Under 120s gone: logistics

[Tralfamadorian]

The earth's carrying capacity is about a billion, if we also want to have wildlife..

Source?

At the same time we do this, we should find people who are doing good things, and encourage them to do more of them and breed more.

What happens in 500 years when the Earth is back to 7 billion? Another cull? Somehow, I think it would be a little more difficult the second time around.

That's the only way out of the hole that humanity's in. If we don't change our path, doom awaits.

What if there was another way? What if the 1st world, whose population is stable, moved more people into cities (leaving more room for the environment), eliminated CO2 emissions and other pollution, set strict rules on new development ie 75% of land is to be untouched, etc; and  we stop trying to develop the 3rd world countries and let them live in harmony with nature?

Most people are too cowardly to change and fear change, so they're going to complain any time someone offers a solution.

Do you honestly think people are going to accept such a radical plan without first criticizing and probing it? Are your expectations of others really that low?

[Everdarkgreen]

What happens in 500 years when the Earth is back to 7 billion? Another cull? Somehow, I think it would be a little more difficult the second time around.

If we somehow end up back in the same position, nature will solve our problem one way or the other. However, the initial culling would be done with a political underpinning in mind and so we would move back towards truth-seeking. It's not a matter of simply reducing the population but reducing it so that a healthy culture may thrive in place of our rotting one and then continuing in light of this population purge. If we have no hope of expectation to learn from the past, then none of the cultural progress we seek and expect of ourselves is even worth attempting.

[Von List]

Here is the problem: None of us here are probably 120 IQ.

[Humanicide]

Here is the problem: None of us here are probably 120 IQ.

I wouldn't put it that simply. I'm sure that there are some among this forum that aren't, but at least in my case when my IQ was tested (roughly 5-6 years ago - by the way does time degrade IQ?) I came out above. Judging by the verbiage, ideas, opinions, and conduct of the members of this forum I'd say many of the users are. If they aren't, man I got fooled pretty good.

[Cargést]

Yeah, I'd have said that 120 was around "average", if I hadn't learnt that the average is actually more like 90-100.  I was above 120 a few years ago, anyway (quite substantially).

[KingdomGone]

I see many people afraid to answer the question.

I think nature takes care of it's own. Or within this subject; doesn't take.

Let problems solve themselves and let we be the first to laught at the edge of burning cities.

[analrapist]

Here is the problem: None of us here are probably 120 IQ.

120 is like "can process a college education," it's not that special.

http://giftedkids.about.com/b/2007/02/28/the-role-of-iq-in-education-and-the-future.htm

[scourge]

Part of the logistics might harness one or more social pathologies (Apple products, celebrity gossip, the band Karnivool, voting, etc.) most commonly shared by intellectually challenged persons as delivery vectors for the other part. The one that does the trick.