10 hours ago APOCALYPSE WARNING: Insect population must be saved or 'LIFE WILL DISAPPEAR'. A DECLINE in insect populations across the globe is a. APOCALYPSE WARNING: Insect population must be saved or 'LIFE WILL DISAPPEAR'. colourknot.info | 2/11/ | Staff. Pink_sakuragirl (Posted by) Level 3. APOCALYPSE WARNING: Insect population must be saved or 'LIFE WILL DISAPPEAR'. 50 minutes ago. APOCALYPSE WARNING: Insect population must be.
or saved be APOCALYPSE DISAPPEAR’ WARNING: must ‘LIFE WILL Insect population
A man with the pseudonym of a Christ-believer ordering up an occultic monumemt to the NWO? This is to mock believers in Christ AND to confuse the sheeple. He implies that Armageddon will kill six plus billion and possibly more, that we are doing it to ourselves through ignorance without help. He said the world is better off with a population of five hundred million. You need three more zeros.
Birth control over a few generations could do it. I have already helped out by not having children. A lot more people deciding not to become parents could help it happen, no violence needed.
Italy is worried that the births are not even replacing the people that they already have and in the past when the population decreased, the world suffered as a result. We now need to figure out how to manage a world when the population decreases. Put your thinking caps on for how to live in a world with a smaller population.
I bet you will like it just fine. At 81 years of age I will be long gone. Good luck to all. Still, current figures point to 10 billion by As reported, this is true that the native Europeans as well as most all industrialized nations are drawing down drastically. Once the majority of the population shifts to represent this group, there will be big problems for those who thought they were helping by not adding to the population living more comfortably.
We certainly can feed all the people that currently exist. More than enough food is produced a year to adequately feed all 7 billion. The problem is governments that do not take care of their people properly, which is likely all governments.
Especially since that number was decided upon by man in a different time when the optimal number of people we could sustain was decided by the technology and state of the world at the time. When the problem actually lies with who we put in charge and what we do with the resources we have. Check out our self controlled cars, planes and robotics that build most things we need with high accuracy.
The mass rationale of humanity will probably be in the dark regarding the new capabilities… only a small amount of people need to be in control for this to happen. Well, here is the problem I see with androids or with intelligent machines running things…since they are not alive, they will not have respect for life.
The result will be a decision to eliminate humans from the planet! And, maybe even eliminate other animals from the planet. Life that is not REAL life is not likely to respect living things. They have no need to do so.
Half a billion is ,, million Einstein. And no one said to kill anyone. The instructions are for those who survive the coming apocalypse according to the creator of the monument.
Or, did you read the article? Our leaders will make wars and that will take care of some. Then our contaminated food supply will eliminate others. But, by far the most will be eliminated by our medical system where many thousands die every year from medical mistakes in hospitals! Or die from overdosing on pain drugs…But the easy way to get there would be thru population reduction…more birth control. No need to kill off anyone, Just implement proper, worldwide birth control easier said than done, of course.
The problem is that without new young people, you end up with a majority of old folks like myself who eventually may not be able to keep the system working. I never said anything about not having any new people. In the beginning there would obviously be a huge difference between the number of young people and old people, but that difference would eventually go back to normal.
I live in a country where year by year the gap between young people and old people gets larger. That definitely creates many problems and for us those problems are already here. I personally believe we can address the issues of an aging population with technological solutions. However, maintaining the current order of things is leading us down a very dangerous path, where we will not only ruin this planet, but also place ourselves in a situation of poverty and misery without enough resources for everyone.
Also, the system currently has to serve billions of people. Finally, I just want to add that old people are not useless and incapable. As one of those old people I remember that the old solve themselves by dying off.
If our global economy continues to falter one of the things that gives way is medical care. So we can expect that the long livability that creates the problem will disappear and we will see the average of death fall back to fifty or sixty years of age even further back. Once the old people no longer make a major part of the population, a major medical cost is gone. Again with the much smaller population you no longer need most of the infrastructure and with an younger average population it should adjust pretty fast.
