Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

RE: Why breed? Re: About the new idea!

Expand Messages
  • Brian A.
    The idea of refusing to have children isn t a new idea, granted. But it s the moral choice. Breeding more so that there will be a collapse is the immoral
    Message 1 of 18 , Apr 23, 2008
      The idea of refusing to have children isn't a new idea, granted.
      But it's the moral choice. Breeding more so that there will be a collapse is the immoral choice because it would lead to a greater amount of suffering for a greater number of individuals before it produces any desirable results.
      Extinction is the alternative to involuntary extinction, the outcome of the course we are on now. It wouldn't be necessary is the planet were not already overpopulated, the evidence of which includes record-high extinctions of non-human life, plagues among the overpopulated species (humans), and other less definable signs.
      After going back and reading carefully what you said, I came to the conclusion that you didn't say much of anything worth listening to. Maybe you should go back and read it yourself.


      Juan - k <wakko_86@...> wrote:
      no, I would not agree to do that, and it has NOTHING to do with what I wrote... It's like people ran out of new ideas... Read carefully what I wrote

      Are we really running out of better ideas??


      To: Why_breed@yahoogroups.comFrom: korhag@...: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 17:17:02 +0000Subject: Why breed? Re: About the new idea!




      Would you agree to...Burn tires to stop air pollution? Remove the catalytic converters ongas guzzlers to stop peak oil? Shoot people to stop careless gunownership? Pay extra taxes to stop tax increases? Cut down trees tostop deforestation? --- In Why_breed@yahoogroups.com, "wakko_86" wrote:>> I think that if we estimate somehow the number of people that die > each year versus the people that could born in order to not > overpopulate our planet (I mean, start being organized worldwide), > we could as someone said, not permit one children per couple but > more, it will indeed depend on stadistics.> > I DO NOT think human extinction would be a good idea, It's too much > radical IMO. It's like "I didn't come out with anything really > creative, so I think this is what we need". I've read a lot, and > seen a lot of documentaries that explain why we're doing this all > wrong, from global warming to overpopulation. A conclusion that I > made about this is that we all are not
      planning our future and we > are all thinking in ourselves, specially the most powerful nations > in the world.> > But if we REALLY WANT TO MAKE SOMETHNG DONE, like "Hey, we really > start a movement so that it WILL WORK", I find REALLY REALLY HARD > (impossible I would think) to make people agree to not breed, or to > stop having children knowing that since they were born society told > them that would be a nice idea.> > I dont care what VHEMT would say or come out with my idea, it's > simply logic, and you should try to think on something else. I agree > with the idea that we humans are destroying ourselves because of > overpopulation, but you are NOT going to convince the entire world > (not even the half) to do this, it's common sense.> > I backup the idea that beth_h8 said, and I quote something really > smart (the first smart quote that I read since I start hearing ideas > to erradicate overpopulation):> > > > > It's probably only slightly more realistic to get
      billions of> > > > people> > > > to act in concert to purposely breed to collapse for reasons of> > > > sustainability than to purposely drastically reduce breeding.> > I totally agree. I accept any critics, because I know there will be.>






      _________________________________________________________________
      Do more with your photos with Windows Live Photo Gallery.
      http://www.windowslive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_Wave2_photos_022008

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


      ------------------------------------

      VHEMT Volunteers and Supporters may subscribe to http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Voluntary_Human_Extinction

      Yahoo! Groups Links






      ---------------------------------
      Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Juan - k
      I m sorry about my English, not a native speaker, I ll try to do my best I have to disagree with you in one thing: It is NOT an immoral choice to breed. It s
      Message 2 of 18 , Apr 23, 2008
        I'm sorry about my English, not a native speaker, I'll try to do my best
        I have to disagree with you in one thing: It is NOT an immoral choice to breed. It's an immoral choice to not be conscious that breeding more than a certain number of children (a number that should be estimated first, in order to mantain a reasonable size of population around the world) would get overpopulation worse.

        The idea of human extinction is a way to say "hey! we are not intelligent enough to think about something that could stop overpopulation else than this!". It's like you have a serious disease, and your final choice is to kill yourself because it will (obviously) kill the disease, or like making an entire city blow up because there's a big infection that appeared there.

        Yes... Human Extinction is one solution, but to me, it's the most (I'm sorry, it's what I really feel) stupid thing that one smart guy should consider... Why? keep reading:

        Ok, I liked when you always say "It's voluntary". So, you're not binding everyone to do it. But sadly, to make it happen, every single person in this world should accept it. And that, my friend... its impossible.
        Let explain this with two situations, you meet one person at random and:

        (1)
        You: Hello! look I think we all human beings should get extinct because overpopulation is killing the world. it's a moral thing!
        The guy: What a freak....


        Second situation:
        (2)

        You: Hello! Look I think we should all start looking forward. We Human beings are killing the world! It's because of overpopulation! We should study this and get the number of children that we all should have in order to not let this happen... Schools should teach more ecology and morals... If we want to stay in this planet, we should take this serious!!!!!
        The guy: I think you're right, we should take this serious, how could we do this?...
        You: We could save energy, we could estimate the number of births.... (the plan continues)


        Stupidity (1) vs Intelligence (2)

        Excuse me but... Why do we got a brain??




        To: Why_breed@yahoogroups.comFrom: phelsumas@...: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 11:47:55 -0700Subject: RE: Why breed? Re: About the new idea!




        The idea of refusing to have children isn't a new idea, granted. But it's the moral choice. Breeding more so that there will be a collapse is the immoral choice because it would lead to a greater amount of suffering for a greater number of individuals before it produces any desirable results.Extinction is the alternative to involuntary extinction, the outcome of the course we are on now. It wouldn't be necessary is the planet were not already overpopulated, the evidence of which includes record-high extinctions of non-human life, plagues among the overpopulated species (humans), and other less definable signs.After going back and reading carefully what you said, I came to the conclusion that you didn't say much of anything worth listening to. Maybe you should go back and read it yourself.Juan - k <wakko_86@...> wrote: no, I would not agree to do that, and it has NOTHING to do with what I wrote... It's like people ran out of new ideas... Read carefully what I wroteAre we really running out of better ideas??To: Why_breed@yahoogroups.comFrom: korhag@...: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 17:17:02 +0000Subject: Why breed? Re: About the new idea!Would you agree to...Burn tires to stop air pollution? Remove the catalytic converters ongas guzzlers to stop peak oil? Shoot people to stop careless gunownership? Pay extra taxes to stop tax increases? Cut down trees tostop deforestation? --- In Why_breed@yahoogroups.com, "wakko_86" wrote:>> I think that if we estimate somehow the number of people that die > each year versus the people that could born in order to not > overpopulate our planet (I mean, start being organized worldwide), > we could as someone said, not permit one children per couple but > more, it will indeed depend on stadistics.> > I DO NOT think human extinction would be a good idea, It's too much > radical IMO. It's like "I didn't come out with anything really > creative, so I think this is what we need". I've read a lot, and > seen a lot of documentaries that explain why we're doing this all > wrong, from global warming to overpopulation. A conclusion that I > made about this is that we all are notplanning our future and we > are all thinking in ourselves, specially the most powerful nations > in the world.> > But if we REALLY WANT TO MAKE SOMETHNG DONE, like "Hey, we really > start a movement so that it WILL WORK", I find REALLY REALLY HARD > (impossible I would think) to make people agree to not breed, or to > stop having children knowing that since they were born society told > them that would be a nice idea.> > I dont care what VHEMT would say or come out with my idea, it's > simply logic, and you should try to think on something else. I agree > with the idea that we humans are destroying ourselves because of > overpopulation, but you are NOT going to convince the entire world > (not even the half) to do this, it's common sense.> > I backup the idea that beth_h8 said, and I quote something really > smart (the first smart quote that I read since I start hearing ideas > to erradicate overpopulation):> > > > > It's probably only slightly more realistic to getbillions of> > > > people> > > > to act in concert to purposely breed to collapse for reasons of> > > > sustainability than to purposely drastically reduce breeding.> > I totally agree. I accept any critics, because I know there will be.> __________________________________________________________Do more with your photos with Windows Live Photo Gallery.http://www.windowslive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_Wave2_photos_022008[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]------------------------------------VHEMT Volunteers and Supporters may subscribe to http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Voluntary_Human_ExtinctionYahoo! Groups Links---------------------------------Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






        _________________________________________________________________
        Blog your life in 3D with Windows Live Writer.
        http://www.windowslive.com/overview.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_Wave2_wl_writer_022008

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • aditmore@juno.com
        the problem is that your thoughtful number of children to solve overpopulation is about 0.0000007 children each, which is not a whole number and so cannot be
        Message 3 of 18 , Apr 24, 2008
          the problem is that your "thoughtful" number of children to solve overpopulation is about 0.0000007 children each, which is not a whole number and so cannot be achieved by any one individual. For the vast majority of individuals, that means no kids.



          I'm sorry about my English, not a native speaker, I'll try to do my best
          I have to disagree with you in one thing: It is NOT an immoral choice to breed. It's an immoral choice to not be conscious that breeding more than a certain number of children (a number that should be estimated first, in order to mantain a reasonable size of population around the world) would get overpopulation worse.

          The idea of human extinction is a way to say "hey! we are not intelligent enough to think about something that could stop overpopulation else than this!". It's like you have a serious disease, and your final choice is to kill yourself because it will (obviously) kill the disease, or like making an entire city blow up because there's a big infection that appeared there.

          Yes... Human Extinction is one solution, but to me, it's the most (I'm sorry, it's what I really feel) stupid thing that one smart guy should consider... Why? keep reading:

          Ok, I liked when you always say "It's voluntary". So, you're not binding everyone to do it. But sadly, to make it happen, every single person in this world should accept it. And that, my friend... its impossible.
          Let explain this with two situations, you meet one person at random and:

          (1)
          You: Hello! look I think we all human beings should get extinct because overpopulation is killing the world. it's a moral thing!
          The guy: What a freak....


          Second situation:
          (2)

          You: Hello! Look I think we should all start looking forward. We Human beings are killing the world! It's because of overpopulation! We should study this and get the number of children that we all should have in order to not let this happen... Schools should teach more ecology and morals... If we want to stay in this planet, we should take this serious!!!!!
          The guy: I think you're right, we should take this serious, how could we do this?...
          You: We could save energy, we could estimate the number of births.... (the plan continues)


          Stupidity (1) vs Intelligence (2)

          Excuse me but... Why do we got a brain??







          _____________________________________________________________
          Click for free information and quotes for interest only loans.
          http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2121/fc/Ioyw6i3mKu4BtiUi3onnSFO1GYsV8f3Zd2LXLRezIBpqlc3n48BDwp/


          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Juan - k
          So that means you already estimated the number... how clever... If you re number was estimated because of those moral reasons, you re wrong 0.0000007?
          Message 4 of 18 , Apr 24, 2008
            So that means you already estimated the number... how clever...
            If you're number was estimated because of those moral reasons, you're wrong
            0.0000007? 0.000000000000001? 0.03? Come on, Einstein. It's still stupid to say "let's get extinct". For the vast majority of individuals, that means stupidity.


