PDA

View Full Version : Eradication verso Depopulation



Tangri
22nd October 2014, 01:59
These subject had a lot of examples to exercise on reducing the threat in History.

Eliminate and/or disorganize any potential opposition are the tool of the dominion.

Americans(white-men) saw Native Indians existence a threat and tried this.

Jews saw any other scientist, lawyer, lawmaker, money keepers, wealth holders, religions as a threat tried,/trying this.

Hitler saw Jews to threat his country(economical, political, religiously) and tried this.

You can add many more to this list.(This post not to meant to accusing specific side, just trying to show that, it did not work out in positive way)

All progressive invaders see this as a solution in easy way.

They created Wars to eradicate reproduction's target (18-35 years old males) and bombed cities to force the mass to evacuate.

in late 1970s an offer was made to the sides according to 6 Billions world population.

Controlling the reproduction must be done by science not with war, no more eradication is needed.

As I remember It based
"Each family will be encouraged to have 1 child around 26-28 years old.
With 75 years life expectancy every 3 generation, population is going to drop %1.3.

I do not know why they(cabal) resisted the idea. They did not support the education, publication, visual suggestion.

On the other hand white(??!!) Cabal is still trying the scientific way to reach depopulation goal by controlled sterilization.

Maybe these doom scenarios(Ebola, D68, Tuberculosis) are the convincing methods of them, since humanity resist to idea of 3s core family.

What do you think?

Ricker
22nd October 2014, 02:37
Population Is a major issue. Education is the key I believe. The problem in my area is that the people that cannot raise or afford children are breeding like field mice.
while the more educated individuals take a more realistic approach. I make X amount of dollars. I cannot afford to properly care for three children. I will have one.
I am not trying to infringe on any ones right to bear children. Its a matter of common sense. Just because you have the ability to do something dose not make it a good idea.
I see all these commercials about starving children in third world nations and I am sympathetic to their plight however I can't help but wonder why are they having children if they themselves are starving? Educate them! Give them a better level of understanding. I do not believe eliminating a third of the worlds population is the key. Lets try to better manage what we have. As always comments and suggestions are welcome. (It's How I grow and Learn ;-) )

Ricker

Lifebringer
22nd October 2014, 03:29
I think you shouldn't use such a broad brush to accuse Progressives of this cabal 1913 banker terrorism. Progressives are American, not communist. While most are falling asleep at the switch, Progressives find the corruption and scream at both parties to end it. American voters owe a lot to progressives. By being able to focus on progress for the families and country, they've unraveled a lot of what others chose to ignore, until it was too late. Since you asked, what do "you" referring to whomever posts, therefore "I" think, "I have to say, I find it offensive to cloak all Progressives in this suspicious light. They cross all party lines, and a GOP progressive, may very well think that progress is having a corporate run country. I don't, I know this country cannot function, unless the people are the ones in control, not the mic. What do you think?

Lifebringer
22nd October 2014, 03:37
I would have had 19, I had to make choices for family planning. I'm what plantation owners referred to as: "A breeder." When the birth control started causing tumors because of multiple egg passages per month, I took it into my own hands, and demanded sterilization. The birth control was not accessible because of price, and domestic violence would occur if refusal in the marriage of sex took place. Those days are long gone now, but no one would have known had I not told them "a woman's business" in a man's world. I believe there are even herbs that can do a few things to bring on a menses that the old women used to give to space children. I just looked at PBS in the upper African region in the rural areas. A guy about 30 w/15 children, and no way to care for them. He says he has a hard time providing for his 4 wives and 15 children. Well that was just stupid to have pleasure, and then not take care of the results. Did he bed more women as wives because he didn't like that menses or 9 month pregnancy wait? All I can say is it seems mighty strange that when it comes to population, that the women and children die as a result of some manly rutting of dominance. Then they start the wars, and kill what we are blessed to bring into the world, take care of, and educate, then what? An apology? Yeah right.

And just to give detail on this irresponsible parent of 15, 4 wives and no job or way to take care of them. He was Islamic/Muslim Arab, and not African. I do believe over the last 4o years the number of children/black African children has declined, but ME will have NO one telling them how many children to have, and that is why they have so many conflicts where everyone wants to rule over others weaker, meeker or poorer than them.

