On 12/2/2022 12:24 PM, shawn wrote:
> On Fri, 02 Dec 2022 17:01:45 +0000, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>
>> On Dec 2, 2022 at 6:28:38 AM PST, "Rhino" <no_offline_contact@example.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2022-11-29 1:41 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>> On Nov 29, 2022 at 7:46:02 AM PST, "Rhino" <no_offline_contact@example.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Good news! There may be a way to ease the pressure of the ongoing
>>>>> drought in the Southwest via solar panels.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCRX232VkBk [16 minutes]
>>>>>
>>>>> This approach has the virtue of being a solution that very "woke"
>>>>> politicians would love. Mind you, I can imagine some major resistance if
>>>>> the bodies of water proposed for the solar panels are used for recreation!
>>>>
>>>> The enviro-kooks will find some reason to oppose it because the whole 'clean
>>>> energy' thing is just a cover for their actual goal, which is to undermine
>>>> our
>>>> First World way of life, which they see as illegitimate and unfair. This is
>>>> why they oppose things like desalination plants, which would give us an
>>>> endless supply of fresh clean water with no pollution. Any approach that
>>>> actually solves the problem without requiring 'sacrifice' from the
>>>> population
>>>> is a no-go for them.
>>>>
>>> I can't help but agree with you. If they really wanted to make things
>>> better in
>>> a way that would support their alleged goals, they would strongly
>>> support and
>>> advocate for things like desalination. But they don't. I can't think of any
>>> reason for that except that they NEED people to sacrifice, with the most
>>> extreme of them insisting that the sacrifice be the very lives of all or
>>> most of the people on the planet. Only then can the planet achieve some
>>> sort of "natural" balance. They are ultimately a death cult. (The faction
>>> that wants only most of the humans on Earth to die are looking forward
>>> to finally creating a new Utopia for the survivors that would probably
>>> look a lot like what they imagine Marx was proposing. The enviros would,
>>> inevitably, be the leaders of that society and it would soon turn into
>>> exactly the same sort of hell that all Marxist states have become in
>>> short order.)
>>
>> Notice how the enviro-kooks that advocate for a mass die-off of humanity to
>> "bring the earth into balance" never seem willing to lead by example and rid
>> the earth of their own parasitic presence. It's always you and me that need to
>> die, never them.
>>
> They won't get their mass die-off but the latest projections show the
> population increasing up to 2050 and then going on a decline.
> Obviously this can change, especially if we went all in on modernizing
> those areas that are experiencing the greatest growth in population.
> As it has been shown that as a society modernizes and the death rate
> of children declines so does the birth rate. Presumably that's behind
> the expected decline in the birth rate after 2050.

Some parts of the world _already_ have birth rates below the replacement
level.