During earlier times, when times got tough for the people the old moved out to die so the rest could survive. As an older person I have no problem with that. What an anti-God, anti-Life, satanic thought! Sounds more like the anti-Christ of Revelation! Get real, get Jesus Christ! And I pray that God will heal your heart and soul with His unconditional love for you and turn face to Him in Truth and Love.
There is no point to anything, so all things being equal take the simplest course of action: Just leave it alone and let it be.
It makes no difference whether we all die now or in the distant future at the thermal death of the universe. So believing that a controlled human population is a good thing is an illusion. It is a meaningless chase after the wind. I suppose it depends on how you look at it.
I understand your point of view, but I also think relative quality of life matters. I could die right now. No a birth controlled population rate means that humans could survive longer and many of the ecological disasters could heal themselves. Taking no action is the way to extinction. Critters that do not change with conditions die out. And we are one of the few that can see what is happening ad can change and adapt purposely.
Tony you amaze me. I am a lot closer to my own death, probably within the next few years, and yet I refused to give up on the human race.
As I do believe in reincarnation, I would much like to com back to a world that is recovering instead of getting worse. Fewer people means a much higher standard of living for the average person. One aspect of being Pagan is that i value the time of mortal living while so many christians seem only to be focused on after life.
You need not wait around, rush to the after life as you seem to have given up on life. The Christians that seem only to be focused on the afterlife have missed the boat. Jesus, the Son of God took all of our bad behaviors, thoughts, illnesses upon himself. Be good to this earth treasure and all creatures dwelling upon it. Get up and be thankful each day…prove your gratitude for life by being a productive, kind, and generous person.
Love your enemies and pray for them. There are a few, but they will not be loudly proclaiming their religion, they will practice it quietly. Those will impress me more than the loud ones because they actually live their religion. I love how you wrote this Mary Bell. I love Jesus and know in my heart the Lord is here for us as long as we believe and follow and never foresake him.
Just a little too complex for what education and life experience people had back then. Too many details to just sit down and make up. And how many people have died and came back, saw the same thing during their passing? And for me, when I was saved, things happened that never happened before. I have no doubts there is a God in Heaven. No one will change that for me, no one will make me believe that science is the answer to everything.
Science may be a way for us to understand why some physical things are the way they are, and only because God allows us to understand. That allows us all to do our own thing with our belief system.
Just love Jesus Christ, live my life with joy and happiness, love and help others that I encounter in my life, and be a good and decent person. Very foolish to wish this on US citizens. So you assume that the world court will actually gain that power. So far America has ignored the world court and gotten away with it. For all the talk and fear of a World government, e seem no closer to it now then when I was born. I think I read that somewhere. Of course there is no need to drill concrete.
One simply puts a rod in the mould where one wants the hole to appear. However the Georgia Guide Stones are made of granite and to make a round hole requires drilling. And the Rosicrucians know it. I do agree with this concept…. Ya have to DO something in order to matter! If the total human population dropped to half a billion, the infrastructure would collapse.
I think we need to keep the population between 2 and 4 billion. With only half a billion, we would not need most of the infrastructure and could tear it down. We would not need most of the farms either. We could let most of the earth return to being a wilderness it was meant to be. There would no longer be any need for war either. I say go for it. Thanks to our crumbling economy more and more coupes are deciding not to raise children so that will help bring the population down.
With fewer parents we will end up with far fewer physically, emotionally, and sexually abused kids. So that to will improve our society and get rid of many of our social problems. Sure go for it. It is a great idea. I am very happy that many of you have chosen not to propagate your genetic legacy forward. It is indeed a good thing. So expect plenty f bi-polare people in yur future.
War has been around since prehistory…. As long as humans have emotion and hormones, realistically there will be war. Unrealistically, we can be smart enough to live in peace. My money is on realism…. We study violent people to death, but never study why some people in the same world are both peaceful and strong.
Should we ever get around to studying health instead of illness we might well change our society for the better. If we did more about violent people early on as children we might well prevent most of the crime and trouble that we see in our society. If we learn how to cooperate rather compete to the bitter end, we will be safer and freer people.