            To: Why_breed@yahoogroups.comFrom: aditmore@...: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 13:49:06 +0000Subject: RE: Why breed? Re: About the new idea!




            the problem is that your "thoughtful" number of children to solve overpopulation is about 0.0000007 children each, which is not a whole number and so cannot be achieved by any one individual. For the vast majority of individuals, that means no kids.I'm sorry about my English, not a native speaker, I'll try to do my best I have to disagree with you in one thing: It is NOT an immoral choice to breed. It's an immoral choice to not be conscious that breeding more than a certain number of children (a number that should be estimated first, in order to mantain a reasonable size of population around the world) would get overpopulation worse.The idea of human extinction is a way to say "hey! we are not intelligent enough to think about something that could stop overpopulation else than this!". It's like you have a serious disease, and your final choice is to kill yourself because it will (obviously) kill the disease, or like making an entire city blow up because there's a big infection that appeared there.Yes... Human Extinction is one solution, but to me, it's the most (I'm sorry, it's what I really feel) stupid thing that one smart guy should consider... Why? keep reading:Ok, I liked when you always say "It's voluntary". So, you're not binding everyone to do it. But sadly, to make it happen, every single person in this world should accept it. And that, my friend... its impossible.Let explain this with two situations, you meet one person at random and:(1)You: Hello! look I think we all human beings should get extinct because overpopulation is killing the world. it's a moral thing!The guy: What a freak....Second situation:(2)You: Hello! Look I think we should all start looking forward. We Human beings are killing the world! It's because of overpopulation! We should study this and get the number of children that we all should have in order to not let this happen... Schools should teach more ecology and morals... If we want to stay in this planet, we should take this serious!!!!!The guy: I think you're right, we should take this serious, how could we do this?...You: We could save energy, we could estimate the number of births.... (the plan continues)Stupidity (1) vs Intelligence (2)Excuse me but... Why do we got a brain??__________________________________________________________Click for free information and quotes for interest only loans.http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2121/fc/Ioyw6i3mKu4BtiUi3onnSFO1GYsV8f3Zd2LXLRezIBpqlc3n48BDwp/%5bNon-text portions of this message have been removed]






            _________________________________________________________________
            Get your fix of news, sports, entertainment and more on MSN Mobile
            http://www.msnmobilefix.com/Default.aspx

            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • korhag
            Stupidity is taking the same action over and over expecting a different result. VHEMT is an entirely new untried approach which by nature should have an
            Message 5 of 18 , Apr 24, 2008
              Stupidity is taking the same action over and over expecting a
              different result. VHEMT is an entirely new untried approach which by
              nature should have an entirely different result.

              6 billion people. Soon to be 7 billion people. Before we even reach 7
              billion, the demand is greater then the supply in just about every
              commodity. We're past peak oil. Not just energy supply, but such
              basics as clean water and grains. With such demands there shouldn't be
              any unemployment anywhere, yet our efficient management of production
              has made it so. With such exponential population growth, we have to
              deal with the excessive waste which pollutes the air, oceans and land
              masses and threatens all life.

              So what is a sustainable human population? Pick a number. The smaller
              that number, the less threat we are to the world and to ourselves.
              That's obvious.

              --- In Why_breed@yahoogroups.com, Juan - k <wakko_86@...> wrote:
              >
              >
              > So that means you already estimated the number... how clever...
              > If you're number was estimated because of those moral reasons,
              you're wrong
              > 0.0000007? 0.000000000000001? 0.03? Come on, Einstein. It's still
              stupid to say "let's get extinct". For the vast majority of
              individuals, that means stupidity.
              >
              >
              > To: Why_breed@...: aditmore@...: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 13:49:06
              +0000Subject: RE: Why breed? Re: About the new idea!
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > the problem is that your "thoughtful" number of children to solve
              overpopulation is about 0.0000007 children each, which is not a whole
              number and so cannot be achieved by any one individual. For the vast
              majority of individuals, that means no kids.I'm sorry about my
              English, not a native speaker, I'll try to do my best I have to
              disagree with you in one thing: It is NOT an immoral choice to breed.
              It's an immoral choice to not be conscious that breeding more than a
              certain number of children (a number that should be estimated first,
              in order to mantain a reasonable size of population around the world)
              would get overpopulation worse.The idea of human extinction is a way
              to say "hey! we are not intelligent enough to think about something
              that could stop overpopulation else than this!". It's like you have a
              serious disease, and your final choice is to kill yourself because it
              will (obviously) kill the disease, or like making an entire city blow
              up because there's a big infection that appeared there.Yes... Human
              Extinction is one solution, but to me, it's the most (I'm sorry, it's
              what I really feel) stupid thing that one smart guy should consider...
              Why? keep reading:Ok, I liked when you always say "It's voluntary".
              So, you're not binding everyone to do it. But sadly, to make it
              happen, every single person in this world should accept it. And that,
              my friend... its impossible.Let explain this with two situations, you
              meet one person at random and:(1)You: Hello! look I think we all human
              beings should get extinct because overpopulation is killing the world.
              it's a moral thing!The guy: What a freak....Second situation:(2)You:
              Hello! Look I think we should all start looking forward. We Human
              beings are killing the world! It's because of overpopulation! We
              should study this and get the number of children that we all should
              have in order to not let this happen... Schools should teach more
              ecology and morals... If we want to stay in this planet, we should
              take this serious!!!!!The guy: I think you're right, we should take
              this serious, how could we do this?...You: We could save energy, we
              could estimate the number of births.... (the plan continues)Stupidity
              (1) vs Intelligence (2)Excuse me but... Why do we got a
              brain??__________________________________________________________Click
              for free information and quotes for interest only
              loans.http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2121/fc/Ioyw6i3mKu4BtiUi3onnSFO1GYsV8f3Zd2LXLRezIBpqlc3n48BDwp/%5bNon-text
              portions of this message have been removed]
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > _________________________________________________________________
              > Get your fix of news, sports, entertainment and more on MSN Mobile
              > http://www.msnmobilefix.com/Default.aspx
              >
              > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              >
            • Juan - k
              I have to congratulate you, because even if you are part of that movement you made something that I wanted: You posted different options korhag wrote: Not
              Message 6 of 18 , Apr 24, 2008
                I have to congratulate you, because even if you are part of that movement you made something that I wanted: You posted different options

                korhag wrote: "Not just energy supply, but such basics as clean water and grains"

                There's a time in our lives where we should think about what we are doing. Same thing for all we humans who live in this planet. But it's about looking for a solution, and not the solution that you all say (human extinction)

                I really like Al Gore's movie because he not only said what's going on and that what is going on is wrong... But he also said a lot of things that could help us fixing the problem. He didn't say "let's just die all human beings, let's stop breeding because we should".

                Instead, we should all think about something that would save our species, because that's what species do: they evolve in order to live longer in this planet. We should evolve our mind, make a further step and think that we should CHANGE a lot of things.

                And yes, my dear friends... It's still time to fix it up

                In addition to this, I would like to say that it's actually OBVIOUS that you should convince everyone in this planet to voluntary stop breeding. And that isn't possible. It's far more (impossible) difficult to make that happen than to change people's mind about what they're doing... Since the 60's people got conscience of what's going on in the planet, that's why ecologic movements started, and I really like those movements

                I support movements that give an intelligent way to keep safe our lives without thinking about such radical ideas

                As I said before, the solution to kill a plague isn't killing every single person in that area, but looking for a solution that would keep them alive


                To: Why_breed@yahoogroups.comFrom: korhag@...: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 17:19:42 +0000Subject: Why breed? Re: About the new idea!




                Stupidity is taking the same action over and over expecting adifferent result. VHEMT is an entirely new untried approach which bynature should have an entirely different result.6 billion people. Soon to be 7 billion people. Before we even reach 7billion, the demand is greater then the supply in just about everycommodity. We're past peak oil. Not just energy supply, but suchbasics as clean water and grains. With such demands there shouldn't beany unemployment anywhere, yet our efficient management of productionhas made it so. With such exponential population growth, we have todeal with the excessive waste which pollutes the air, oceans and landmasses and threatens all life.So what is a sustainable human population? Pick a number. The smallerthat number, the less threat we are to the world and to ourselves.That's obvious.--- In Why_breed@yahoogroups.com, Juan - k <wakko_86@...> wrote:>> > So that means you already estimated the number... how clever...> If you're number was estimated because of those moral reasons,you're wrong> 0.0000007? 0.000000000000001? 0.03? Come on, Einstein. It's stillstupid to say "let's get extinct". For the vast majority ofindividuals, that means stupidity.> > > To: Why_breed@...: aditmore@...: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 13:49:06+0000Subject: RE: Why breed? Re: About the new idea!> > > > > the problem is that your "thoughtful" number of children to solveoverpopulation is about 0.0000007 children each, which is not a wholenumber and so cannot be achieved by any one individual. For the vastmajority of individuals, that means no kids.I'm sorry about myEnglish, not a native speaker, I'll try to do my best I have todisagree with you in one thing: It is NOT an immoral choice to breed.It's an immoral choice to not be conscious that breeding more than acertain number of children (a number that should be estimated first,in order to mantain a reasonable size of population around the world)would get overpopulation worse.The idea of human extinction is a wayto say "hey! we are not intelligent enough to think about somethingthat could stop overpopulation else than this!". It's like you have aserious disease, and your final choice is to kill yourself because itwill (obviously) kill the disease, or like making an entire city blowup because there's a big infection that appeared there.Yes... HumanExtinction is one solution, but to me, it's the most (I'm sorry, it'swhat I really feel) stupid thing that one smart guy should consider...Why? keep reading:Ok, I liked when you always say "It's voluntary".So, you're not binding everyone to do it. But sadly, to make ithappen, every single person in this world should accept it. And that,my friend... its impossible.Let explain this with two situations, youmeet one person at random and:(1)You: Hello! look I think we all humanbeings should get extinct because overpopulation is killing the world.it's a moral thing!The guy: What a freak....Second situation:(2)You:Hello! Look I think we should all start looking forward. We Humanbeings are killing the world! It's because of overpopulation! Weshould study this and get the number of children that we all shouldhave in order to not let this happen... Schools should teach moreecology and morals... If we want to stay in this planet, we shouldtake this serious!!!!!The guy: I think you're right, we should takethis serious, how could we do this?...You: We could save energy, wecould estimate the number of births.... (the plan continues)Stupidity(1) vs Intelligence (2)Excuse me but... Why do we got abrain??__________________________________________________________Clickfor free information and quotes for interest onlyloans.http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2121/fc/Ioyw6i3mKu4BtiUi3onnSFO1GYsV8f3Zd2LXLRezIBpqlc3n48BDwp/%5bNon-textportions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > __________________________________________________________> Get your fix of news, sports, entertainment and more on MSN Mobile> http://www.msnmobilefix.com/Default.aspx> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]>






                _________________________________________________________________
                Send funny voice messages packed with tidbits from MSN. Everyone wants to be ready.
                http://www.noonewantstolookdumb.com?OCID=T001MSN54N1613A

                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • korhag
                You support ecologic movements, yet you call VHEMT radical. Trouble with ecological solutions is they look to treat the symptoms rather then the disease. With
                Message 7 of 18 , Apr 24, 2008
                  You support ecologic movements, yet you call VHEMT radical. Trouble
                  with ecological solutions is they look to treat the symptoms rather
                  then the disease.