Pris
22nd October 2014, 05:42
Population Is a major issue. Education is the key I believe. The problem in my area is that the people that cannot raise or afford children are breeding like field mice.
while the more educated individuals take a more realistic approach. I make X amount of dollars. I cannot afford to properly care for three children. I will have one.
I am not trying to infringe on any ones right to bear children. Its a matter of common sense. Just because you have the ability to do something dose not make it a good idea.
I see all these commercials about starving children in third world nations and I am sympathetic to their plight however I can't help but wonder why are they having children if they themselves are starving? Educate them! Give them a better level of understanding. I do not believe eliminating a third of the worlds population is the key. Lets try to better manage what we have. As always comments and suggestions are welcome. (It's How I grow and Learn ;-) )

Ricker

Really... Educate them?! For goodness sake, you still watch TV, eh? Who do you think is making those commercials about starving children in 'third world nations'? And, ask yourself 'why'? It's not to make us more 'sympathetic'. It's to make us more intolerant. I mean, listen to you.

'Educate them!'

Obviously, eliminating population on this planet is not the answer nor is it necessary.

Btw, here's a reminder about who controls the educational systems -- the same people who make those commercials. They do not want people to be educated and they make sure of it.



I would have had 19, I had to make choices for family planning. I'm what plantation owners referred to as: "A breeder." When the birth control started causing tumors because of multiple egg passages per month, I took it into my own hands, and demanded sterilization. The birth control was not accessible because of price, and domestic violence would occur if refusal in the marriage of sex took place. Those days are long gone now, but no one would have known had I not told them "a woman's business" in a man's world. I believe there are even herbs that can do a few things to bring on a menses that the old women used to give to space children. I just looked at PBS in the upper African region in the rural areas. A guy about 30 w/15 children, and no way to care for them. He says he has a hard time providing for his 4 wives and 15 children. Well that was just stupid to have pleasure, and then not take care of the results. Did he bed more women as wives because he didn't like that menses or 9 month pregnancy wait? All I can say is it seems mighty strange that when it comes to population, that the women and children die as a result of some manly rutting of dominance. Then they start the wars, and kill what we are blessed to bring into the world, take care of, and educate, then what? An apology? Yeah right.

And just to give detail on this irresponsible parent of 15, 4 wives and no job or way to take care of them. He was Islamic/Muslim Arab, and not African. I do believe over the last 4o years the number of children/black African children has declined, but ME will have NO one telling them how many children to have, and that is why they have so many conflicts where everyone wants to rule over others weaker, meeker or poorer than them.

Don't go after the guy with four wives and 15 kids (Of course, the guy could just be a sex maniac, but that's another topic.;)). Instead, go after the system that encourages that. And, while we're at it, let's go after all of us for allowing the system to continue as it is.

Who decides how many kids a person can have? Who decides how they ought to live their life? If you think this is about what you can and can't 'afford', then you're missing the whole point of what it means to be a sovereign individual. This is not about money, power and greed. It's so much more than these absurd games and jokes we pull on one another.

Of course we have 'conflicts where everyone wants to rule over others weaker, meeker or poorer than them'. We live in a system that is run by money and until we eliminate that one thing, we will live in a world of lack and limitation. We cannot blame individuals caught up by 'the dog eat dog world' that enslaves them. Instead, we must take the money and power away from the minority of psychopathic individuals that have managed to hijack the planet.

Ultimately, we need a moneyless society. We need free energy. We need everyone to be treated equally. And, we need to take care of each other and the planet and clean it up. One answer is contributionism. Another answer, on the same line, is a resource-based society.

All of this is doable.

We live in a world of abundance. The world's population could be many times over what it is now and it could easily be sustained by this planet. We can eliminate most crime, hunger, disease and planetary destruction overnight.

Tesla_WTC_Solution
22nd October 2014, 17:39
Modern agriculture methods might very well ELIMINATE most need for roadway cargo transportation :).
If we can popularize the notion of "self-sustaining LOCAL communities" rather than a huge top-down red-riding-hood system of wolf eat child,
we will cut out the need for such en masse transportation.

And then when food and water supply are localized/stabilized, people can transition toward NOT COMMUTING.
I.e. there will be less need to travel to work for food if local communities self-sustain.

Believe it or not, greenhouses and vertical farming, urban agrarianism, hold great promise.
The USA is grievously behind in the race to modernize.

UAE and other Arab nations are 100 years ahead of us in terms of what they are building for their local people.
We need to ensure as a global population that these technologies are within reach of all in need of them,
not merely a privilege of being rich, white or educated, or royal...

Here's a really funny idea, too, btw: most US cities have a fairly large homeless/street population.
If even 25 percent of these street people could be employed working for urban vertical farms,
that 25 percent of the homeless could probably feed most of the world.


But who has the dream?

778 neighbour of some guy
22nd October 2014, 18:01
But who has the dream?

You do, and the dream is correct.


Modern agriculture methods might very well ELIMINATE most need for roadway cargo transportation .
If we can popularize the notion of "self-sustaining LOCAL communities" rather than a huge top-down red-riding-hood system of wolf eat child,
we will cut out the need for such en masse transportation.


Believe it or not, greenhouses and vertical farming, urban agrarianism, hold great promise.

