Home... the Movie

[beauanderos]

Somehow I missed this one. Some stunning visuals, along with a worthy message

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jqxENMKa ... ton&wide=1

[Country]

Fantastic movie. One of the reasons I became a vegetarian was to do my small part impacting the ecosystems of the planet in which we live.

[Thogey]

What's wrong with impacting eco-systems?

BTW, the video was beautiful. But, the earth is not God. The earth was a gift for us to USE to SEIZE and EXPLOIT.

I hope we can do a better job at it though.

Beef rules and I'm glad those who came before me SEIZED the natural flora and fauna of No. America.

I'm glad we have oil, beef and huge pieces of machinery to harvest vast swaths of land.

As far as petro-chemicals, Thank what-ever god you pray to we have that ability. It's not perfect, but better than a potato fungus wiping out a nation.

I kill pests and wild animals I find to be 'inconvenient' (sometimes using petro chemicals) and am not one bit guilty of any wrong.

Watch the video though. Absolutely breathtaking video.

Here's a short one with awesome landscapes, no message, just beauty.
http://sonicbomb.com/xv1.php?vid=sea&id=611&ttitle=The Sea&s=44&w=700&h=400

[Country]

What's wrong with impacting eco-systems?

BTW, the video was beautiful. But, the earth is not God. The earth was a gift for us to USE to SEIZE and EXPLOIT.

I hope we can do a better job at it though.

Beef rules and I'm glad those who came before me SEIZED the natural flora and fauna of No. America.

I'm glad we have oil, beef and huge pieces of machinery to harvest vast swaths of land.

As far as petro-chemicals, Thank what-ever god you pray to we have that ability. It's not perfect, but better than a potato fungus wiping out a nation.

I kill pests and wild animals I find to be 'inconvenient' (sometimes using petro chemicals) and am not one bit guilty of any wrong.

Watch the video though. Absolutely breathtaking video.

Here's a short one with awesome landscapes, no message, just beauty.
http://sonicbomb.com/xv1.php?vid=sea&id=611&ttitle=The Sea&s=44&w=700&h=400

You missed the whole point of the movie - unless humans reduce their impact on the earth, humans will become extinct. The beauty of this earth will soon metamorphasize into a nasty world we cannot envision unless we humans modify our destructive ways. If you watched the entire movie, this movie firmly stated that the resources of our Earth are finite. The time of infinite degradation of our Earth has ended.

In Genesis, when God gave mankind dominion over the earth, it was to manage it not to exploit it.

[Thogey]

Humans will become extinct, that is a fact and there is nothing anyone can do about it.

It was a nastier world before developement. All that wilderness might look pretty, but it kills people if not managed properly.

I didn't miss the point of anything. I just disagree with many of the premises. Infinite degradation? The Earth will kick our asses on every level. We have been given a gift that allows us to change things to suit our needs, to a point.

I was beautiful, but typical.

[Thogey]

[68Camaro]

I didn't have the time to watch the thing, started it but become impatient (given the time I had) in the first 90 seconds, when I realized how long it was, and how slowly it was developing. I'll give it another shot later. That said, I've seen similar things before, and I have little patience for the "worship the earth" pieces that is where many of these things end up. I'll take your word for the beauty of it, which does make me want to give it another try.

Parts of humanity have not been good stewards to the earth. That continues, especially in the newly industrial countries, but the trend is slowing, starting to reverse in places. Pendulums swing back and forth. This pendulum did swing too far to the abuse side, but it's hit the peak point and has been swinging back toward the middle for some time. While we may not yet have crossed-over the mid-point, all the "stuff" is in place to have it swing far too far to the other side, quickly.

I'm with Thogey on this one...

[Country]

Using Carlin as a resource is ludicrous. The movie clearly points out that unless we humans change, we will become extinct rather quickly. As this dead comedian points out, Mother Earth will protect herself, but it is the human race that will be one of those species he says will disapppear each year unless we humans curtail our raping of our Earth.

[68Camaro]

Using Carlin as a resource is ludicrous. The movie clearly points out that unless we humans change, we will become extinct rather quickly. As this dead comedian points out, Mother Earth will protect herself, but it is the human race that will be one of those species he says will disapppear each year unless we humans curtail our raping of our Earth.

Carlin's viewpoint (dead or not, comedian or not) is just as valid as that of any other. He's not a "resource" but he has an opinion, a valid opinion, and in part he uses satire to make points.

I think Carlin is agreeing with you, in that humanity will eventually disappear. I don't agree completely with Carlin, but I think his lack of panic over the rape (and I won't use quotes, because it's real - the difference is that I view the earth as fundamentally self-healing, in general) of the earth is well grounded.

I also realize this is a very emotional issue for many people. I have zero interest in debating it. You will not change my mind, I won't change yours. So let's just agree to disagree on this one.

[Rodebaugh]

Well I watched it. All hour and a half of it. It had alot of purdy landscapes and a bunch of ugly ones. However, I still like cotton underbritches, jeeps, and t-bones.

[shinnosuke]

Did I mention that I live in Texas? Why is it always about Texas???

If you divided the square feet in Texas by the world's population, what would be the sq ft per person in Texas?
Texas is 267,339 sq miles, and 1 sq mile = 640 acres, and 1 acre = 43,560 sq ft., How many square feet per person, if you put the entire world population into Texas assuming we round the world population to 6.6 billion people?

Texas area = 267339 X (5280)^2
= 7,452,732,672,000 sq.ft.
Population of world = 6,600,000,000.
Dividing area with population
1129.2 0192 s.ft./person.

So each and every person gets their own 1130 sq. ft. apartment. They get double that if we make the apartments into 2-storey buildings.

Granted it wouldn't be very practical, but there would still be a lot of planet left over. It's pretty tough for man to cause his own extinction as long as nuclear weapons aren't used. And even if they are, have you seen Hiroshima lately? I have.

Extinction will come from exterior forces, asteroids, sunspots, black holes, if it comes at all.

[John_doe]

What's wrong with impacting eco-systems?

BTW, the video was beautiful. But, the earth is not God. The earth was a gift for us to USE to SEIZE and EXPLOIT.

I hope we can do a better job at it though.

Beef rules and I'm glad those who came before me SEIZED the natural flora and fauna of No. America.

I'm glad we have oil, beef and huge pieces of machinery to harvest vast swaths of land.

As far as petro-chemicals, Thank what-ever god you pray to we have that ability. It's not perfect, but better than a potato fungus wiping out a nation.

I kill pests and wild animals I find to be 'inconvenient' (sometimes using petro chemicals) and am not one bit guilty of any wrong.

Watch the video though. Absolutely breathtaking video.

Here's a short one with awesome landscapes, no message, just beauty.
http://sonicbomb.com/xv1.php?vid=sea&id=611&ttitle=The Sea&s=44&w=700&h=400

You missed the whole point of the movie - unless humans reduce their impact on the earth, humans will become extinct. The beauty of this earth will soon metamorphasize into a nasty world we cannot envision unless we humans modify our destructive ways. If you watched the entire movie, this movie firmly stated that the resources of our Earth are finite. The time of infinite degradation of our Earth has ended.

In Genesis, when God gave mankind dominion over the earth, it was to manage it not to exploit it.

The world will end at some point, regardless of what we do.

The world and life itself are like books. There is a begining and an end. How it started, and how it will end seems to be the main point of discussion, and I do agree we should offset the end as long as possible.

[John_doe]

Sorry the book thing is how I explain death to grieving people. I've found it also applies to the earth as well.

[beauanderos]

I loved the photography in the movie, what I did not care for was the simpering tone of the moderator when she mentioned the growing disparity between those who work, invest, and generate wealth... and those who just subsist, as if that is somehow the fault of the industrious few. The Earth cannot support the needs of the overpopulated masses (due to logistics) and I would speculate that some type of mass die off will ensue... happens all the time with various species when the ecology is out of kilter. The focus on Nigeria only proves that there are regions where some type of birth control should be mandatory, but of course that would never happen.

[theo]

I distrust anybody who uses emotional images and language to prop up a factually weak argument. It is the exact same argument made by Thomas Malthus about 200 years ago (the earth cannot continue to support its current population, resources are dwindling. . etc). Of course Malthus was unaware of vast amounts of untapped resources just below his feet which would be discovered a few generations later. It makes you wonder what reserves of energy and wealth we have yet to discover.

[fb101]

I loved the photography in the movie, what I did not care for was the simpering tone of the moderator when she mentioned the growing disparity between those who work, invest, and generate wealth... and those who just subsist, as if that is somehow the fault of the industrious few. The Earth cannot support the needs of the overpopulated masses (due to logistics) and I would speculate that some type of mass die off will ensue... happens all the time with various species when the ecology is out of kilter. The focus on Nigeria only proves that there are regions where some type of birth control should be mandatory, but of course that would never happen.

Beau, please read shinnosuke;
If he hadn't put the actual math there I would have.

This overpopulation is like global warming - a tool to keep the masses off guard and another part of the circus.
The entire population of earth could live comfortably in just the state of texas.
There are no food shortages, only distribution shortages.

[beauanderos]

I loved the photography in the movie, what I did not care for was the simpering tone of the moderator when she mentioned the growing disparity between those who work, invest, and generate wealth... and those who just subsist, as if that is somehow the fault of the industrious few. The Earth cannot support the needs of the overpopulated masses (due to logistics) and I would speculate that some type of mass die off will ensue... happens all the time with various species when the ecology is out of kilter. The focus on Nigeria only proves that there are regions where some type of birth control should be mandatory, but of course that would never happen.

Beau, please read shinnosuke;
If he hadn't put the actual math there I would have.

This overpopulation is like global warming - a tool to keep the masses off guard and another part of the circus.
The entire population of earth could live comfortably in just the state of texas.
There are no food shortages, only distribution shortages.

Oh... so we're going to take off the mittens? Ok, I'll play. Overpopulation is not like global warming (in the sense I take it you mean) as it is not a debatable issue... it is irrefutable. The least advanced nations have the highest birth rates... those same nations that are subject to poor distribution systems and toxic water. If you're one of those people (and by no means am I defending them or suggesting we somehow ease their burden... because they will then just produce more offspring and exacerbate their malady) I really don't think you'd spend much time wondering about density issues. A region is by definition overpopulated when it can no longer support the indigenous populace, whether that be from ruination of the tillable soil, arid conditions, whatever. You're really going to sit there and glibly tell me that everyone could easily live within the state of Texas... like that is some kind of solution??? What BS! Try telling that to the migratory nomadic tribes of starving people numbering in the hundreds of thousands, or those relocated to refugee camps, just because they could no longer feed themselves in their home lands. A food shortage due to distribution problems is what? Uhhhhm... I think it would still be a food shortage, duh! I guess the one billion people in danger of starving are just kidding themselves, they aren't really hungry, because in advanced nations there are occasional surpluses of different types of foods? Using the Texas sophistry is akin to claiming that "Hey, if the forum members had ALL the silver and gold in the world... we'd all be rich!" Woohoo! That's true. But it sure ain't reality. Now then, you forced me into this corner. I have no solutions for the existing problem, but the one suggestion I would make is, I'm sure, not one the filmmakers intended to stimulate. My idea? Mandatory birth control (by chemical means) to limit populations to a size that blighted areas CAN support without outside help. That's probably on an agenda somewhere at these Bilderburg functions. Like someone else mentioned, all things come to an end... and an endless escalation of global population is surely one of them. Why don't you go watch Chris Martenson's Crash Course... and if you can still mount an intelligent debate that present conditions are sustainable after assimilating the information he presents, then I will be obliged to recognize the presence of a genius in our midst.

[theo]

The main problem I have with this line of argument is the solution, which is invariably suppression of freedom. "People in prosperous nations have no right to rape the planet, wasting precious resources while people in the third world starve! Somebody should MAKE them cut back on their outragous consumption" Hello U.N. tax; goodbye private property rights.

The real solution to food and resources shortages has always been freedom (specifically private property rights) leading to technological development. Enforced population control will NEVER be the answer.

[beauanderos]

The main problem I have with this line of argument is the solution, which is invariably suppression of freedom. "People in prosperous nations have no right to rape the planet, wasting precious resources while people in the third world starve! Somebody should MAKE them cut back on their outragous consumption" Hello U.N. tax; goodbye private property rights.