                  With the symptom of lack of clean water, the problem isn't a single
                  source. It's not one factory dumping raw sewage, or a hundred. Nor is
                  it millions of city dwellers doing what they do every day. It's the
                  entire population of people doing what they do.

                  The trouble with solving the identified problems, few have the guts to
                  talk about the elephant in the room. And fewer still want to make the
                  sacrifices required.

                  Sacrifice is the greatest glory. Switching to a hybrid isn't much of a
                  sacrifice, or a solution. Neither is composting your scraps. But
                  choosing not to breed is genuinely not further contributing to the
                  problem.


                  --- In Why_breed@yahoogroups.com, Juan - k <wakko_86@...> wrote:
                  >
                  >
                  > I have to congratulate you, because even if you are part of that
                  movement you made something that I wanted: You posted different options
                  >
                  > korhag wrote: "Not just energy supply, but such basics as clean
                  water and grains"
                  >
                  > There's a time in our lives where we should think about what we are
                  doing. Same thing for all we humans who live in this planet. But it's
                  about looking for a solution, and not the solution that you all say
                  (human extinction)
                  >
                  > I really like Al Gore's movie because he not only said what's going
                  on and that what is going on is wrong... But he also said a lot of
                  things that could help us fixing the problem. He didn't say "let's
                  just die all human beings, let's stop breeding because we should".
                  >
                  > Instead, we should all think about something that would save our
                  species, because that's what species do: they evolve in order to live
                  longer in this planet. We should evolve our mind, make a further step
                  and think that we should CHANGE a lot of things.
                  >
                  > And yes, my dear friends... It's still time to fix it up
                  >
                  > In addition to this, I would like to say that it's actually OBVIOUS
                  that you should convince everyone in this planet to voluntary stop
                  breeding. And that isn't possible. It's far more (impossible)
                  difficult to make that happen than to change people's mind about what
                  they're doing... Since the 60's people got conscience of what's going
                  on in the planet, that's why ecologic movements started, and I really
                  like those movements
                  >
                  > I support movements that give an intelligent way to keep safe our
                  lives without thinking about such radical ideas
                  >
                  > As I said before, the solution to kill a plague isn't killing every
                  single person in that area, but looking for a solution that would keep
                  them alive
                  >
                  >
                  > To: Why_breed@...: korhag@...: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 17:19:42
                  +0000Subject: Why breed? Re: About the new idea!
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Stupidity is taking the same action over and over expecting
                  adifferent result. VHEMT is an entirely new untried approach which
                  bynature should have an entirely different result.6 billion people.
                  Soon to be 7 billion people. Before we even reach 7billion, the demand
                  is greater then the supply in just about everycommodity. We're past
                  peak oil. Not just energy supply, but suchbasics as clean water and
                  grains. With such demands there shouldn't beany unemployment anywhere,
                  yet our efficient management of productionhas made it so. With such
                  exponential population growth, we have todeal with the excessive waste
                  which pollutes the air, oceans and landmasses and threatens all
                  life.So what is a sustainable human population? Pick a number. The
                  smallerthat number, the less threat we are to the world and to
                  ourselves.That's obvious.--- In Why_breed@yahoogroups.com, Juan - k
                  <wakko_86@> wrote:>> > So that means you already estimated the
                  number... how clever...> If you're number was estimated because of
                  those moral reasons,you're wrong> 0.0000007? 0.000000000000001? 0.03?
                  Come on, Einstein. It's stillstupid to say "let's get extinct". For
                  the vast majority ofindividuals, that means stupidity.> > > To:
                  Why_breed@: aditmore@: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 13:49:06+0000Subject: RE: Why
                  breed? Re: About the new idea!> > > > > the problem is that your
                  "thoughtful" number of children to solveoverpopulation is about
                  0.0000007 children each, which is not a wholenumber and so cannot be
                  achieved by any one individual. For the vastmajority of individuals,
                  that means no kids.I'm sorry about myEnglish, not a native speaker,
                  I'll try to do my best I have todisagree with you in one thing: It is
                  NOT an immoral choice to breed.It's an immoral choice to not be
                  conscious that breeding more than acertain number of children (a
                  number that should be estimated first,in order to mantain a reasonable
                  size of population around the world)would get overpopulation worse.The
                  idea of human extinction is a wayto say "hey! we are not intelligent
                  enough to think about somethingthat could stop overpopulation else
                  than this!". It's like you have aserious disease, and your final
                  choice is to kill yourself because itwill (obviously) kill the
                  disease, or like making an entire city blowup because there's a big
                  infection that appeared there.Yes... HumanExtinction is one solution,
                  but to me, it's the most (I'm sorry, it'swhat I really feel) stupid
                  thing that one smart guy should consider...Why? keep reading:Ok, I
                  liked when you always say "It's voluntary".So, you're not binding
                  everyone to do it. But sadly, to make ithappen, every single person in
                  this world should accept it. And that,my friend... its impossible.Let
                  explain this with two situations, youmeet one person at random
                  and:(1)You: Hello! look I think we all humanbeings should get extinct
                  because overpopulation is killing the world.it's a moral thing!The
                  guy: What a freak....Second situation:(2)You:Hello! Look I think we
                  should all start looking forward. We Humanbeings are killing the
                  world! It's because of overpopulation! Weshould study this and get the
                  number of children that we all shouldhave in order to not let this
                  happen... Schools should teach moreecology and morals... If we want to
                  stay in this planet, we shouldtake this serious!!!!!The guy: I think
                  you're right, we should takethis serious, how could we do this?...You:
                  We could save energy, wecould estimate the number of births.... (the
                  plan continues)Stupidity(1) vs Intelligence (2)Excuse me but... Why do
                  we got
                  abrain??__________________________________________________________Clickfor
                  free information and quotes for interest
                  onlyloans.http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2121/fc/Ioyw6i3mKu4BtiUi3onnSFO1GYsV8f3Zd2LXLRezIBpqlc3n48BDwp/%5bNon-textportions
                  of this message have been removed] > > > > > > >
                  __________________________________________________________> Get your
                  fix of news, sports, entertainment and more on MSN Mobile>
                  http://www.msnmobilefix.com/Default.aspx> > [Non-text portions of this
                  message have been removed]>
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > _________________________________________________________________
                  > Send funny voice messages packed with tidbits from MSN. Everyone
                  wants to be ready.
                  > http://www.noonewantstolookdumb.com?OCID=T001MSN54N1613A
                  >
                  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  >
                • Juan - k
                  As I said, letting us human beings get extinct is one solution, but quite a radical solution What I meant to say is that I support movements that give
                  Message 8 of 18 , Apr 24, 2008
                    As I said, letting us human beings get extinct is one solution, but quite a radical solution

                    What I meant to say is that I support movements that give solutions that include an alternative way, a change, something smart that can save life, instead of letting it die forever. That's why I wrote about Al Gore: because he gave solutions to overpopulation and global warming (and NONE of them said let's get extinct)

                    We are not looking for glory, we are looking for survival

                    Even a bigger glory than sacrifice is knowing that you are part of the people that contributed to save the world with humans still living. WOW! what a glory you stand with your kids and you can say "hey, I'm part of the people who made it possible to breed you and save the planet at the same time, we only needed to think hard"

                    I would be proud of someone who comes and says "hey, I found people dying, I didn't know what to do, so I looked for help and now they are ok", and not of someone who says "hey, I found people dying, but I didn't know what to do, so I let them die"

                    It's simple, you get glory for doing something hard that maximizes the better (not letting humans get extinct). Sacrifice=glory is an old cliche, thank God I dont like cliches.
                    Like someone said in one youtube thread: "Well, it seems that we will not have to worry about these people breeding at all (speaking about overpopulation)"

                    It's quite a radical option, but it doesn't cut the mustard



                    To: Why_breed@yahoogroups.comFrom: korhag@...: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 03:16:36 +0000Subject: Why breed? Re: About the new idea!




                    You support ecologic movements, yet you call VHEMT radical. Troublewith ecological solutions is they look to treat the symptoms ratherthen the disease. With the symptom of lack of clean water, the problem isn't a singlesource. It's not one factory dumping raw sewage, or a hundred. Nor isit millions of city dwellers doing what they do every day. It's theentire population of people doing what they do. The trouble with solving the identified problems, few have the guts totalk about the elephant in the room. And fewer still want to make thesacrifices required.Sacrifice is the greatest glory. Switching to a hybrid isn't much of asacrifice, or a solution. Neither is composting your scraps. Butchoosing not to breed is genuinely not further contributing to theproblem.--- In Why_breed@yahoogroups.com, Juan - k <wakko_86@...> wrote:>> > I have to congratulate you, because even if you are part of thatmovement you made something that I wanted: You posted different options> > korhag wrote: "Not just energy supply, but such basics as cleanwater and grains"> > There's a time in our lives where we should think about what we aredoing. Same thing for all we humans who live in this planet. But it'sabout looking for a solution, and not the solution that you all say(human extinction)> > I really like Al Gore's movie because he not only said what's goingon and that what is going on is wrong... But he also said a lot ofthings that could help us fixing the problem. He didn't say "let'sjust die all human beings, let's stop breeding because we should".> > Instead, we should all think about something that would save ourspecies, because that's what species do: they evolve in order to livelonger in this planet. We should evolve our mind, make a further stepand think that we should CHANGE a lot of things.> > And yes, my dear friends... It's still time to fix it up> > In addition to this, I would like to say that it's actually OBVIOUSthat you should convince everyone in this planet to voluntary stopbreeding. And that isn't possible. It's far more (impossible)difficult to make that happen than to change people's mind about whatthey're doing... Since the 60's people got conscience of what's goingon in the planet, that's why ecologic movements started, and I reallylike those movements> > I support movements that give an intelligent way to keep safe ourlives without thinking about such radical ideas> > As I said before, the solution to kill a plague isn't killing everysingle person in that area, but looking for a solution that would keepthem alive> > > To: Why_breed@...: korhag@...: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 17:19:42+0000Subject: Why breed? Re: About the new idea!> > > > > Stupidity is taking the same action over and over expectingadifferent result. VHEMT is an entirely new untried approach whichbynature should have an entirely different result.6 billion people.Soon to be 7 billion people. Before we even reach 7billion, the demandis greater then the supply in just about everycommodity. We're pastpeak oil. Not just energy supply, but suchbasics as clean water andgrains. With such demands there shouldn't beany unemployment anywhere,yet our efficient management of productionhas made it so. With suchexponential population growth, we have todeal with the excessive wastewhich pollutes the air, oceans and landmasses and threatens alllife.So what is a sustainable human population? Pick a number. Thesmallerthat number, the less threat we are to the world and toourselves.That's obvious.--- In Why_breed@yahoogroups.com, Juan - k<wakko_86@> wrote:>> > So that means you already estimated thenumber... how clever...> If you're number was estimated because ofthose moral reasons,you're wrong> 0.0000007? 0.000000000000001? 0.03?Come on, Einstein. It's stillstupid to say "let's get extinct". Forthe vast majority ofindividuals, that means stupidity.> > > To:Why_breed@: aditmore@: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 13:49:06+0000Subject: RE: Whybreed? Re: About the new idea!> > > > > the problem is that your"thoughtful" number of children to solveoverpopulation is about0.0000007 children each, which is not a wholenumber and so cannot beachieved by any one individual. For the vastmajority of individuals,that means no kids.I'm sorry about myEnglish, not a native speaker,I'll try to do my best I have todisagree with you in one thing: It isNOT an immoral choice to breed.It's an immoral choice to not beconscious that breeding more than acertain number of children (anumber that should be estimated first,in order to mantain a reasonablesize of population around the world)would get overpopulation worse.Theidea of human extinction is a wayto say "hey! we are not intelligentenough to think about somethingthat could stop overpopulation elsethan this!". It's like you have aserious disease, and your finalchoice is to kill yourself because itwill (obviously) kill thedisease, or like making an entire city blowup because there's a biginfection that appeared there.Yes... HumanExtinction is one solution,but to me, it's the most (I'm sorry, it'swhat I really feel) stupidthing that one smart guy should consider...Why? keep reading:Ok, Iliked when you always say "It's voluntary".So, you're not bindingeveryone to do it. But sadly, to make ithappen, every single person inthis world should accept it. And that,my friend... its impossible.Letexplain this with two situations, youmeet one person at randomand:(1)You: Hello! look I think we all humanbeings should get extinctbecause overpopulation is killing the world.it's a moral thing!Theguy: What a freak....Second situation:(2)You:Hello! Look I think weshould all start looking forward. We Humanbeings are killing theworld! It's because of overpopulation! Weshould study this and get thenumber of children that we all shouldhave in order to not let thishappen... Schools should teach moreecology and morals... If we want tostay in this planet, we shouldtake this serious!!!!!The guy: I thinkyou're right, we should takethis serious, how could we do this?...You:We could save energy, wecould estimate the number of births.... (theplan continues)Stupidity(1) vs Intelligence (2)Excuse me but... Why dowe gotabrain??__________________________________________________________Clickforfree information and quotes for interestonlyloans.http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2121/fc/Ioyw6i3mKu4BtiUi3onnSFO1GYsV8f3Zd2LXLRezIBpqlc3n48BDwp/%5bNon-textportionsof this message have been removed] > > > > > > >__________________________________________________________> Get yourfix of news, sports, entertainment and more on MSN Mobile>http://www.msnmobilefix.com/Default.aspx> > [Non-text portions of thismessage have been removed]> > > > > > > > __________________________________________________________> Send funny voice messages packed with tidbits from MSN. Everyonewants to be ready.> http://www.noonewantstolookdumb.com?OCID=T001MSN54N1613A> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]>