Bingo


And then when food and water supply are localized/stabilized

Soil can suck up ten gallons of water in two minutes and gone is your water, if you do this however............in your garden, on your wall or back room, you use up to 95 % less water and you WILL EAT WELL, dada is now a farmer and he can even afford to be a lazy one, now dada just needs a way to grow condoms.

Rj4MzjxjGck

or this

84zh7XL15n8

Cjay
23rd October 2014, 02:16
Population Is a major issue. Education is the key I believe. The problem in my area is that the people that cannot raise or afford children are breeding like field mice.

All over the world, the poorest, hungriest people have the highest birthrates. That is partly due to a biological response that increases fertility. It is part of the survival mechanism of the species. Educate all you want. It won't alter the biological survival responses.

Tangri
23rd October 2014, 05:00
I think you shouldn't use such a broad brush to accuse Progressives of this cabal 1913 banker terrorism. Progressives are American, not communist. While most are falling asleep at the switch, Progressives find the corruption and scream at both parties to end it. American voters owe a lot to progressives. By being able to focus on progress for the families and country, they've unraveled a lot of what others chose to ignore, until it was too late. Since you asked, what do "you" referring to whomever posts, therefore "I" think, "I have to say, I find it offensive to cloak all Progressives in this suspicious light. They cross all party lines, and a GOP progressive, may very well think that progress is having a corporate run country. I don't, I know this country cannot function, unless the people are the ones in control, not the mic. What do you think?

There is another world other than US which their progressive invader utterance does not refer Democrats. Even Khmer Rouge(communist)was progressive invader.

Tangri
23rd October 2014, 05:08
Population Is a major issue. Education is the key I believe. The problem in my area is that the people that cannot raise or afford children are breeding like field mice.

All over the world, the poorest, hungriest people have the highest birthrates. That is partly due to a biological response that increases fertility. It is part of the survival mechanism of the species. Educate all you want. It won't alter the biological survival responses.

If you want to have early flowers from your tomato plants you need not to over watering, every living being responds same way when they faced to extinction.

Tangri
23rd October 2014, 21:40
One thing is certain. The planet and it's resources are finite. And it can not support an infinite population of human or other species.

The issue of population is too important to avoid just because it is controversial.

http://www.populationspeakout.org/sites/default/files/PCReader-Ryerson-Population.pdf

Pris
23rd October 2014, 23:52
Here's a really funny idea, too, btw: most US cities have a fairly large homeless/street population.
If even 25 percent of these street people could be employed working for urban vertical farms,
that 25 percent of the homeless could probably feed most of the world.

That's a great idea (urban, vertical farms)... except, just because I may be homeless doesn't mean I want to be hauled off to work in some vertical farm.

This reminds me of scenarios from 'Metropolis' and 'Brave New World' ('the homeless could probably feed most of the world').

Also, I'm certain that many of the homeless chose to drop out of the system because they know it enslaves them. Unless we can take out the 'slavery' aspect of working (ie. 'earning' money to 'make a living') and the inherent judgement that goes along with the expectation that everyone should be 'working for a living' based on somebody else's yardstick, then maybe you've got something. We also need to eliminate debt (slavery).

Making 'jobs' for the homeless isn't going fix anything because we're all stuck in the same boat. We know that doesn't work. The more tangled up we are in the system, the easier it is to control us.

I'd work at anything if I knew I wasn't being manipulated for some nefarious cause (like upholding the current monetary system that enslaves us all), and the work I did directly benefited myself and those around me equally.

Also, working at something that may be necessary but not ideal to an individual's needs and desires may be tolerated for short periods if it helps the community. But, whoever invented the 40 hour work week (and for most people, those are dead-end, useless jobs [because of the capitalist system we live in]) knew exactly how to keep us distracted, unhappy (throw materialism at them), busy and, of course, enslaved.

Pris
24th October 2014, 00:03
One thing is certain. The planet and it's resources are finite. And it can not support an infinite population of human or other species.

The issue of population is too important to avoid just because it is controversial.

http://www.populationspeakout.org/sites/default/files/PCReader-Ryerson-Population.pdf

How truly limited are we? Apparently, we have zero-point energy. That technology is being stifled. Apparently, we can make anything from energy (energy-matter converters) and again, that kind of technology is being held back from us.

The population of humans on Earth is still not a big deal. Yet. Like I mentioned, it could be many times over what it is and we'd still be fine (obviously not with the way things are run now -- please see my previous post).

Besides, there's zillions of planets out there. Who says we have to stay on Earth?

Tangri
24th October 2014, 05:05
One thing is certain. The planet and it's resources are finite. And it can not support an infinite population of human or other species.

