planet, if we do things the right way.

that growth is exponential and I don't have to tell Gabriel what that means.

It means you are wrong. Check the population chart of my previous post. The growth is not exponential anymore. It has doubled in one generation, yes, but in a linear way. And the growth rate is forecasted to start to decline soon. We will still be growing, but at a progressively reduced speed.

If every adult person has one offspring, the population is reduced. If they have two, the population remains steady, They must have three or more to grow the population, and that is before factoring in infant mortality rates. Certainly we can slow population growth without oppressing people or depriving them of families. But, yes, it will take governments to provide the necessary resources. That, by the way, is what governments are for.

And that is already happening. That's why the growth is not exponential anymore and the rate is forecasted to start to decline. And the reason is not that we run out of resources and people is dying of starvation. Rather the opposite, the reason is that more and more people is coming out of extreme poverty and has more access to resources like food, education, medicine, etc.

Life expectancy is increasing all over the world especially in poor countries. Infant mortality, malnourishing, maternal mortality after giving birth, extreme poverty, analphabetism, all these indicators are going down especially in poor countries. The situation is still tragically bad but trending well. Unfortunately we are destroying the planet in the process. And we don't need to. We know how to avoid it.

We could also talk about the undesirable side effects of reducing the birth rate. Hint: several countries are importing young people. But I digress (even more)

[Gabriel]

Are we off-topic enough?

What was the topic?

Second Turnback This Week Due to Unruly Pax

Yep, we are off topic since the opening post.

[Evan]

Measure against what? What is the spec or tolerable limit?

I'm reaching my tolerable limit just in my fast gentrifying neighborhood. But I digress.
Imagine if I said to you that there are 8 billion elephants in the world. That would seem pretty extreme, wouldn't it? Or 8 billion tigers?
8 billion of anything with the consumptive appetite of human beings is bonkers.
And by bonkers, I mean unsustainable.

What was the topic?

Greyhound of the skies. FA's need stun weapons. Convert some baggage area into a cage. There are also too many of us who are bonkers and the modest civic responsibilities during a pandemic seems to have played a big role in that.

[TeeVee]

this is some of the more interesting conversation we've had on this forum and i truly enjoy it. i dont take any of this personally and would hope none of you do either.

to hell with aviation safety. though this place seems to thrive more on the lack thereof.

Gabe, i'm kinda dumbfounded by your position. you talk about how wonderful chemicals are in one post and then hint that we shouldn't have to resort to them in another. you claim we NEED chemicals to feed the masses of starving people but ignore the fact that we waste millions of tons per year. well, maybe if we didn't produce such excessive amounts of food to feed starving people the food wouldnt go to waste.

how's that for an answer?

[Gabriel]

this is some of the more interesting conversation we've had on this forum and i truly enjoy it. i dont take any of this personally and would hope none of you do either.

to hell with aviation safety. though this place seems to thrive more on the lack thereof.

Gabe, i'm kinda dumbfounded by your position. you talk about how wonderful chemicals are in one post and then hint that we shouldn't have to resort to them in another. you claim we NEED chemicals to feed the masses of starving people but ignore the fact that we waste millions of tons per year. well, maybe if we didn't produce such excessive amounts of food to feed starving people the food wouldnt go to waste.

how's that for an answer?

1- I mentioned properties of these chemicals. I mentioned good stuff, but I also mentioned not_inocuous, harm, and carcinogenic. Things can be good and bad at the same time, good for some things, bad for others.

2- True, if we didn't waste the millions of tons of perfectly edible food and if we were all vegan, we would have more than enough land to feed all the population now and in the foreseeable future while at the same time reforesting AG land and using some of the land used today for food for biofuels. And that could be sustained for the foreseeable future and I am talking of at least a century. Now the question is how we convince all of us to stop wasting food and to go vegan. I am guilty of both. Monsanto thanks our collective lack of moral empathy.

[Gabriel]

I'm reaching my tolerable limit just in my fast gentrifying neighborhood. But I digress.
Imagine if I said to you that there are 8 billion elephants in the world. That would seem pretty extreme, wouldn't it? Or 8 billion tigers?
8 billion of anything with the consumptive appetite of human beings is bonkers.
And by bonkers, I mean unsustainable.

8 billion tigers can't multiply the available food per acre by 2.5 times and increase the amount of calories and proteins available per tiger, and it would be suicidal for them to go vegan.
Or current population and foreseeable growth of number and of consumption per capita is sustainable, just not in the way we are doing it now. We CAN do it. We KNOW how to do it. Whether we are going to do it remains to be seen. And if you are not very optimistic I won't blame you.

Greyhound of the skies. FA's need stun weapons. Convert some baggage area into a cage. There are also too many of us who are bonkers and the modest civic responsibilities during a pandemic seems to have played a big role in that.

No. The topic was a 2nd turn back that was not related to masks or COVID, let alone food and agrochemicals.

[3WE]

Ban [crop dusters]. Fixed.

And then you are willing to go hand weed rice fields?

[3WE]

Please note: There are many crop protection companies and products.

And repeating, the stuff we use in our houses for bugs average more toxic than weed killers…because science TM

[3WE]

DISCUSSIONS OF PESTICIDE RISK/BENEFIT ARE CANCELED!

We have a new variant within a variant CoVid-19 Omicron BA2…

More cool code language, more mandates, more vaccines…

[TeeVee]

and if we were all vegan, we would have more than enough land to feed all the population now and in the foreseeable future while at the same time reforesting AG land and using some of the land used today for food for biofuels.

this reminds me of what the real estate agents in south florida were saying 15 years ago: "we are running out of land!!! buy now or you will never be able to live here!" developers were whining to government about not being allowed to destroy even more of the everglades so they could build needed housing because there was absolutely no room to build.

ABSOLUTE and TOTAL bullshit.

if you drive around south florida you will see huge tracts of undeveloped, unused land. not to mention huge tracts of blighted areas. the problem with these are that they are further from the beach so i guess that makes them non-existent.

i've driven across the united states at least 6 times. i've flown over it dozens of times. there is no lack of space for growing crops and we produce WAY more produce then we consume, so at least in this country, dont blame cattle ranching for causing a shortage of space to grow food crops.

nicaragua, my 2nd home, is a huge producer of beef and exported 189 million kgs of beef in 2020 alone. i drive around this country and there is definitely no shortage of farm land. in fact, farming and the production/export of produce is on the rise.

as a species we do not have a food problem. there are food problems in certain areas were human REproduction has exceeded the ability of the locals to produce enough food. poverty is another cause. corruption is high on the list as well.

we are never going to be all vegan and should not be. God/nature did not design us to be so.

[ATLcrew]

DISCUSSIONS OF PESTICIDE RISK/BENEFIT ARE CANCELED!

We have a new variant within a variant CoVid-19 Omicron BA2…

More cool code language, more mandates, more vaccines…

Your info is out of date. BA2 has been canceled because Ukraine.

Carry on.