                    _________________________________________________________________
                    Get your fix of news, sports, entertainment and more on MSN Mobile
                    http://www.msnmobilefix.com/Default.aspx

                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • korhag
                    Cake and eat it too? To what extent can we breed? Even with 6billion there s still wide open spaces. 60billion? 600billion? 6trillion? We can t possibly have
                    Message 9 of 18 , Apr 25, 2008
                      Cake and eat it too? To what extent can we breed? Even with 6billion
                      there's still wide open spaces. 60billion? 600billion? 6trillion? We
                      can't possibly have infinite growth. With the human creature, there's
                      none but ourselves to cull the heard.

                      What solution? If everyone pollutes half as much but the population
                      doubles, then there is no net gain. The population will double. That's
                      not speculation. Cutting emission by more then half is unlikely.

                      Unfortunately the path we're heading on is persistent. The ability to
                      pollute to the extent where we change the global climate affects all
                      life, not just human. And pollution is just part of the problem we create.

                      I don't think anyone here seriously expects to "not-breed" ourselves
                      to the point of complete extinction. I do believe that purposeful
                      non-breeding is helping rather then impeding. Where ignoring the
                      problem can only be detrimental.



                      --- In Why_breed@yahoogroups.com, Juan - k <wakko_86@...> wrote:
                      >
                      >
                      > As I said, letting us human beings get extinct is one solution, but
                      quite a radical solution
                      >
                      > What I meant to say is that I support movements that give solutions
                      that include an alternative way, a change, something smart that can
                      save life, instead of letting it die forever. That's why I wrote about
                      Al Gore: because he gave solutions to overpopulation and global
                      warming (and NONE of them said let's get extinct)
                      >
                      > We are not looking for glory, we are looking for survival
                      >
                      > Even a bigger glory than sacrifice is knowing that you are part of
                      the people that contributed to save the world with humans still
                      living. WOW! what a glory you stand with your kids and you can say
                      "hey, I'm part of the people who made it possible to breed you and
                      save the planet at the same time, we only needed to think hard"
                      >
                      > I would be proud of someone who comes and says "hey, I found people
                      dying, I didn't know what to do, so I looked for help and now they are
                      ok", and not of someone who says "hey, I found people dying, but I
                      didn't know what to do, so I let them die"
                      >
                      > It's simple, you get glory for doing something hard that maximizes
                      the better (not letting humans get extinct). Sacrifice=glory is an old
                      cliche, thank God I dont like cliches.
                      > Like someone said in one youtube thread: "Well, it seems that we
                      will not have to worry about these people breeding at all (speaking
                      about overpopulation)"
                      >
                      > It's quite a radical option, but it doesn't cut the mustard
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > To: Why_breed@...: korhag@...: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 03:16:36
                      +0000Subject: Why breed? Re: About the new idea!
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > You support ecologic movements, yet you call VHEMT radical.
                      Troublewith ecological solutions is they look to treat the symptoms
                      ratherthen the disease. With the symptom of lack of clean water, the
                      problem isn't a singlesource. It's not one factory dumping raw sewage,
                      or a hundred. Nor isit millions of city dwellers doing what they do
                      every day. It's theentire population of people doing what they do. The
                      trouble with solving the identified problems, few have the guts totalk
                      about the elephant in the room. And fewer still want to make
                      thesacrifices required.Sacrifice is the greatest glory. Switching to a
                      hybrid isn't much of asacrifice, or a solution. Neither is composting
                      your scraps. Butchoosing not to breed is genuinely not further
                      contributing to theproblem.--- In Why_breed@yahoogroups.com, Juan - k
                      <wakko_86@> wrote:>> > I have to congratulate you, because even if you
                      are part of thatmovement you made something that I wanted: You posted
                      different options> > korhag wrote: "Not just energy supply, but such
                      basics as cleanwater and grains"> > There's a time in our lives where
                      we should think about what we aredoing. Same thing for all we humans
                      who live in this planet. But it'sabout looking for a solution, and not
                      the solution that you all say(human extinction)> > I really like Al
                      Gore's movie because he not only said what's goingon and that what is
                      going on is wrong... But he also said a lot ofthings that could help
                      us fixing the problem. He didn't say "let'sjust die all human beings,
                      let's stop breeding because we should".> > Instead, we should all
                      think about something that would save ourspecies, because that's what
                      species do: they evolve in order to livelonger in this planet. We
                      should evolve our mind, make a further stepand think that we should
                      CHANGE a lot of things.> > And yes, my dear friends... It's still time
                      to fix it up> > In addition to this, I would like to say that it's
                      actually OBVIOUSthat you should convince everyone in this planet to
                      voluntary stopbreeding. And that isn't possible. It's far more
                      (impossible)difficult to make that happen than to change people's mind
                      about whatthey're doing... Since the 60's people got conscience of
                      what's goingon in the planet, that's why ecologic movements started,
                      and I reallylike those movements> > I support movements that give an
                      intelligent way to keep safe ourlives without thinking about such
                      radical ideas> > As I said before, the solution to kill a plague isn't
                      killing everysingle person in that area, but looking for a solution
                      that would keepthem alive> > > To: Why_breed@: korhag@: Thu, 24 Apr
                      2008 17:19:42+0000Subject: Why breed? Re: About the new idea!> > > > >
                      Stupidity is taking the same action over and over expectingadifferent
                      result. VHEMT is an entirely new untried approach whichbynature should
                      have an entirely different result.6 billion people.Soon to be 7
                      billion people. Before we even reach 7billion, the demandis greater
                      then the supply in just about everycommodity. We're pastpeak oil. Not
                      just energy supply, but suchbasics as clean water andgrains. With such
                      demands there shouldn't beany unemployment anywhere,yet our efficient
                      management of productionhas made it so. With suchexponential
                      population growth, we have todeal with the excessive wastewhich
                      pollutes the air, oceans and landmasses and threatens alllife.So what
                      is a sustainable human population? Pick a number. Thesmallerthat
                      number, the less threat we are to the world and toourselves.That's
                      obvious.--- In Why_breed@yahoogroups.com, Juan - k<wakko_86@> wrote:>>
                      > So that means you already estimated thenumber... how clever...> If
                      you're number was estimated because ofthose moral reasons,you're
                      wrong> 0.0000007? 0.000000000000001? 0.03?Come on, Einstein. It's
                      stillstupid to say "let's get extinct". Forthe vast majority
                      ofindividuals, that means stupidity.> > > To:Why_breed@: aditmore@:
                      Thu, 24 Apr 2008 13:49:06+0000Subject: RE: Whybreed? Re: About the new
                      idea!> > > > > the problem is that your"thoughtful" number of children
                      to solveoverpopulation is about0.0000007 children each, which is not a
                      wholenumber and so cannot beachieved by any one individual. For the
                      vastmajority of individuals,that means no kids.I'm sorry about
                      myEnglish, not a native speaker,I'll try to do my best I have
                      todisagree with you in one thing: It isNOT an immoral choice to
                      breed.It's an immoral choice to not beconscious that breeding more
                      than acertain number of children (anumber that should be estimated
                      first,in order to mantain a reasonablesize of population around the
                      world)would get overpopulation worse.Theidea of human extinction is a
                      wayto say "hey! we are not intelligentenough to think about
                      somethingthat could stop overpopulation elsethan this!". It's like you
                      have aserious disease, and your finalchoice is to kill yourself
                      because itwill (obviously) kill thedisease, or like making an entire
                      city blowup because there's a biginfection that appeared there.Yes...
                      HumanExtinction is one solution,but to me, it's the most (I'm sorry,
                      it'swhat I really feel) stupidthing that one smart guy should
                      consider...Why? keep reading:Ok, Iliked when you always say "It's
                      voluntary".So, you're not bindingeveryone to do it. But sadly, to make
                      ithappen, every single person inthis world should accept it. And
                      that,my friend... its impossible.Letexplain this with two situations,
                      youmeet one person at randomand:(1)You: Hello! look I think we all
                      humanbeings should get extinctbecause overpopulation is killing the
                      world.it's a moral thing!Theguy: What a freak....Second
                      situation:(2)You:Hello! Look I think weshould all start looking
                      forward. We Humanbeings are killing theworld! It's because of
                      overpopulation! Weshould study this and get thenumber of children that
                      we all shouldhave in order to not let thishappen... Schools should
                      teach moreecology and morals... If we want tostay in this planet, we
                      shouldtake this serious!!!!!The guy: I thinkyou're right, we should
                      takethis serious, how could we do this?...You:We could save energy,
                      wecould estimate the number of births.... (theplan
                      continues)Stupidity(1) vs Intelligence (2)Excuse me but... Why dowe
                      gotabrain??__________________________________________________________Clickforfree
                      information and quotes for
                      interestonlyloans.http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2121/fc/Ioyw6i3mKu4BtiUi3onnSFO1GYsV8f3Zd2LXLRezIBpqlc3n48BDwp/%5bNon-textportionsof
                      this message have been removed] > > > > > >
                      >__________________________________________________________> Get
                      yourfix of news, sports, entertainment and more on MSN
                      Mobile>http://www.msnmobilefix.com/Default.aspx> > [Non-text portions
                      of thismessage have been removed]> > > > > > > >
                      __________________________________________________________> Send funny
                      voice messages packed with tidbits from MSN. Everyonewants to be
                      ready.> http://www.noonewantstolookdumb.com?OCID=T001MSN54N1613A> >
                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]>
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > _________________________________________________________________
                      > Get your fix of news, sports, entertainment and more on MSN Mobile
                      > http://www.msnmobilefix.com/Default.aspx
                      >
                      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      >
                    • beth_h8
                      Ultimately, it s not what WE want that is what s going to happen, but what the majority want to do. Lots of people have severe myopia involving what the
                      Message 10 of 18 , Apr 28, 2008
                        Ultimately, it's not what WE want that is what's going to happen, but
                        what the majority want to do.