The issue of population is too important to avoid just because it is controversial.

http://www.populationspeakout.org/sites/default/files/PCReader-Ryerson-Population.pdf

How truly limited are we? Apparently, we have zero-point energy. That technology is being stifled. Apparently, we can make anything from energy (energy-matter converters) and again, that kind of technology is being held back from us.

The population of humans on Earth is still not a big deal. Yet. Like I mentioned, it could be many times over what it is and we'd still be fine (obviously not with the way things are run now -- please see my previous post).

Besides, there's zillions of planets out there. Who says we have to stay on Earth?


:canada: I think you accepted that you have one of the escape pod tickets.

Pris
24th October 2014, 05:21
One thing is certain. The planet and it's resources are finite. And it can not support an infinite population of human or other species.

The issue of population is too important to avoid just because it is controversial.

http://www.populationspeakout.org/sites/default/files/PCReader-Ryerson-Population.pdf

How truly limited are we? Apparently, we have zero-point energy. That technology is being stifled. Apparently, we can make anything from energy (energy-matter converters) and again, that kind of technology is being held back from us.

The population of humans on Earth is still not a big deal. Yet. Like I mentioned, it could be many times over what it is and we'd still be fine (obviously not with the way things are run now -- please see my previous post).

Besides, there's zillions of planets out there. Who says we have to stay on Earth?


:canada: I think you accepted that you have one of the escape pod tickets.

Why should we only let the psychos have all the fun? Besides, don't you think it's time we took our planet back?

Tangri
24th October 2014, 05:45
One thing is certain. The planet and it's resources are finite. And it can not support an infinite population of human or other species.

The issue of population is too important to avoid just because it is controversial.

http://www.populationspeakout.org/sites/default/files/PCReader-Ryerson-Population.pdf

How truly limited are we? Apparently, we have zero-point energy. That technology is being stifled. Apparently, we can make anything from energy (energy-matter converters) and again, that kind of technology is being held back from us.

The population of humans on Earth is still not a big deal. Yet. Like I mentioned, it could be many times over what it is and we'd still be fine (obviously not with the way things are run now -- please see my previous post).

Besides, there's zillions of planets out there. Who says we have to stay on Earth?


:canada: I think you accepted that you have one of the escape pod tickets.

Why should we only let the psychos have all the fun? Besides, don't you think it's time we took our planet back?

Nice .

"there's zillions of planets out there. Who says we have to stay on Earth?"

Lets not beat around the bush and tell me about your ticket to solar warden. How can I obtain one of the ticket ?

Pris
24th October 2014, 06:08
One thing is certain. The planet and it's resources are finite. And it can not support an infinite population of human or other species.

The issue of population is too important to avoid just because it is controversial.

http://www.populationspeakout.org/sites/default/files/PCReader-Ryerson-Population.pdf

How truly limited are we? Apparently, we have zero-point energy. That technology is being stifled. Apparently, we can make anything from energy (energy-matter converters) and again, that kind of technology is being held back from us.

The population of humans on Earth is still not a big deal. Yet. Like I mentioned, it could be many times over what it is and we'd still be fine (obviously not with the way things are run now -- please see my previous post).

Besides, there's zillions of planets out there. Who says we have to stay on Earth?


:canada: I think you accepted that you have one of the escape pod tickets.

Why should we only let the psychos have all the fun? Besides, don't you think it's time we took our planet back?

Nice .

"there's zillions of planets out there. Who says we have to stay on Earth?"

Lets not beat around the bush and tell me about your ticket to solar warden. How can I obtain one of the ticket ?

I've already answered that question with my earlier comments in this thread. We can do anything we want if we stop allowing ourselves to be held back by those 'in authority'. First, we need to eliminate money and rid ourselves of the psychos running the planet (those two go hand in hand, btw).

Tangri
23rd November 2014, 00:01
I heard this . It is more horrifying then catastrophic events In my opinion .

With complete sterilization of Humans, in 70 years world population can be eradicated. It would be an unacceptable thinking/solution, if it was considered.

eaglespirit
23rd November 2014, 00:09
We need free energy. We need everyone to be treated equally. And, we need to take care of each other and the planet and clean it up. One answer is contributionism. Another answer, on the same line, is a resource-based society.

All of this is doable.

We live in a world of abundance. The world's population could be many times over what it is now and it could easily be sustained by this planet. We can eliminate most crime, hunger, disease and planetary destruction overnight.

...and so it IS !!!

Pris
23rd November 2014, 01:05
I heard this . It is more horrifying then catastrophic events In my opinion .

With complete sterilization of Humans, in 70 years world population can be eradicated. It would be an unacceptable thinking/solution, if it was considered.


No matter what they throw at us, no matter how hard they try to eliminate us, life always finds a way. :)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkWeMvrNiOM