Underwater Colonization = Win

[Tokzic]

One time in geography two grades ago, we were talking about overpopulation. My eyes wandered to the world map. There sure was a lot of blue on that map. Much more blue than brown. Then it occurred to me... couldn't we float homes? Or have a tunnel city underwater? It would be so awesome and space-conservey.

Underwater colonization is definitely awesome.

[Mindfields]

Populating the oceans would give us more time to plan for outer space. We still have a while to go until all the land is full, though.

[dontcareaboutmyid]

basically
eb's solution:
Lets have WW3

In all actuality, if we nuked africa, like all of it. Then we detox it all, and set it up with a buncha condominiums and improve on magtrain, we could have a really cool,"this continent for living, this for work, this for manufacturing, this is the brothel, ect ect

[GuidoHunter]

Tokzic, they already do in Europe. The Netherlands, I think maybe, where it's overpopulated they build on the riverbanks.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

[Reach]

Assuming there were more first world nations, we wouldn't even have to worry about overpopulation. The rate of natural increase here by births is tiny. Hell, places in europe have a rate of decrease XD ...All the people are coming from southern Asia lol (Africa contributes but only about 1/3 as much). Asia will house more than 60% of the world in 2050. If they were under control, the population wouldn't double for a very long time (over 1000 years), as developed nations populations stay relatively static outside of immigration.

Even at our current rate, it'll take atleast 100 years for our population to double. Populations will likely start to crest by 2100 anyway and increase will be slowed dramatically. Overpopulation isn't a real problem right now; destroying our planet is - which will happen first if we're not careful.

But yea, I've thought of underwater cities, or cities built on the water that also decend under the water many times before. Seems like a good way to exploit resources and also get a lot more area to keep people. Not that we shouldn't stick with space. We estimate living on the moon by 2018 and landing on mars by 2030...the solar system alone could probably support 10,000,000,000,000,000,000 people easily with it's resources.

[FluorescentArmy]

Its all China's fault. Them and there 1 billion citizens. We should kill china. Living in the sea would be cool. I could be one with the coral again.

[lord_carbo]

I blame rednecks for having 10 children and the stupid people Maddox talked about once in one of his articles. China isn't to blame, they have a 2 child rule--2 children have 2 children, so they don't overpopulate

[Reach]

Too bad that doesn't help much. They already have 1.2 billion people, the fact is they're still going to produce faster than they're wiped out at such a massive population. However, once they finally emerge as a first world country, their population will level off. But you have to remember immigrants populating the rest of the world. China alone could be looking at as much growth as 7-9 million people a year in the near future.

But atleast they're doing something. Africa and a lot of the other countries in southern asia are causing the big problems right now. India poses a big problem. You could be looking at nearly 60-70 years before they are finally able to stabalize their population, and by then they could increase it more than 700 million.

As for rednecks, XD. North america would be looking at a maximum of 1-2 million people a year. And that's mostly the immigrants.

Population control doesn't stop overpopulation, it only slows it slightly. How well developed a nation is determines how fast the population grows. Limiting to one child in a country that is mostly undeveloped doesn't do much good; they're still going to have that child.

[chickendude]

ok, here's the plan

first we figure out where the hell we're going to get energy since we're running out of resources

if we have too many people, we'll just nuke some country and have them nuke someone else and start WW3. Everyone will die and the world population will be controlled.

Or we could spread the plague 3rd millenia edition

[Reach]

War is useless and a waste of life. A population is always going to rebound unless we're pushed to the point of extinction. If you want to stop overpopulation, asia and africa have to develop. But yes, resources are a problem, which is why space is looking like a very good future for us.

The bird flu might lay a smack down on africa and southern asia if it hits human to human >.> Almost all of the deaths will be centered there. But this only hinders their development, they will rebound, so it's not like it's helping any.

[chickendude]

Lets dump an enormous solar panel in front of our entire planet

Or lets hook up a giant metal ring around our planet thats bolted to the ground somewhere

then rope up the metal ring to the moon, and stick a nuclear power plant there

I have crazy ideas, then the moon could have all our power and still somehow be connected

If we developed a teleport type of device, (sending people through wires n stuff) then we could easil.... ok I'm going to cut the star trek

OCEAN TREK
Omega, start the new sci fi show
OCEAN, THE FINAL FRONTIER BEFORE SPACE

[xObserveRx]

OCEAN TREK
Omega, start the new sci fi show
OCEAN, THE FINAL FRONTIER BEFORE SPACE

Actually, for most of ffr, a girl's private parts would be the final frontier... even after space.

[dontcareaboutmyid]

I would have to assume your mom's private parts are not a frontier to be traveled on yes?

Apparantly, there was this study that said soy sauce reduces sperm counts.

Who would like to call BS first?

[shortyrider]

Re: Underwater Colonization = Win

massacre is the only solution to overpopulating

[GuidoHunter]

Re: Underwater Colonization = Win

Dude, enough bumping of old CT topics. They die for a reason.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com