                        Lots of people have severe myopia involving what the "future" is going
                        to be. Lots of people still think that there is a plentiful amount of
                        world resources, just some sort of oligarchy or conspiracy is keeping
                        it from being distributed "properly". They have lots of children "to
                        bring about a (better) future". It's true though: We're past peak oil,
                        and we have no alternative than the internal combustion engine on a
                        large scale, especially in the US. There are plenty of things,
                        including power plants and factories that still run on coal, even
                        high-sulfur coal. Wind farms and wave energy technologies exist, but
                        people don't want them or at least "not in my backyard". Solar is
                        another possibility, but it's not done much. These things won't be
                        done until the last drop of oil is gone. Then, it'll be too late
                        because there will be no oil to grease the gears of the next
                        generation of technology.

                        Meanwhile, we're turning food into ethanol, and the US is giving tax
                        incentives to do it. There are massive food shortages throughout the
                        world due to crop failure in parts. People are growing hungry, and
                        food is getting more costly. Why are the crops failing? A combination
                        of pests and heat and drought. The pests were caused by "super
                        strains" of these things produced by using chemicals (mostly
                        petroleum-based) to kill most of them, so the few who could survive
                        were the only ones to breed. Crops are failing due to climate changes
                        and yearly fluctuations. Different things need to be grown in
                        different areas. I don't have the data or knowledge to know what they
                        should be.

                        There's a problem of clean water. I have read in several sources about
                        pharmaceutical drugs being in groundwater in measurable amounts,
                        mostly because there is no known way to effectively remove them, and
                        tolerated because there are no tests for them. That's in addition to
                        the various chemicals that were in the water before that as pollution.

                        We've run out of food and fresh water. There are riots.

                        Sure, there are conspiracies and mismanagement behind some of it.
                        There always have been. The bottom line problem is that there are TOO
                        MANY PEOPLE! It will come to violence, certainly, but that will barely
                        slow it down. Too many bacteria in a petri dish will poison themselves
                        with their own waste products. Rats will kill each other from
                        overcrowding. Even if we DID produce a sustainable population right
                        now, the earth would STILL collapse under what has been done, with so
                        many pollutants in canisters that will break down over time.

                        It's totally irresponsible to breed, and to put more people in this
                        disaster that will soon come about. People still want their babies
                        though. It won't matter, except it will mean more suffering for more
                        people.

                        I was reading earlier about child abuse, the prevalence, the laws
                        involving it and their application in various areas of the world.
                        Gee... pack animals expel members of their pack that do not
                        appropriately care for their or others' young, because they don't
                        trust them. Humans, OTOH, take child abusers and restore any living
                        children to them, and the whole thing repeats. The justification is
                        rights of "natural parents". There's the notion that children are
                        something to be privately owned, and no one and nothing has any other
                        rights. How dumb is that? No, humans are not as highly "evolved" as
                        most pack animals or other primates. We've just got more intelligence.
                        We've got enough to enact outright evil.

                        I think extinction is inevitable now. Just a year or two ago I
                        believed that just maybe, a global pandemic that reduced the human
                        population to about 500 million or so might save it, but there's a
                        major flaw there. Assuming that we don't go utterly nuts with the "all
                        out war" mentality, and blow this planet to bits, most of the
                        lifeforms that exist now will go with us. It's possible a few things
                        like rats might survive, and almost certainly the cockroaches will
                        survive. Some plants will too. Unfortunately, the sun has too little
                        time in the few billion years it's got left to evolve anything
                        significantly intelligent out of the cockroaches or even the rats. The
                        whole notion of keeping our "knowledge" and "Rosetta Stones" to help
                        someone in the future obtain it is very unlikely.

                        On a global scale, breeding or not breeding really doesn't matter
                        anymore now. On a more personal level, it's evil to put someone else
                        into this situation.

                        Pessimist? Me? NO! I'm just not as delusional as most.

                        Beth

                        --- In Why_breed@yahoogroups.com, "Brian A." <phelsumas@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > The idea of refusing to have children isn't a new idea, granted.
                        > But it's the moral choice. Breeding more so that there will be a
                        collapse is the immoral choice because it would lead to a greater
                        amount of suffering for a greater number of individuals before it
                        produces any desirable results.
                        > Extinction is the alternative to involuntary extinction, the outcome
                        of the course we are on now. It wouldn't be necessary is the planet
                        were not already overpopulated, the evidence of which includes
                        record-high extinctions of non-human life, plagues among the
                        overpopulated species (humans), and other less definable signs.
                        > After going back and reading carefully what you said, I came to the
                        conclusion that you didn't say much of anything worth listening to.
                        Maybe you should go back and read it yourself.
                        >
                        >
                        > Juan - k <wakko_86@...> wrote:
                        > no, I would not agree to do that, and it has NOTHING to do with what
                        I wrote... It's like people ran out of new ideas... Read carefully
                        what I wrote
                        >
                        > Are we really running out of better ideas??
                        >
                        >
                        > To: Why_breed@...: korhag@...: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 17:17:02
                        +0000Subject: Why breed? Re: About the new idea!
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > Would you agree to...Burn tires to stop air pollution? Remove the
                        catalytic converters ongas guzzlers to stop peak oil? Shoot people to
                        stop careless gunownership? Pay extra taxes to stop tax increases? Cut
                        down trees tostop deforestation? --- In Why_breed@yahoogroups.com,
                        "wakko_86" wrote:>> I think that if we estimate somehow the number of
                        people that die > each year versus the people that could born in order
                        to not > overpopulate our planet (I mean, start being organized
                        worldwide), > we could as someone said, not permit one children per
                        couple but > more, it will indeed depend on stadistics.> > I DO NOT
                        think human extinction would be a good idea, It's too much > radical
                        IMO. It's like "I didn't come out with anything really > creative, so
                        I think this is what we need". I've read a lot, and > seen a lot of
                        documentaries that explain why we're doing this all > wrong, from
                        global warming to overpopulation. A conclusion that I > made about
                        this is that we all are not
                        > planning our future and we > are all thinking in ourselves,
                        specially the most powerful nations > in the world.> > But if we
                        REALLY WANT TO MAKE SOMETHNG DONE, like "Hey, we really > start a
                        movement so that it WILL WORK", I find REALLY REALLY HARD >
                        (impossible I would think) to make people agree to not breed, or to >
                        stop having children knowing that since they were born society told >
                        them that would be a nice idea.> > I dont care what VHEMT would say or
                        come out with my idea, it's > simply logic, and you should try to
                        think on something else. I agree > with the idea that we humans are
                        destroying ourselves because of > overpopulation, but you are NOT
                        going to convince the entire world > (not even the half) to do this,
                        it's common sense.> > I backup the idea that beth_h8 said, and I quote
                        something really > smart (the first smart quote that I read since I
                        start hearing ideas > to erradicate overpopulation):> > > > > It's
                        probably only slightly more realistic to get
                        > billions of> > > > people> > > > to act in concert to purposely
                        breed to collapse for reasons of> > > > sustainability than to
                        purposely drastically reduce breeding.> > I totally agree. I accept
                        any critics, because I know there will be.>
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > _________________________________________________________________
                        > Do more with your photos with Windows Live Photo Gallery.
                        > http://www.windowslive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_Wave2_photos_022008
                        >
                        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        >
                        >
                        > ------------------------------------
                        >
                        > VHEMT Volunteers and Supporters may subscribe to
                        http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Voluntary_Human_Extinction
                        >
                        > Yahoo! Groups Links
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > ---------------------------------
                        > Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.
                        Try it now.
                        >
                        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        >
                      • beth_h8
                        ... Ah, but if the non-breed crowd does not breed, and not being parents , are then sufficiently distrusted to be not allowed to have any significant input
                        Message 11 of 18 , Apr 28, 2008
                          >
                          > I don't think anyone here seriously expects to "not-breed" ourselves
                          > to the point of complete extinction. I do believe that purposeful
                          > non-breeding is helping rather then impeding. Where ignoring the
                          > problem can only be detrimental.
                          >
                          Ah, but if the "non-breed" crowd does not breed, and not being
                          "parents", are then sufficiently distrusted to be not allowed to have
                          any significant input into the ideas of children until all of THEIR
                          ideas, and possibly life path are set, all that will breed into the
                          next generation are people from religious and cultural norms that say
                          "have many children!" So, the whole voluntary human extinction
                          movement, or even the responsible breeding ideas, will be lost, or, at
                          least, not taught until someone is in their 40s and their breeding or
                          not-breeding has been done.

                          The "don't breed" idea is being left unheard until far too late by too
                          many who might heed it. There's a much louder message being heard of
                          "MAY YOU HAVE MANY CHILDREN". or at least, "WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO MAKE
                          ME A GRANDPARENT?" or "It's up to you to carry on the family name."

                          Beth
                        • Juan - k
                          I agree with the fact that there s A LOT of issues nowadays. We re killing ourselves. I would like to quote something you wrote: Ultimately, it s not what WE
                          Message 12 of 18 , Apr 28, 2008
                            I agree with the fact that there's A LOT of issues nowadays. We're killing ourselves. I would like to quote something you wrote:

                            "Ultimately, it's not what WE want that is what's going to happen, but what the majority want to do."

                            I agree. Changes in this planet are happening in a very very slow way. We humans doesn't make a big change in our lives if major changes are happening so slow. People get scared with huge changes.

                            I like to read things like this. News and stuff like that. I like to learn about this.

                            I really dont know how much you have to tolerate until you realized that you "had to put some evil here", but It's sad that you had to give up for new ideas. It's like you hear a lot of noise, a claxon, an rock show in front of you. And then you just can't handle the whole thing and you take a minigun and kill the person with the claxon and the whole rock band. You thought you could handle a lot of noise, until you heard too much, and you had to put some evil there. I think I get your point.