Our ancestors learned that and that was what started us on the road to civilization. Forgetting that is what is destroying our civilization. Even primitive people know that their survival depends on cooperation among the people. I think it depends…realistically a rational person is going to do what works best.
IF it can be clear to people that living without war is beneficial to all, then that will be the choice that is made. I like this idea. One little addition — those remaining alive would only be me, and 2 to 3,,, of the most attractive women of my choosing.
That might be a genetic disaster. In breading create all sort of problem Look what happened to the inbred royal families. If not stop talking about it for other people. Not having children is a very easy choice now, compared to how it was centuries ago. Our economy alone is having a negative affect on our birth rate as most working people can no longer afford to raise children. Nor is it only happening in our country,.
Meanwhile whom is this elite that you are imagining? They are not even needed to make this happen. People are waiting later to even have kids then ever and more and more people are delaying the idea of marriage as well. So both of these will have an effect. Also remember one of the side effects of our modern medicine is that unlike in the past, most Americans now multiple health issues.
That alone is not good for long term survival. In the old days most of those health issues would have killed them off leaving only the healthiest, and smartest, and the most inventive to survive. So with any plague, and a breakdown in our medical system that will come with the economic collapse we face, most of the world people are going to die off and there is nothing that mankind can do about it. Add changing climate that has already thinned out mankind many times in the past and will do so again.
So the only matter to decide is do we do it voluntarily by birth control, or does nature do it by the great die off. It will happen one way or another. Again no elites are needed for this to happen. The same natural laws apply to us as it does to every other living being on this planet. We actually poison the air we breathe, the water we drink, the ground that we live on, and the food that we eat. That already has altered our genes and those damaged genes we pass on down to our descendants.
So human extinction gets more likely day by day because we refuse to change what we do. People like Al Gore that talks about gw and hot house gasses then flies all over the country in personnel jet instead of taking mass air liner jets, ect.
I prefer to get my information from scientists who actually study the problems that we are dealing with. Do you actually believe that evan the rich guys are not going to be hurt by the problems we are facing? Also remember for them to be so very rich requires that they be a huge number of hard working poor people. It takes millions of poor people to support just one of our very rich guys.
A sudden drop in the human population is going to end most of the rich guys as well as they will have no one to do the work and make the money so that they can be so very rich. That is why our rich guys talk mostly against things like global warming, and over population because less people would mean far less rich guys, with far less wealth. Learn more on how we support the super rich and cutting the population is just not going to do it.
Stop being a sheep. You bring up a crucial point. If we cut the population, by whatever means, the wealthy will have fewer people in the labor pool. Therefore, the wealthy will have to create automation to perform the work. That is currently happening. If the Black Plague in Europe is anything to go by, any catastrophe will present opportunities to the average survivor. I think you have a point about damages to our people. When I grew up, there were no autistic children anywhere.
When my son was young, I knew of ONE autistic child in our town. Now, autism rates are one in every 88 children. Something has to be causing this increase…and it is NOT better identification of the problem! Same was true of cancer. When I was a kid it was a disease of late middle age and old age, but you never saw a baby or a teenager with it. But we have dumped a great deal or radiation and chemicals into our environment and ourselves since then and I think most of the health issues we see today are environmentally caused.
We made the mistake of thinking that we and our environment were somehow separated but what we do to the environment we do to ourselves. Only when we stop polluting our environment will we stop polluting ourselves.
Boy, you really are a pessimist! The main thing is that humans still make the same basic mistakes that they have always made. As a result they create civilizations and then self destruct. We are making the same mistakes today that brought down all the past civilizations that being greed, selfishness, and corruption.
No need to have myself fixed, there are other ways of controlling that. Combine 2 or 3 I do. And with that statement, you prove that no religion is YOUR problem. Wish I could be at your deathbed when you are gasping for your last breath…. I will be praying for you to believe there is a God Who loves you with an unconditional love and wants you to be with Him in glory forever. Religion has nothing to do with God. I happen to believe in God, not religion.