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

On 2022-12-02 3:24 PM, shawn wrote:
> On Fri, 02 Dec 2022 17:01:45 +0000, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>
>> On Dec 2, 2022 at 6:28:38 AM PST, "Rhino" <no_offline_contact@example.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2022-11-29 1:41 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>> On Nov 29, 2022 at 7:46:02 AM PST, "Rhino" <no_offline_contact@example.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Good news! There may be a way to ease the pressure of the ongoing
>>>>> drought in the Southwest via solar panels.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCRX232VkBk [16 minutes]
>>>>>
>>>>> This approach has the virtue of being a solution that very "woke"
>>>>> politicians would love. Mind you, I can imagine some major resistance if
>>>>> the bodies of water proposed for the solar panels are used for recreation!
>>>>
>>>> The enviro-kooks will find some reason to oppose it because the whole 'clean
>>>> energy' thing is just a cover for their actual goal, which is to undermine
>>>> our
>>>> First World way of life, which they see as illegitimate and unfair. This is
>>>> why they oppose things like desalination plants, which would give us an
>>>> endless supply of fresh clean water with no pollution. Any approach that
>>>> actually solves the problem without requiring 'sacrifice' from the
>>>> population
>>>> is a no-go for them.
>>>>
>>> I can't help but agree with you. If they really wanted to make things
>>> better in
>>> a way that would support their alleged goals, they would strongly
>>> support and
>>> advocate for things like desalination. But they don't. I can't think of any
>>> reason for that except that they NEED people to sacrifice, with the most
>>> extreme of them insisting that the sacrifice be the very lives of all or
>>> most of the people on the planet. Only then can the planet achieve some
>>> sort of "natural" balance. They are ultimately a death cult. (The faction
>>> that wants only most of the humans on Earth to die are looking forward
>>> to finally creating a new Utopia for the survivors that would probably
>>> look a lot like what they imagine Marx was proposing. The enviros would,
>>> inevitably, be the leaders of that society and it would soon turn into
>>> exactly the same sort of hell that all Marxist states have become in
>>> short order.)
>>
>> Notice how the enviro-kooks that advocate for a mass die-off of humanity to
>> "bring the earth into balance" never seem willing to lead by example and rid
>> the earth of their own parasitic presence. It's always you and me that need to
>> die, never them.
>>
> They won't get their mass die-off but the latest projections show the
> population increasing up to 2050 and then going on a decline.
> Obviously this can change, especially if we went all in on modernizing
> those areas that are experiencing the greatest growth in population.
> As it has been shown that as a society modernizes and the death rate
> of children declines so does the birth rate. Presumably that's behind
> the expected decline in the birth rate after 2050.

China's population is expected to decline by about 700 million alone -
HALF it's current population!! - as the current old people die off and
are NOT replaced due to decades of the One Child Policy (which became
the Two Child Policy and now the Three Child Policy but way too late to
make much difference).

India, on the other hand, is almost China's population now and is
expected to overtake it fairly soon. I haven't researched what their
trends are but I know they never had anything like the One Child Policy
so any population decline is likely to be considerably slower than China's.

--
Rhino

On 2022-12-02 3:30 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
> On 12/2/2022 12:24 PM, shawn wrote:
>> On Fri, 02 Dec 2022 17:01:45 +0000, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Dec 2, 2022 at 6:28:38 AM PST, "Rhino"
>>> <no_offline_contact@example.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2022-11-29 1:41 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>>   On Nov 29, 2022 at 7:46:02 AM PST, "Rhino"
>>>>> <no_offline_contact@example.com>
>>>>>   wrote:
>>>>>>   Good news! There may be a way to ease the pressure of the ongoing
>>>>>>   drought in the Southwest via solar panels.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCRX232VkBk [16 minutes]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   This approach has the virtue of being a solution that very "woke"
>>>>>>   politicians would love. Mind you, I can imagine some major
>>>>>> resistance if
>>>>>>   the bodies of water proposed for the solar panels are used for
>>>>>> recreation!
>>>>>   The enviro-kooks will find some reason to oppose it because the
>>>>> whole 'clean
>>>>>   energy' thing is just a cover for their actual goal, which is to
>>>>> undermine
>>>>> our
>>>>>   First World way of life, which they see as illegitimate and
>>>>> unfair. This is
>>>>>   why they oppose things like desalination plants, which would give
>>>>> us an
>>>>>   endless supply of fresh clean water with no pollution. Any
>>>>> approach that
>>>>>   actually solves the problem without requiring 'sacrifice' from the
>>>>> population
>>>>>   is a no-go for them.
>>>> I can't help but agree with you. If they really wanted to make things
>>>> better in
>>>> a way that would support their alleged goals, they would strongly
>>>> support and
>>>> advocate for things like desalination. But they don't. I can't think
>>>> of any
>>>> reason for that except that they NEED people to sacrifice, with the
>>>> most
>>>> extreme of them insisting that the sacrifice be the very lives of
>>>> all or
>>>> most of the people on the planet. Only then can the planet achieve some
>>>> sort of "natural" balance. They are ultimately a death cult. (The
>>>> faction
>>>> that wants only most of the humans on Earth to die are looking forward
>>>> to finally creating a new Utopia for the survivors that would probably
>>>> look a lot like what they imagine Marx was proposing. The enviros
>>>> would,
>>>> inevitably, be the leaders of that society and it would soon turn into
>>>> exactly the same sort of hell that all Marxist states have become in
>>>> short order.)
>>>
>>> Notice how the enviro-kooks that advocate for a mass die-off of
>>> humanity to
>>> "bring the earth into balance" never seem willing to lead by example
>>> and rid
>>> the earth of their own parasitic presence. It's always you and me
>>> that need to
>>> die, never them.
>>>
>> They won't get their mass die-off but the latest projections show the
>> population increasing up to 2050 and then going on a decline.
>> Obviously this can change, especially if we went all in on modernizing
>> those areas that are experiencing the greatest growth in population.
>> As it has been shown that as a society modernizes and the death rate
>> of children declines so does the birth rate. Presumably that's behind
>> the expected decline in the birth rate after 2050.
>
> Some parts of the world _already_ have birth rates below the replacement
> level.
>
That includes Europe, North America and Russia.