                            It's seems that's better to get evil...

                            It seems that it's better to extinct every single person in this planet, including the ones who could save our planet with their brilliant minds

                            It seems that it's better to extinct every single person in this planet, including the ones who will not come after us to change the situation

                            It seems that we ran out of ideas, and we should to voluntary extinct. because, we don't believe that something could change this

                            It seems that this is IMPOSSIBLE, because in order to make humans extinct, EVERY SINGLE PERSON SHOULD AGREE TO DO THIS. And this is not going to happen (I know 10 who won't)

                            It seems that it's really silly to have a movement like this, if voluntary extinction is NOT going to happen (what's the point?)

                            It seems that if you can't even the people responsible of global warming and all that stuff to change their mind and stop pollution, you won't convince them to help in this voluntary extinction of human beings thing

                            It seems that we really don't have any ideas at all. Our brains exploded. So now we got an idea! Let's get extinct

                            it's voluntary, of course. because everyone will want to do it. so it's very smart to keep this movement alive... yes, yes it is =)

                            (I like sarcasm)


                            To: Why_breed@yahoogroups.comFrom: beth_h8@...: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 07:39:40 +0000Subject: Why breed? Re: About the new idea!




                            Ultimately, it's not what WE want that is what's going to happen, butwhat the majority want to do.Lots of people have severe myopia involving what the "future" is goingto be. Lots of people still think that there is a plentiful amount ofworld resources, just some sort of oligarchy or conspiracy is keepingit from being distributed "properly". They have lots of children "tobring about a (better) future". It's true though: We're past peak oil,and we have no alternative than the internal combustion engine on alarge scale, especially in the US. There are plenty of things,including power plants and factories that still run on coal, evenhigh-sulfur coal. Wind farms and wave energy technologies exist, butpeople don't want them or at least "not in my backyard". Solar isanother possibility, but it's not done much. These things won't bedone until the last drop of oil is gone. Then, it'll be too latebecause there will be no oil to grease the gears of the nextgeneration of technology.Meanwhile, we're turning food into ethanol, and the US is giving taxincentives to do it. There are massive food shortages throughout theworld due to crop failure in parts. People are growing hungry, andfood is getting more costly. Why are the crops failing? A combinationof pests and heat and drought. The pests were caused by "superstrains" of these things produced by using chemicals (mostlypetroleum-based) to kill most of them, so the few who could survivewere the only ones to breed. Crops are failing due to climate changesand yearly fluctuations. Different things need to be grown indifferent areas. I don't have the data or knowledge to know what theyshould be.There's a problem of clean water. I have read in several sources aboutpharmaceutical drugs being in groundwater in measurable amounts,mostly because there is no known way to effectively remove them, andtolerated because there are no tests for them. That's in addition tothe various chemicals that were in the water before that as pollution.We've run out of food and fresh water. There are riots. Sure, there are conspiracies and mismanagement behind some of it.There always have been. The bottom line problem is that there are TOOMANY PEOPLE! It will come to violence, certainly, but that will barelyslow it down. Too many bacteria in a petri dish will poison themselveswith their own waste products. Rats will kill each other fromovercrowding. Even if we DID produce a sustainable population rightnow, the earth would STILL collapse under what has been done, with somany pollutants in canisters that will break down over time.It's totally irresponsible to breed, and to put more people in thisdisaster that will soon come about. People still want their babiesthough. It won't matter, except it will mean more suffering for morepeople.I was reading earlier about child abuse, the prevalence, the lawsinvolving it and their application in various areas of the world.Gee... pack animals expel members of their pack that do notappropriately care for their or others' young, because they don'ttrust them. Humans, OTOH, take child abusers and restore any livingchildren to them, and the whole thing repeats. The justification isrights of "natural parents". There's the notion that children aresomething to be privately owned, and no one and nothing has any otherrights. How dumb is that? No, humans are not as highly "evolved" asmost pack animals or other primates. We've just got more intelligence.We've got enough to enact outright evil.I think extinction is inevitable now. Just a year or two ago Ibelieved that just maybe, a global pandemic that reduced the humanpopulation to about 500 million or so might save it, but there's amajor flaw there. Assuming that we don't go utterly nuts with the "allout war" mentality, and blow this planet to bits, most of thelifeforms that exist now will go with us. It's possible a few thingslike rats might survive, and almost certainly the cockroaches willsurvive. Some plants will too. Unfortunately, the sun has too littletime in the few billion years it's got left to evolve anythingsignificantly intelligent out of the cockroaches or even the rats. Thewhole notion of keeping our "knowledge" and "Rosetta Stones" to helpsomeone in the future obtain it is very unlikely.On a global scale, breeding or not breeding really doesn't matteranymore now. On a more personal level, it's evil to put someone elseinto this situation.Pessimist? Me? NO! I'm just not as delusional as most.Beth--- In Why_breed@yahoogroups.com, "Brian A." <phelsumas@...> wrote:>> The idea of refusing to have children isn't a new idea, granted. > But it's the moral choice. Breeding more so that there will be acollapse is the immoral choice because it would lead to a greateramount of suffering for a greater number of individuals before itproduces any desirable results.> Extinction is the alternative to involuntary extinction, the outcomeof the course we are on now. It wouldn't be necessary is the planetwere not already overpopulated, the evidence of which includesrecord-high extinctions of non-human life, plagues among theoverpopulated species (humans), and other less definable signs.> After going back and reading carefully what you said, I came to theconclusion that you didn't say much of anything worth listening to. Maybe you should go back and read it yourself.> > > Juan - k <wakko_86@...> wrote: > no, I would not agree to do that, and it has NOTHING to do with whatI wrote... It's like people ran out of new ideas... Read carefullywhat I wrote> > Are we really running out of better ideas??> > > To: Why_breed@...: korhag@...: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 17:17:02+0000Subject: Why breed? Re: About the new idea!> > > > > Would you agree to...Burn tires to stop air pollution? Remove thecatalytic converters ongas guzzlers to stop peak oil? Shoot people tostop careless gunownership? Pay extra taxes to stop tax increases? Cutdown trees tostop deforestation? --- In Why_breed@yahoogroups.com,"wakko_86" wrote:>> I think that if we estimate somehow the number ofpeople that die > each year versus the people that could born in orderto not > overpopulate our planet (I mean, start being organizedworldwide), > we could as someone said, not permit one children percouple but > more, it will indeed depend on stadistics.> > I DO NOTthink human extinction would be a good idea, It's too much > radicalIMO. It's like "I didn't come out with anything really > creative, soI think this is what we need". I've read a lot, and > seen a lot ofdocumentaries that explain why we're doing this all > wrong, fromglobal warming to overpopulation. A conclusion that I > made aboutthis is that we all are not> planning our future and we > are all thinking in ourselves,specially the most powerful nations > in the world.> > But if weREALLY WANT TO MAKE SOMETHNG DONE, like "Hey, we really > start amovement so that it WILL WORK", I find REALLY REALLY HARD >(impossible I would think) to make people agree to not breed, or to >stop having children knowing that since they were born society told >them that would be a nice idea.> > I dont care what VHEMT would say orcome out with my idea, it's > simply logic, and you should try tothink on something else. I agree > with the idea that we humans aredestroying ourselves because of > overpopulation, but you are NOTgoing to convince the entire world > (not even the half) to do this,it's common sense.> > I backup the idea that beth_h8 said, and I quotesomething really > smart (the first smart quote that I read since Istart hearing ideas > to erradicate overpopulation):> > > > > It'sprobably only slightly more realistic to get> billions of> > > > people> > > > to act in concert to purposelybreed to collapse for reasons of> > > > sustainability than topurposely drastically reduce breeding.> > I totally agree. I acceptany critics, because I know there will be.> > > > > > > > __________________________________________________________> Do more with your photos with Windows Live Photo Gallery.> http://www.windowslive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_Wave2_photos_022008> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]> > > ------------------------------------> > VHEMT Volunteers and Supporters may subscribe tohttp://groups.yahoo.com/group/Voluntary_Human_Extinction> > Yahoo! Groups Links> > > > > > > ---------------------------------> Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]>






                            _________________________________________________________________
                            Get your fix of news, sports, entertainment and more on MSN Mobile
                            http://www.msnmobilefix.com/Default.aspx

                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          • korhag
                            Juan, I dig your sarcasm. Obviously you want to breed, or have bred already. Nothing this community says is going to convince you otherwise. You just want to
                            Message 13 of 18 , Apr 28, 2008
                              Juan, I dig your sarcasm.

                              Obviously you want to breed, or have bred already. Nothing this
                              community says is going to convince you otherwise. You just want to
                              argue. Perhaps you want to understand our point of view. So let me put
                              it to you in another way.

                              Parenting a child is a selfless act. It is generous. It is kind. It is
                              charitable. It is very loving. This much you'll agree with. We all will.

                              However, conceiving a child is always selfish. At that point, it can
                              never be about the kid because they don't exist. Not yet. No matter
                              the reason or motivation, it is about you. Every reason start with "I"
                              or "We". as in "We want to start a family" or "I think I can..." Very
                              few breeders are thinking of others when they start to think about
                              having kids. It's pure selfishness.

                              I don't know what you think is evil, or what makes something evil, but
                              I bet you would associate evil with selfish motivations.

                              In choosing to not breed, the motivations can be mixed. On the one
                              hand, I ain't having kids because what's mine is mine and I ain't
                              giving that up for nobody. That's pretty selfish but I'm sure there
                              are folks out there who might feel that way. On the other hand, the
                              selfless reasons to not breed have already been explained to you. That
                              happens to be the reason VHEMT and other groups like this exist. Be a
                              skeptical as you want, but it's true.

                              Now to address you points...

                              Changes in the planet are accelerating rapidly, not slowly. In all
                              aspects. Yes, it's debatable and so I won't delve further. But that's
                              my belief for whatever that's worth.

                              You put a lot of faith in future generations that will discover the
                              ways and means to save us. And it's true, Galileo, Issac Newton,
                              Einstein, etc have furthered Mankind in wonderful ways and there are
                              expectations that this tradition of brilliance will continue.

                              But it is also true that all things will pass. There are more extinct
                              species then ones that have survived. It is survival of the fittest
                              after all. When will Mankind see it's natural extinction? Never is
                              simply not an option, although this remote possibility exists. It is
                              conceivable Mankind will not survive a nuclear world war, a
                              super-volcanic eruption, or the greed which starves it's poor.

                              Given your great faith, answer me this; Will it be Star Trek or
                              Morlocks? Nobody knows. Nobody can know. But what we do know is that
                              there is a problem right here and now tht isn't going away. We can
                              only hope that we can control all the symptoms, and put them in check.
                              But the disease remains and more symptoms appear, sooner or later the
                              matter will have to be addressed. And we'll do it with purpose or in
                              error, but we'll have to do it.