Marta makes excellent, reasonable points and expressed nothing that needs to be fixed. As I said in my previous post, you will be in my prayers…. This couldnt be more right. If the Lord blessed you with life, then it is in your best interest to preserve that life. Read your or someones Bible and it states that the children of this life is the innocence of this world and if any one would lead them astray, then it would be best if that individual was not born.
Not in those exact words but it should get the point across. Using birth control messes with and prevents the body from using its own natural reserves.
Depending on what kind of birth control it is, some do more harm than others, so mixing them…well lets just say, you should do your research on the stuff you put in your body before recommending them to other. My point is, if there has been life created, we have no right playing God and take that life away. And if you think it can just be brushed underneath the carpet and you will be fine, know that there is not a thing you could or cant do that He wont see… He always has his eyes on you T.
Are your religions the only accepted ideas because billions of other people accept them? Religion is a tool for controlling the masses. No, the media and the TV are tools for controlling the masses, religion is knowing that we come from a higher being, and of course the devil has created many false religions to lead the gullible astray. Also it is not about being good or bad, it is more about making a choice to live with God in this life and eternity, or to reject God in this life and eternity.
You use their worthless paper called money that has some made up fake value. Do you even know what money is, where is comes from? They divided the world with artificial borders and you talk about religion and God being used to control people. News flash, you need to be more than good to go to heaven. You definitely need to learn about God, read the Bible because they got you brainwashed into their polor-opposite counterfeit reality. Being good, as in works?
Requires Faith… where a lot of my fellow Protestants get it wrong. Scary for even me right now…. The entire Bible, all of it!! Our guttural bacteria are killing bad bacteria all the time. No one can interpret the scriptures privately correctly without the guidance of the infallible Holy Catholic Church. The Bible was created by the Catholic Church for teaching purposes only, because Christianity is not a religion of the book like Islam and other false religions.
You keep following Martin Luther the Rosicrucian you foolish twit. None of those state anything about Catholiicism. God is real Jesus us real but Catholic us just a religion, a very bad one that made up rules as they go along. A real man of God speaks from the heart what the spirit tells him to say. You were not raised in the Holy Catholic Church, you were raised at home with your parents, and they obviously did not teach you anything about the Holy Catholic faith.
We see it all the time, parents put their kids in Catholic schools without living the Catholic lifestyle and teaching it to their kids. As soon as the kids leave school they turn to evil. You do know that the Jewish Priests wore robes, and read the scriptures out of books, afterwards teaching what the scriptures mean for them, and how to use them in their own lives using their own words, exactly what the Catholic Church does now as the fulfilment of the Old Covenant with the New?
By thier fruits you should discern and test All spirit s. Yes, well the fruits of the Holy Catholic Church is Christian civilisation, which is being destroyed right now around the world. And that began with the Protestant revolution of the antichrist occult which has broken down Christianity to a dumb and foolish belief by its fruits of division, heresy, murder, adultery, and rejection of the true Christ and His Church. I was following you until you brought in the insult about Martin Luther followed by foolish Twit.
It is really sad that the ones that claim to be the Greatest of the Greats are the same ones that mutilated, violated and molested many children. I suggest you crawl back into your igloo and remain there until the Chariot comes from the Sky. If you follow him you are a foolish twit. Who claims to be the greatest of the greats? By your words we know that you are a foolish twit that has no idea what Christianity is, or who is responsible for Christian civilisation, and who is a part of its destruction.
Grow a brain before posting. Read Genesis, where the first murder by Cain is recorded. Jesus Christ is the true saviour, learn who he is, why he died and rose up to defeat death for you! When did God tell anyone to read the Bible? And when did God say that the Bible is a text book on Christianity that we can take as though it is talking to us, when in reality the letters and books of the Bible are directed to those of a different time, in a certain context, for a certain reason, and for a particular understanding?
Judaism, Protestantism, and Islam have different gods compared to the one and only Christian Holy Catholic Apostolic faith. Who did you vote for? The people responsible for turning off the heat on old people this winter?
The people who took away in-school nutritional assistance to at risk children? Then you, Joseph, are a murderer and an abomination unto the Lord. You have a bugbear about abortion. Ever hear of contraceptives? Plainly, Marta uses contraceptives. Monotheists are none other than fascists.