The real solution to food and resources shortages has always been freedom (specifically private property rights) leading to technological development. Enforced population control will NEVER be the answer.

Trust me, I am the farthest thing from being some bleeding heart liberal. I'm only suggesting some means of population control in backward areas as a more humane solution to address the concern of starvation than to let procreative ignorance proliferate leading to perpetuation of an ever-worsening problem of hunger/starvation/death. If some measures aren't employed to limit the problem, nature will invoke its own solution. Starvation seems to be her preferred method. Prosperous nations can't make effectual inroads to providing surplus food to these peoples as the shipments don't reach beyond local warlords to their hapless intended victims.

[aloneibreak]

The main problem I have with this line of argument is the solution, which is invariably suppression of freedom. "People in prosperous nations have no right to rape the planet, wasting precious resources while people in the third world starve! Somebody should MAKE them cut back on their outragous consumption" Hello U.N. tax; goodbye private property rights.

The real solution to food and resources shortages has always been freedom (specifically private property rights) leading to technological development. Enforced population control will NEVER be the answer.

Trust me, I am the farthest thing from being some bleeding heart liberal. I'm only suggesting some means of population control in backward areas as a more humane solution to address the concern of starvation than to let procreative ignorance proliferate leading to perpetuation of an ever-worsening problem of hunger/starvation/death. If some measures aren't employed to limit the problem, nature will invoke its own solution. Starvation seems to be her preferred method. Prosperous nations can't make effectual inroads to providing surplus food to these peoples as the shipments don't reach beyond local warlords to their hapless intended victims.

procreative ignorance can be helped through education about birth control methods

its the word "mandatory" you used that worries me

government abuse is always attached to "mandatory"

[HoardCopperByTheTon]

I'm doing my bit to help with the global warming problem. Today I am eating the cows.

[beauanderos]

The main problem I have with this line of argument is the solution, which is invariably suppression of freedom. "People in prosperous nations have no right to rape the planet, wasting precious resources while people in the third world starve! Somebody should MAKE them cut back on their outragous consumption" Hello U.N. tax; goodbye private property rights.

The real solution to food and resources shortages has always been freedom (specifically private property rights) leading to technological development. Enforced population control will NEVER be the answer.

Trust me, I am the farthest thing from being some bleeding heart liberal. I'm only suggesting some means of population control in backward areas as a more humane solution to address the concern of starvation than to let procreative ignorance proliferate leading to perpetuation of an ever-worsening problem of hunger/starvation/death. If some measures aren't employed to limit the problem, nature will invoke its own solution. Starvation seems to be her preferred method. Prosperous nations can't make effectual inroads to providing surplus food to these peoples as the shipments don't reach beyond local warlords to their hapless intended victims.

procreative ignorance can be helped through education about birth control methods

its the word "mandatory" you used that worries me

government abuse is always attached to "mandatory"

Perhaps education CAN help, in an extremely limited fashion, among already educated, reasoning, sensible folks (although it hasn't made many inroads among our own teen population) but really... educate completely illiterate wandering hordes? To them, a child is merely an extra pair of hands to help plant and harvest (in good times) to ward off further starvation. It would never work. Maybe some form of monetary reward for sterilization, but that would only have a limited effect as well. The problem, even with well-intended gov't sanctioned programs (China) is that the one birth per family rule leads to them killing off most of the baby girls since they prefer boys. But what would the population of China be if they didn't make some effort at limiting that growth? At least they recognize they have a problem, unlike India.

[beauanderos]

Boy, this thread is sure moving away from its intended posting of "hey guys, check out the beautiful scenery." Here's a short report on the ramifications of the China experiment:
Problems associated with overpopulation. China has the highest population in the world, encompassing 1.2 billion or twenty one percent of the world's population (P.R.B. 7). China faces serious social and economic problems associated with overpopulation in the years to come. Overly populated regions lead to degradation of land and resources, pollution, and detrimental living conditions. The Chinese government has tried to find a solution to the problem of increasing population with moderate success.

