So if there is 2.2 square miles for every living person on the Earth, how are we overpopulated?
BTW: Dessert and mountainous terrain have been removed from the equation.
51-55, M
Top | Newest First | Oldest First
VerbingNoun
As stated before, landmass is one thing but you have to remember. What can we do with that land mass? If we didn't have any desserts or mountains, great. But it takes more than 2.2 square miles to clothe and feed a vegetarian for a lifetime. What kind of textiles? Where will the house be? Where will the food grow? Then you need resources to build their homes even if simple.
calicuz · 51-55, M
Interesting. So the answer is not in simplifying the world?
VerbingNoun
IF humans were the only creatures on this planet and all of our goods came from another planet, then technically simplifying the world would be the answer.
But as we know, we have hills that snow, coastal ranges with storms, other animals, and so on.
But as we know, we have hills that snow, coastal ranges with storms, other animals, and so on.
Triscuitan
I think the concept of overpopulation does not equate to how much space we have on earth, but the resources that are being consumed. Also, you have to take into account every other living thing on this earth. To say 2.2 miles for every person....and where does everything else live? And did you also remove the sea from this equation?
calicuz · 51-55, M
Yes the sea was not in the equation, nor the poles. Only habitable land.
calicuz · 51-55, M
I think that is part of the problem. We have to kill off other species just to continue to make room for ourselves.
Xuan
Landmass to population isn't really the determining factor in overpopulation. Not all land is equally productive, and certainly isn't evenly distributed, and not all lifestyles are equally consumptive.
calicuz · 51-55, M
True, I like your answer.
Xuan
Ah, thanks. I usually try to be good on EP, lol.
TheOneyouwerewarnedabout
I find that hard to believe oO
Maybe if the desert mountains were in the equation
Maybe if the desert mountains were in the equation
calicuz · 51-55, M
No, but I was supposed to write "2.2 acres" per person. I'm not sure if that helps my argument though.... lol...
calicuz · 51-55, M
BTW: Now you know why I never ask questions.... LOL!!!!
shaggynz
Because there is enough in this world to satisfy man's needs ... not his wants.
calicuz · 51-55, M
Wow, good point, something no one else has brought up.
rozelli
both poles and ocean as well?
calicuz · 51-55, M
Dammit!!!! Now I have to redo the math.... lol... Good question though.... lol... :)
rozelli
just seems unlikely..there is alot of pretty open terrain but billions of peeps too...
calicuz · 51-55, M
Actually the equation is only habitable land, so the poles have been removed and the sea was never apart of it.
Unquestioned
Farmland, and the rich with their hundreds of acres.