Marta, for your own sake you might want to learn the scientific facts about the link between abortion and breast cancer. That is scientific research. There is no link between abortion and breast cancer. That is a false truth used as a scare tactic.
You are wrong and have been lied to by the depopulation freaks at the UN. Look up agenda 21, and now agenda I remember a woman arguing with me about this, stated that she has had 6 children, 3 of them miscarried, with no abortions but got breast cancer. God bless you and prayers and blessings….. When I was in high school in the fifties, I knew we had a population problem.
I raised one child. My son raised one child. Some of us HAVE been practicing what we believe to be needed in terms of human population on the earth. Many others have also done this. In the tumult of actual such disasters, that is rarely the case. But this is no problem to me. I am a firm believer of the Bible, so if it is not written in Word then it is not of Him, and if it is not of Him then it shall not be followed.
But that is just what I believe, if the Lord would not force his belief on any one, then it is not my right to force it on either of you. That is just what I think. The reason 1 child per family or woman which seems more appropriate is chosen is due to statistics. It is not just a randomly generated number, it actually brings within a reasonable proximity the death and birth rates to keep the world population at a balance.
This would allow for participation by all and if either the zero child or 1 child per woman was implemented it would render the guidestones useless. Population would more than likely half in 25 yrs or so and within one century we would be at a sustainable level. I use 96 solar panels so that I can leave my air conditioning on 24 hours a day with no damage to nature. I built it up a bit a a time and did not need any subsidy. I am not even middle class.
It is if we do not live in an ecological manner that we will need you stone outhouse. You know one of the biggest faults of our society is we never ask how much is enough. Our always buying society never has enough no matter how much they spend or how big a debt. I have never been in debt because I have aways lived under my income. I have no cares about what the latest fad is or what the fashion is. I do what I think is right. Not being a sheep leads to happiness. The fact is its not realistic for our population to keep growing exponentially on a planet of finite resources.
But complicated software is replaced slowly, and many old programs were still running on institutional mainframes and embedded in chips. And these were the hardheaded predictions from tech-savvy authorities such as president Bill Clinton, who warned the nation, "I want to stress the urgency of the challenge. This is not one of the summer movies where you can close your eyes during the scary part".
Cultural pessimists saw the Y2K bug as comeuppance for enthralling our civilization to technology. Among religious thinkers, the numerological link to Christian millennialism was irresistible. The Reverend Jerry Falwell declared, "I believe that Y2K may be God's instrument to shake this nation, humble this nation, awaken this nation and from this nation start revival that spreads the face of the earth before the Rapture of the Church.
As a former assembly language programmer, I was skeptical of the doomsday scenarios, and fortuitously I was in New Zealand, the first country to welcome the new millennium, at the fateful moment. Sure enough, at 12 a. The Y2K reprogrammers, like the elephant-repellent salesman, took credit for averting disaster, but many countries and small businesses had taken their chances without any Y2K preparation, and they had no problems, either.
Although some software needed updating one program on my laptop displayed "Jan. The threat turned out to be barely more serious than the lettering on the sidewalk prophet's sandwich board.
H ow should we think about catastrophic threats? Let's begin with the greatest existential question of all, the fate of our species. As with the more parochial question of our fate as individuals, we assuredly have to come to terms with our mortality. Biologists joke that to a first approximation all species are extinct, since that was the fate of at least 99 per cent of the species that ever lived. A typical mammalian species lasts around a million years, and it's hard to insist that Homo sapiens will be an exception.
Even if we had remained technologically humble hunter-gatherers, we would still be living in a geological shooting gallery. A burst of gamma rays from a supernova or collapsed star could irradiate half the planet, brown the atmosphere and destroy the ozone layer, allowing ultraviolet light to irradiate the other half.
Or the Earth's magnetic field could flip, exposing the planet to an interlude of lethal solar and cosmic radiation. An asteroid could slam into the Earth, flattening thousands of square miles and kicking up debris that would black out the sun and drench us with corrosive rain. Supervolcanoes or massive lava flows could choke us with ash, CO2 and sulfuric acid. A black hole could wander into the solar system and pull the Earth out of its orbit or suck it into oblivion.
