You can't even engage me in this topic/debate Why are you still responding.

To be fair you haven’t contributed anything of value. At least sub tried to engage in a spirited debate bringing some info into it.

You just insulted him.

we aren't overpopulated in the malthusian sense. but it will take many generations for modern civilization to be carbon neutral on average, and by then the planet will have warmed enough to trigger worldwide mayhem. how quickly the planet will warm is a function of how much we pollute on average and how many of us there are.

im not going to take the time to teach him overpopulation on a worldwide scale, if he wants to do the research himself thats fine. until that point he is simply trolling




its not a debate lol, its a fact

I agree. Our problem as a people is the overconsumption that society has created. Especially in the first world countries.
We have to find a new energy source, and quickly if we want to live even just hundreds of years into the future. Just had to ask though because many just look at it as a people problem and eliminate more people and problem solved. That's simply not the case at all. The amount of people on earth isn't the problem.

This post was edited by Subzer0isGG on Mar 2 2021 11:09am

You can't even have a conversation about the topic.

"i can spew any outrageous garbage I want and it is YOUR job to prove me wrong. otherwise you're an idiot"

lol nty

Another simpleton.

true, but the absolute amount of pollution means there's not much time left to transition to cleaner energy without mass upheavals or irreversible climate change. humanity would still be adding to the greenhouse effect with a lower population count but we'd have more time to come up with alternatives.

I actually believe it is.

I would say it’s the onus of the person disagreeing with a point to prove that person is incorrect.