                              --- In Why_breed@yahoogroups.com, Juan - k <wakko_86@...> wrote:
                              >
                              >
                              > I agree with the fact that there's A LOT of issues nowadays. We're
                              killing ourselves. I would like to quote something you wrote:
                              >
                              > "Ultimately, it's not what WE want that is what's going to happen,
                              but what the majority want to do."
                              >
                              > I agree. Changes in this planet are happening in a very very slow
                              way. We humans doesn't make a big change in our lives if major changes
                              are happening so slow. People get scared with huge changes.
                              >
                              > I like to read things like this. News and stuff like that. I like to
                              learn about this.
                              >
                              > I really dont know how much you have to tolerate until you realized
                              that you "had to put some evil here", but It's sad that you had to
                              give up for new ideas. It's like you hear a lot of noise, a claxon, an
                              rock show in front of you. And then you just can't handle the whole
                              thing and you take a minigun and kill the person with the claxon and
                              the whole rock band. You thought you could handle a lot of noise,
                              until you heard too much, and you had to put some evil there. I think
                              I get your point.
                              >
                              > It's seems that's better to get evil...
                              >
                              > It seems that it's better to extinct every single person in this
                              planet, including the ones who could save our planet with their
                              brilliant minds
                              >
                              > It seems that it's better to extinct every single person in this
                              planet, including the ones who will not come after us to change the
                              situation
                              >
                              > It seems that we ran out of ideas, and we should to voluntary
                              extinct. because, we don't believe that something could change this
                              >
                              > It seems that this is IMPOSSIBLE, because in order to make humans
                              extinct, EVERY SINGLE PERSON SHOULD AGREE TO DO THIS. And this is not
                              going to happen (I know 10 who won't)
                              >
                              > It seems that it's really silly to have a movement like this, if
                              voluntary extinction is NOT going to happen (what's the point?)
                              >
                              > It seems that if you can't even the people responsible of global
                              warming and all that stuff to change their mind and stop pollution,
                              you won't convince them to help in this voluntary extinction of human
                              beings thing
                              >
                              > It seems that we really don't have any ideas at all. Our brains
                              exploded. So now we got an idea! Let's get extinct
                              >
                              > it's voluntary, of course. because everyone will want to do it. so
                              it's very smart to keep this movement alive... yes, yes it is =)
                              >
                              > (I like sarcasm)
                              >
                              >
                              > To: Why_breed@...: beth_h8@...: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 07:39:40
                              +0000Subject: Why breed? Re: About the new idea!
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              > Ultimately, it's not what WE want that is what's going to happen,
                              butwhat the majority want to do.Lots of people have severe myopia
                              involving what the "future" is goingto be. Lots of people still think
                              that there is a plentiful amount ofworld resources, just some sort of
                              oligarchy or conspiracy is keepingit from being distributed
                              "properly". They have lots of children "tobring about a (better)
                              future". It's true though: We're past peak oil,and we have no
                              alternative than the internal combustion engine on alarge scale,
                              especially in the US. There are plenty of things,including power
                              plants and factories that still run on coal, evenhigh-sulfur coal.
                              Wind farms and wave energy technologies exist, butpeople don't want
                              them or at least "not in my backyard". Solar isanother possibility,
                              but it's not done much. These things won't bedone until the last drop
                              of oil is gone. Then, it'll be too latebecause there will be no oil to
                              grease the gears of the nextgeneration of technology.Meanwhile, we're
                              turning food into ethanol, and the US is giving taxincentives to do
                              it. There are massive food shortages throughout theworld due to crop
                              failure in parts. People are growing hungry, andfood is getting more
                              costly. Why are the crops failing? A combinationof pests and heat and
                              drought. The pests were caused by "superstrains" of these things
                              produced by using chemicals (mostlypetroleum-based) to kill most of
                              them, so the few who could survivewere the only ones to breed. Crops
                              are failing due to climate changesand yearly fluctuations. Different
                              things need to be grown indifferent areas. I don't have the data or
                              knowledge to know what theyshould be.There's a problem of clean water.
                              I have read in several sources aboutpharmaceutical drugs being in
                              groundwater in measurable amounts,mostly because there is no known way
                              to effectively remove them, andtolerated because there are no tests
                              for them. That's in addition tothe various chemicals that were in the
                              water before that as pollution.We've run out of food and fresh water.
                              There are riots. Sure, there are conspiracies and mismanagement behind
                              some of it.There always have been. The bottom line problem is that
                              there are TOOMANY PEOPLE! It will come to violence, certainly, but
                              that will barelyslow it down. Too many bacteria in a petri dish will
                              poison themselveswith their own waste products. Rats will kill each
                              other fromovercrowding. Even if we DID produce a sustainable
                              population rightnow, the earth would STILL collapse under what has
                              been done, with somany pollutants in canisters that will break down
                              over time.It's totally irresponsible to breed, and to put more people
                              in thisdisaster that will soon come about. People still want their
                              babiesthough. It won't matter, except it will mean more suffering for
                              morepeople.I was reading earlier about child abuse, the prevalence,
                              the lawsinvolving it and their application in various areas of the
                              world.Gee... pack animals expel members of their pack that do
                              notappropriately care for their or others' young, because they
                              don'ttrust them. Humans, OTOH, take child abusers and restore any
                              livingchildren to them, and the whole thing repeats. The justification
                              isrights of "natural parents". There's the notion that children
                              aresomething to be privately owned, and no one and nothing has any
                              otherrights. How dumb is that? No, humans are not as highly "evolved"
                              asmost pack animals or other primates. We've just got more
                              intelligence.We've got enough to enact outright evil.I think
                              extinction is inevitable now. Just a year or two ago Ibelieved that
                              just maybe, a global pandemic that reduced the humanpopulation to
                              about 500 million or so might save it, but there's amajor flaw there.
                              Assuming that we don't go utterly nuts with the "allout war"
                              mentality, and blow this planet to bits, most of thelifeforms that
                              exist now will go with us. It's possible a few thingslike rats might
                              survive, and almost certainly the cockroaches willsurvive. Some plants
                              will too. Unfortunately, the sun has too littletime in the few billion
                              years it's got left to evolve anythingsignificantly intelligent out of
                              the cockroaches or even the rats. Thewhole notion of keeping our
                              "knowledge" and "Rosetta Stones" to helpsomeone in the future obtain
                              it is very unlikely.On a global scale, breeding or not breeding really
                              doesn't matteranymore now. On a more personal level, it's evil to put
                              someone elseinto this situation.Pessimist? Me? NO! I'm just not as
                              delusional as most.Beth--- In Why_breed@yahoogroups.com, "Brian A."
                              <phelsumas@> wrote:>> The idea of refusing to have children isn't a
                              new idea, granted. > But it's the moral choice. Breeding more so that
                              there will be acollapse is the immoral choice because it would lead to
                              a greateramount of suffering for a greater number of individuals
                              before itproduces any desirable results.> Extinction is the
                              alternative to involuntary extinction, the outcomeof the course we are
                              on now. It wouldn't be necessary is the planetwere not already
                              overpopulated, the evidence of which includesrecord-high extinctions
                              of non-human life, plagues among theoverpopulated species (humans),
                              and other less definable signs.> After going back and reading
                              carefully what you said, I came to theconclusion that you didn't say
                              much of anything worth listening to. Maybe you should go back and read
                              it yourself.> > > Juan - k <wakko_86@> wrote: > no, I would not agree
                              to do that, and it has NOTHING to do with whatI wrote... It's like
                              people ran out of new ideas... Read carefullywhat I wrote> > Are we
                              really running out of better ideas??> > > To: Why_breed@: korhag@:
                              Fri, 21 Mar 2008 17:17:02+0000Subject: Why breed? Re: About the new
                              idea!> > > > > Would you agree to...Burn tires to stop air pollution?
                              Remove thecatalytic converters ongas guzzlers to stop peak oil? Shoot
                              people tostop careless gunownership? Pay extra taxes to stop tax
                              increases? Cutdown trees tostop deforestation? --- In
                              Why_breed@yahoogroups.com,"wakko_86" wrote:>> I think that if we
                              estimate somehow the number ofpeople that die > each year versus the
                              people that could born in orderto not > overpopulate our planet (I
                              mean, start being organizedworldwide), > we could as someone said, not
                              permit one children percouple but > more, it will indeed depend on
                              stadistics.> > I DO NOTthink human extinction would be a good idea,
                              It's too much > radicalIMO. It's like "I didn't come out with anything
                              really > creative, soI think this is what we need". I've read a lot,
                              and > seen a lot ofdocumentaries that explain why we're doing this all
                              > wrong, fromglobal warming to overpopulation. A conclusion that I >
                              made aboutthis is that we all are not> planning our future and we >
                              are all thinking in ourselves,specially the most powerful nations > in
                              the world.> > But if weREALLY WANT TO MAKE SOMETHNG DONE, like "Hey,
                              we really > start amovement so that it WILL WORK", I find REALLY
                              REALLY HARD >(impossible I would think) to make people agree to not
                              breed, or to >stop having children knowing that since they were born
                              society told >them that would be a nice idea.> > I dont care what
                              VHEMT would say orcome out with my idea, it's > simply logic, and you
                              should try tothink on something else. I agree > with the idea that we
                              humans aredestroying ourselves because of > overpopulation, but you
                              are NOTgoing to convince the entire world > (not even the half) to do
                              this,it's common sense.> > I backup the idea that beth_h8 said, and I
                              quotesomething really > smart (the first smart quote that I read since
                              Istart hearing ideas > to erradicate overpopulation):> > > > >
                              It'sprobably only slightly more realistic to get> billions of> > > >
                              people> > > > to act in concert to purposelybreed to collapse for
                              reasons of> > > > sustainability than topurposely drastically reduce
                              breeding.> > I totally agree. I acceptany critics, because I know
                              there will be.> > > > > > > >
                              __________________________________________________________> Do more
                              with your photos with Windows Live Photo Gallery.>
                              http://www.windowslive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_Wave2_photos_022008>
                              > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]> > >
                              ------------------------------------> > VHEMT Volunteers and
                              Supporters may subscribe
                              tohttp://groups.yahoo.com/group/Voluntary_Human_Extinction> > Yahoo!
                              Groups Links> > > > > > > ---------------------------------> Be a
                              better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it
                              now.> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]>
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              > _________________________________________________________________
                              > Get your fix of news, sports, entertainment and more on MSN Mobile
                              > http://www.msnmobilefix.com/Default.aspx
                              >
                              > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              >
                            • beth_h8
                              Ah, but it s NOT slow changes anymore. Changes are happening very rapidly! Rainfall has changed, and food production has changed significantly just this
                              Message 14 of 18 , Apr 29, 2008
                                Ah, but it's NOT slow changes anymore. Changes are happening very
                                rapidly! Rainfall has changed, and food production has changed
                                significantly just this decade. It'll get more significant as more
                                things come into play - economically driven wars (to get NEEDS),
                                further overcrowding, disease that comes with overcrowding, lack of
                                clean water, and all that.

                                It's also worthy of note that the geological records show sudden - as
                                in a few years - between these "global warming" climate swings and ice
                                ages.

                                We are in a global extinction event. These are geologically driven.
                                The size of creatures going extinct is about 100 lbs - thus, smaller
                                than (average) humans. Humans will be extinct, voluntary or not.