Even if the species manages to survive for a billion more years, the Earth and solar system will not: Technology, then, is not the reason that our species must some day face the Grim Reaper. Indeed, technology is our best hope for cheating death, at least for a while. As long as we are entertaining hypothetical disasters far in the future, we must also ponder hypothetical advances that would allow us to survive them, such as growing food under lights powered with nuclear fusion, or synthesizing it in industrial plants such as biofuel.
Even technologies of the not-so-distant future could save our skin. It's technically feasible to track the trajectories of asteroids and other "extinction-class near-Earth objects," spot the ones that are on a collision course with the Earth and nudge them off course before they send us the way of the dinosaurs. NASA has also figured out a way to pump water at high pressure into a supervolcano and extract the heat for geothermal energy, cooling the magma enough that it would never blow its top.
For this reason, the techno-apocalyptic claim that ours is the first civilization that can destroy itself is misconceived. As Ozymandias reminded the traveller in Percy Bysshe Shelley's poem, most of the civilizations that have ever existed have been destroyed.
Conventional history blames the destruction on external events such as plagues, conquests, earthquakes or weather. But the physicist David Deutsch points out those civilizations could have thwarted the fatal blows had they had better agricultural, medical or military technology: A judicious look at threats to global well-being is not a call to complacency but the opposite.
Some threats strike me as the 21st-century version of the Y2K bug. This includes the possibility that we will be annihilated by artificial intelligence, whether as direct targets of their will to power or as collateral damage of their single-mindedly pursuing some goal we give them. The first threat depends on a confusion of intelligence with dominance: Those traits are bundled together in Homo sapiens , but an intelligence that is designed rather than having evolved needn't be saddled with ruthless megalomania.
Other threats are less fanciful, but are already being blunted. Contrary to Malthusian predictions of teeming populations eating themselves into mass starvation, the world has been increasingly feeding itself. The reasons include advances in agronomy, the spread of democratic governance and especially the demographic transition: As countries escape extreme poverty and illiteracy, their people choose to have fewer children.
The predictions of catastrophic resource depletion have been repeatedly falsified, too, by a combination of technology and markets. This leaves still other threats which are real and nowhere near being solved: But unsolved does not mean unsolvable.
Pathways to decarbonizing the economy have been mapped out, including carbon pricing, zero-carbon energy sources and programs for carbon capture and storage. The prospect of meeting these challenges is by no means utopian. The world has dealt with global challenges in the past, including atmospheric nuclear testing and the ozone hole. It has survived half-mad despots with nuclear weapons, namely Stalin and Mao, and episodes of dangerous brinkmanship during the Cold War.
It has reduced nuclear arsenals by 85 per cent, and the amount of CO2 emitted per dollar of GDP by 44 per cent. We have closed comments on this story for legal reasons or for abuse. For more information on our commenting policies and how our community-based moderation works, please read our Community Guidelines and our Terms and Conditions.
Site navigation Your reading history. Article text size A. To view your reading history, you must be logged in. Contributed to The Globe and Mail. Published February 24, Updated February 24, Story continues below advertisement. Human extinction is one of the great existential questions of apocalyptic thought; ultimately, no species lasts forever.
APOCALYPSE WARNING: Insect population must be saved or ‘LIFE WILL DISAPPEAR’
10 hours ago APOCALYPSE WARNING: Insect population must be saved or 'LIFE Massive insect decline could have 'catastrophic' environmental impact, study says . All Insects Will Vanish from Earth Within Years if 'Catastrophic'. Massive insect decline could have 'catastrophic' environmental impact, study says APOCALYPSE WARNING: Insect population must be saved or 'LIFE WILL . All Insects Will Vanish from Earth Within Years if 'Catastrophic' Population . What does it mean for the rest of life on Earth? They must have made some kind of mistake in their citation, he thought. How could something as fundamental as the bugs in the sky just disappear? This is especially true of insect populations, which are naturally variable, with wide, trend-obscuring.