--
Rhino

On 12/2/22 11:01 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
> On Dec 2, 2022 at 6:28:38 AM PST, "Rhino" <no_offline_contact@example.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 2022-11-29 1:41 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>> On Nov 29, 2022 at 7:46:02 AM PST, "Rhino" <no_offline_contact@example.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Good news! There may be a way to ease the pressure of the ongoing
>>>> drought in the Southwest via solar panels.
>>>>
>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCRX232VkBk [16 minutes]
>>>>
>>>> This approach has the virtue of being a solution that very "woke"
>>>> politicians would love. Mind you, I can imagine some major resistance if
>>>> the bodies of water proposed for the solar panels are used for recreation!
>>>
>>> The enviro-kooks will find some reason to oppose it because the whole 'clean
>>> energy' thing is just a cover for their actual goal, which is to undermine
>>> our
>>> First World way of life, which they see as illegitimate and unfair. This is
>>> why they oppose things like desalination plants, which would give us an
>>> endless supply of fresh clean water with no pollution. Any approach that
>>> actually solves the problem without requiring 'sacrifice' from the
>>> population
>>> is a no-go for them.
>>>
>> I can't help but agree with you. If they really wanted to make things
>> better in
>> a way that would support their alleged goals, they would strongly
>> support and
>> advocate for things like desalination. But they don't. I can't think of any
>> reason for that except that they NEED people to sacrifice, with the most
>> extreme of them insisting that the sacrifice be the very lives of all or
>> most of the people on the planet. Only then can the planet achieve some
>> sort of "natural" balance. They are ultimately a death cult. (The faction
>> that wants only most of the humans on Earth to die are looking forward
>> to finally creating a new Utopia for the survivors that would probably
>> look a lot like what they imagine Marx was proposing. The enviros would,
>> inevitably, be the leaders of that society and it would soon turn into
>> exactly the same sort of hell that all Marxist states have become in
>> short order.)
>
> Notice how the enviro-kooks that advocate for a mass die-off of humanity

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jan/13/top-scientists-warn-of-ghastly-future-of-mass-extinction-and-climate-disruption-aoe

Top scientists warn of 'ghastly future of mass extinction' and climate
disruption

Sobering new report says world is failing to grasp the extent of threats
posed by biodiversity loss and the climate crisis

I have to admit I'm not that knowledgable at the motivations for
continual SHITPOSTING. Are the top scientists the Guardian wrote about
the "enviro-kooks" also? And should we take the word of an anonyshit
with no legitimate identity on this? It seems very counterintuitive.

On Fri, 2 Dec 2022 12:30:58 -0800, Dimensional Traveler
<dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:

>Some parts of the world _already_ have birth rates below the replacement
>level.

Yup - and two of them are both Russia and Ukraine even BEFORE their
war. Between the birthrate and emigration we're talking something of
the order of 20-30% since 1991.