                                We've greatly increased our population as supported by oil. We are
                                past peak oil. As oil goes away, we can no longer support that. We
                                won't just die off to sustainable levels. There will be panic and
                                rioting and war, which will kill far below the "sustainable
                                population" - possibly or probably leaving too few to maintain a
                                genetic line.

                                If there are only a few, there will be too few to be able to maintain
                                the underground and undersea repositories of chemical, biological, and
                                nuclear waste and weapons. They will get out and further damage the
                                environment and survivors.

                                On OUR voluntary human extinction, we can have our genetic line
                                extinct, or at least not pass it down. What kind of a person would put
                                someone they claimed to love into this hell which is coming?

                                Beth

                                --- In Why_breed@yahoogroups.com, Juan - k <wakko_86@...> wrote:
                                >
                                >
                                > I agree with the fact that there's A LOT of issues nowadays. We're
                                killing ourselves. I would like to quote something you wrote:
                                >
                                > "Ultimately, it's not what WE want that is what's going to happen,
                                but what the majority want to do."
                                >
                                > I agree. Changes in this planet are happening in a very very slow
                                way. We humans doesn't make a big change in our lives if major changes
                                are happening so slow. People get scared with huge changes.
                                >
                                > I like to read things like this. News and stuff like that. I like to
                                learn about this.
                                >
                                > I really dont know how much you have to tolerate until you realized
                                that you "had to put some evil here", but It's sad that you had to
                                give up for new ideas. It's like you hear a lot of noise, a claxon, an
                                rock show in front of you. And then you just can't handle the whole
                                thing and you take a minigun and kill the person with the claxon and
                                the whole rock band. You thought you could handle a lot of noise,
                                until you heard too much, and you had to put some evil there. I think
                                I get your point.
                                >
                                > It's seems that's better to get evil...
                                >
                                > It seems that it's better to extinct every single person in this
                                planet, including the ones who could save our planet with their
                                brilliant minds
                                >
                                > It seems that it's better to extinct every single person in this
                                planet, including the ones who will not come after us to change the
                                situation
                                >
                                > It seems that we ran out of ideas, and we should to voluntary
                                extinct. because, we don't believe that something could change this
                                >
                                > It seems that this is IMPOSSIBLE, because in order to make humans
                                extinct, EVERY SINGLE PERSON SHOULD AGREE TO DO THIS. And this is not
                                going to happen (I know 10 who won't)
                                >
                                > It seems that it's really silly to have a movement like this, if
                                voluntary extinction is NOT going to happen (what's the point?)
                                >
                                > It seems that if you can't even the people responsible of global
                                warming and all that stuff to change their mind and stop pollution,
                                you won't convince them to help in this voluntary extinction of human
                                beings thing
                                >
                                > It seems that we really don't have any ideas at all. Our brains
                                exploded. So now we got an idea! Let's get extinct
                                >
                                > it's voluntary, of course. because everyone will want to do it. so
                                it's very smart to keep this movement alive... yes, yes it is =)
                                >
                                > (I like sarcasm)
                                >
                                >
                                > To: Why_breed@...: beth_h8@...: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 07:39:40
                                +0000Subject: Why breed? Re: About the new idea!
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                > Ultimately, it's not what WE want that is what's going to happen,
                                butwhat the majority want to do.Lots of people have severe myopia
                                involving what the "future" is goingto be. Lots of people still think
                                that there is a plentiful amount ofworld resources, just some sort of
                                oligarchy or conspiracy is keepingit from being distributed
                                "properly". They have lots of children "tobring about a (better)
                                future". It's true though: We're past peak oil,and we have no
                                alternative than the internal combustion engine on alarge scale,
                                especially in the US. There are plenty of things,including power
                                plants and factories that still run on coal, evenhigh-sulfur coal.
                                Wind farms and wave energy technologies exist, butpeople don't want
                                them or at least "not in my backyard". Solar isanother possibility,
                                but it's not done much. These things won't bedone until the last drop
                                of oil is gone. Then, it'll be too latebecause there will be no oil to
                                grease the gears of the nextgeneration of technology.Meanwhile, we're
                                turning food into ethanol, and the US is giving taxincentives to do
                                it. There are massive food shortages throughout theworld due to crop
                                failure in parts. People are growing hungry, andfood is getting more
                                costly. Why are the crops failing? A combinationof pests and heat and
                                drought. The pests were caused by "superstrains" of these things
                                produced by using chemicals (mostlypetroleum-based) to kill most of
                                them, so the few who could survivewere the only ones to breed. Crops
                                are failing due to climate changesand yearly fluctuations. Different
                                things need to be grown indifferent areas. I don't have the data or
                                knowledge to know what theyshould be.There's a problem of clean water.
                                I have read in several sources aboutpharmaceutical drugs being in
                                groundwater in measurable amounts,mostly because there is no known way
                                to effectively remove them, andtolerated because there are no tests
                                for them. That's in addition tothe various chemicals that were in the
                                water before that as pollution.We've run out of food and fresh water.
                                There are riots. Sure, there are conspiracies and mismanagement behind
                                some of it.There always have been. The bottom line problem is that
                                there are TOOMANY PEOPLE! It will come to violence, certainly, but
                                that will barelyslow it down. Too many bacteria in a petri dish will
                                poison themselveswith their own waste products. Rats will kill each
                                other fromovercrowding. Even if we DID produce a sustainable
                                population rightnow, the earth would STILL collapse under what has
                                been done, with somany pollutants in canisters that will break down
                                over time.It's totally irresponsible to breed, and to put more people
                                in thisdisaster that will soon come about. People still want their
                                babiesthough. It won't matter, except it will mean more suffering for
                                morepeople.I was reading earlier about child abuse, the prevalence,
                                the lawsinvolving it and their application in various areas of the
                                world.Gee... pack animals expel members of their pack that do
                                notappropriately care for their or others' young, because they
                                don'ttrust them. Humans, OTOH, take child abusers and restore any
                                livingchildren to them, and the whole thing repeats. The justification
                                isrights of "natural parents". There's the notion that children
                                aresomething to be privately owned, and no one and nothing has any
                                otherrights. How dumb is that? No, humans are not as highly "evolved"
                                asmost pack animals or other primates. We've just got more
                                intelligence.We've got enough to enact outright evil.I think
                                extinction is inevitable now. Just a year or two ago Ibelieved that
                                just maybe, a global pandemic that reduced the humanpopulation to
                                about 500 million or so might save it, but there's amajor flaw there.
                                Assuming that we don't go utterly nuts with the "allout war"
                                mentality, and blow this planet to bits, most of thelifeforms that
                                exist now will go with us. It's possible a few thingslike rats might
                                survive, and almost certainly the cockroaches willsurvive. Some plants
                                will too. Unfortunately, the sun has too littletime in the few billion
                                years it's got left to evolve anythingsignificantly intelligent out of
                                the cockroaches or even the rats. Thewhole notion of keeping our
                                "knowledge" and "Rosetta Stones" to helpsomeone in the future obtain
                                it is very unlikely.On a global scale, breeding or not breeding really
                                doesn't matteranymore now. On a more personal level, it's evil to put
                                someone elseinto this situation.Pessimist? Me? NO! I'm just not as
                                delusional as most.Beth--- In Why_breed@yahoogroups.com, "Brian A."
                                <phelsumas@> wrote:>> The idea of refusing to have children isn't a
                                new idea, granted. > But it's the moral choice. Breeding more so that
                                there will be acollapse is the immoral choice because it would lead to
                                a greateramount of suffering for a greater number of individuals
                                before itproduces any desirable results.> Extinction is the
                                alternative to involuntary extinction, the outcomeof the course we are
                                on now. It wouldn't be necessary is the planetwere not already
                                overpopulated, the evidence of which includesrecord-high extinctions
                                of non-human life, plagues among theoverpopulated species (humans),
                                and other less definable signs.> After going back and reading
                                carefully what you said, I came to theconclusion that you didn't say
                                much of anything worth listening to. Maybe you should go back and read
                                it yourself.> > > Juan - k <wakko_86@> wrote: > no, I would not agree
                                to do that, and it has NOTHING to do with whatI wrote... It's like
                                people ran out of new ideas... Read carefullywhat I wrote> > Are we
                                really running out of better ideas??> > > To: Why_breed@: korhag@:
                                Fri, 21 Mar 2008 17:17:02+0000Subject: Why breed? Re: About the new
                                idea!> > > > > Would you agree to...Burn tires to stop air pollution?
                                Remove thecatalytic converters ongas guzzlers to stop peak oil? Shoot
                                people tostop careless gunownership? Pay extra taxes to stop tax
                                increases? Cutdown trees tostop deforestation? --- In
                                Why_breed@yahoogroups.com,"wakko_86" wrote:>> I think that if we
                                estimate somehow the number ofpeople that die > each year versus the
                                people that could born in orderto not > overpopulate our planet (I
                                mean, start being organizedworldwide), > we could as someone said, not
                                permit one children percouple but > more, it will indeed depend on
                                stadistics.> > I DO NOTthink human extinction would be a good idea,
                                It's too much > radicalIMO. It's like "I didn't come out with anything
                                really > creative, soI think this is what we need". I've read a lot,
                                and > seen a lot ofdocumentaries that explain why we're doing this all
                                > wrong, fromglobal warming to overpopulation. A conclusion that I >
                                made aboutthis is that we all are not> planning our future and we >
                                are all thinking in ourselves,specially the most powerful nations > in
                                the world.> > But if weREALLY WANT TO MAKE SOMETHNG DONE, like "Hey,
                                we really > start amovement so that it WILL WORK", I find REALLY
                                REALLY HARD >(impossible I would think) to make people agree to not
                                breed, or to >stop having children knowing that since they were born
                                society told >them that would be a nice idea.> > I dont care what
                                VHEMT would say orcome out with my idea, it's > simply logic, and you
                                should try tothink on something else. I agree > with the idea that we
                                humans aredestroying ourselves because of > overpopulation, but you
                                are NOTgoing to convince the entire world > (not even the half) to do
                                this,it's common sense.> > I backup the idea that beth_h8 said, and I
                                quotesomething really > smart (the first smart quote that I read since
                                Istart hearing ideas > to erradicate overpopulation):> > > > >
                                It'sprobably only slightly more realistic to get> billions of> > > >
                                people> > > > to act in concert to purposelybreed to collapse for
                                reasons of> > > > sustainability than topurposely drastically reduce
                                breeding.> > I totally agree. I acceptany critics, because I know
                                there will be.> > > > > > > >
                                __________________________________________________________> Do more
                                with your photos with Windows Live Photo Gallery.>
                                http://www.windowslive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_Wave2_photos_022008>
                                > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]> > >
                                ------------------------------------> > VHEMT Volunteers and
                                Supporters may subscribe
                                tohttp://groups.yahoo.com/group/Voluntary_Human_Extinction> > Yahoo!
                                Groups Links> > > > > > > ---------------------------------> Be a
                                better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it
                                now.> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]>
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                > _________________________________________________________________
                                > Get your fix of news, sports, entertainment and more on MSN Mobile
                                > http://www.msnmobilefix.com/Default.aspx
                                >
                                > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                >
                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.