China's population control policy. The Chinese government has used several methods to control population growth. In 1979, China started the "one child per family policy" (Juali Li 563). This policy stated that citizens must obtain a birth certificate before the birth of their children. The citizens would be offered special benefits if they agreed to have only one child. Citizens who did have more than one child would either be taxed an amount up to fifty percent of their income, or punished by loss of employment or other benefits (Hilali 10). Furthermore, unplanned pregnancies or pregnancies without the proper authorization would need to be terminated (Hilali 9). In 1980, the birth-quota system was established to monitor population growth(Jiali Li 563). Under this system, the government set target goals for each region. Local officials were mainly held responsible for making sure that population growth totals did not exceed target goals. If target goals were not met, the local officials were punished by law or by loss of privileges.

Other population control methods. Other methods that have been used by the Chinese government to restrict rising population totals include birth control programs and economic changes. In the early '80's, sterilization target goals were set and made mandatory for people who had two children (Hilali 19). At its peak in 1983, tubal ligations, vasectomies, and abortions amounted to thirty-five percent of the total birth control methods (Hilali 20). In addition, the economy changed from primarily one of agriculture to industry (Hilali 22). The government used this to its advantage; spreading the view that economic growth would hinder population growth (Hilali 22).

Problems associated with population policies. There have been many problems associated with the policies and programs established by Chinese officials. First of all, these programs have been difficult to implement and have had little success. Local officials in charge of growth totals, have falsified reports in order to avoid punishment (Zeng Yi 29). Consequently, this has led to underreporting of the number of births by as much as twenty-seven percent in 1992 (Zeng Yi 32). Moreover, compliance with the birth-quota system has been low. Of the 14,808 infants born between 1980-1988, only about half have been with a legal birth permit(Jiali Li 567). Of those born with a permit, eighty-eight percent were first children born into families (Jiali Li 567). Furthermore, out of the second children born, only eleven percent were authorized (Jiali Li 568). Lastly, people of rural communities, who depend on having larger families to help with the farms, have succeeded in finding ways around the birth-quota system (Hilali 13).

Social and political consequences. The Chinese government has also had to deal with political and social upheaval as a result of its strict policies. The United States, as well as many other countries, have publicly expressed their disapproval with Chinese leaders for their sterilization policies (Hilali 20). In addition, the Chinese citizens have retaliated with acts of violence related to the one child policy (Hilali 25). Finally, the cultural preference for sons has led to a large number of incidences of female infanticide (Hilali 21). As a result, the Chinese government has had to relax policies to include the "daughter-only-household" policy, which allows rural couples having a daughter first to be allowed to have a second child (Jiali Li 569).

Social and economic benefits. Over the last fifty years, China has raised the standards of living by keeping growth rates down. Access to natural resources have increased dramatically since 1980. According to the State Family Planning Commission, coverage in tap water has increased from eighty-four percent to ninety-four percent in the last fifteen years. Furthermore, coverage of natural gas has risen from sixteen percent to seventy-three percent. In addition, medical coverage has been extended to include birth insurance and workers compensation for mothers who follow China's birth policies (SFPC). In 1998, nineteen percent of China's population used this policy. Other benefits include increases in average life expectancy from thirty five years in 1949 to seventy years in 1996, and decreases in infant mortality rates from two hundred per one thousand to thirty three per one thousand (SFPC).

Future outcomes. Serious reforms are needed to ensure that China's population will not continue to grow. Better policies, more education, and urbanization could help China to reach population target goals. Since 1980, China has realized the importance of collaboration among agencies, and it has established the Population and Information Research Center (SFPC). This agency, along with others, is in charge of gathering information about population totals and helping the government to implement policies (SFPC). Projected growth of China's population is estimated to be around 1.5 billion by the year 2025 (P.R.B. 7). These figures will continue to rise, and the social and economic burdens will continue to plague everyone living in China.

[beauanderos]

This was interesting as well...

http://policy.audubon.org/sites/default ... ochure.pdf

[whatsnext]

Getting involved with the global elites plan to control everyone is not for me. I'll just wait for the global hilter command to start doing what they want, after their attempt to talk the majority into self enslavement fails(or will it?).

Let people live their lives and breed death unto themselves and let the dead bury the dead.

But the woman talked about desalinization like it is a bad thing, talk about something that should be invested in and developed.