The Golden Age of Humanity

[JohnnySavage]

This is it.

 

[Adre]

Can we expect to get laid more often?

 

[Disgustipated]

This is it.

Shaddup, Bert.

 

[JohnnySavage]

Shaddup, Bert.

Did you hear the one about the two donkey's that walked into a bar?


... I don't remember the rest of the joke but your mother's a whore.

 

[Disgustipated]

Can we expect to get laid more often?

Did you hear the one about the two donkey's that walked into a bar?


... I don't remember the rest of the joke but your mother's a whore.

Apparently so.

 

[Bert Notorius]

Shaddup, Bert.

you get stupider every day.

 

[hssh345Alt]

Did you hear the one about the two donkey's that walked into a bar?


... I don't remember the rest of the joke but your mother's a whore.

You 1st, Johny… Eeehooo, eehoo.. No, you go, Busy…
(I remember the rest of the.joke)

 

[Disgustipated]

you get stupider every day.

That would mean you read me everyfuckingday, chunk.

 

[Bert Notorius]

That would mean you read me everyfuckingday, chunk.

i extrapolate.

look it up.

 

[Disgustipated]

i extrapolate.

look it up.

We're not talking about your waistline.

 

[JohnnySavage]

This thread had a lot of potential in my head. But then I didn't really feel like nurturing it.


It's true though; as a species, we've peaked. 100 years from now, there will be less then 3 billion humans, most will live in squalor, the few will live in secure areas.

Too many people and too few resources.

For all of humanity we've lived on the interest of the natural capital. For the last 30 years or so, the interest hasn't been enough to support the mass of humanity and we've been spending that natural capital.

With the global access to information, the have-nots will want the same things the haves, have. The haves will not lower their standard of living, and there aren't enough resources for everyone to live at that standard.

Resource wars, famine, disease, desperation. Humanity will self-correct.

 

[ms_ann_thrope]

This thread had a lot of potential in my head. But then I didn't really feel like nurturing it.


It's true though; as a species, we've peaked. 100 years from now, there will be less then 3 billion humans, most will live in squalor, the few will live in secure areas.

Too many people and too few resources.

For all of humanity we've lived on the interest of the natural capital. For the last 30 years or so, the interest hasn't been enough to support the mass of humanity and we've been spending that natural capital.

With the global access to information, the have-nots will want the same things the haves, have. The haves will not lower their standard of living, and there aren't enough resources for everyone to live at that standard.

Resource wars, famine, disease, desperation. Humanity will self-correct.

There has always been and there will always be haves and have-nots. The majority always accept their position, ultimately, with random pockets of uprising to be expected.

 

[eyer]

It's true though; as a species, we've peaked.

Great example of a "peaked" individual simply projecting, Johnboy.

 

[phrodeau]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...4-mass-shootings-and-204-days-in-2015-so-far/

There have been 204 mass shootings — and 204 days — in 2015 so far.

This year there were 18 mass shootings in April, 39 in May, 41 in June, and 34 so far in July -- and the month isn't over yet. The theater shooting was Louisiana's 8th this year. There have been 10 in Ohio, 14 in California and 16 in New York.

Not an age of gold, but an age of lead.

 

[eyer]

And even the evolutionists will lose faith...

 

[ms_ann_thrope]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...4-mass-shootings-and-204-days-in-2015-so-far/

Not an age of gold, but an age of lead.

How much lead was flying during WWll?

 

[Liar]

This is it.

And you spend it here?

 

[Yardley]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...4-mass-shootings-and-204-days-in-2015-so-far/

Not an age of gold, but an age of lead.

6 billion people and you are of the opinion that the most pressing problem is a few sensationalized shootings? More people are killed by cows. Not to mention mosquitoes and lack of clean drinking water.

 

[phrodeau]

6 billion people and you are of the opinion that the most pressing problem is a few sensationalized shootings? More people are killed by cows. Not to mention mosquitoes and lack of clean drinking water.

Cows kill about 20 Americans every year. Guns kill about 30 Americans every day.

 

[Yardley]

Cows kill about 20 Americans every year. Guns kill about 30 Americans every day.

Guns kill no one. People using guns kill people. The pressing issue you raised was mass shootings. Mass shootings do not kill 30 people everyday. Of those that die from gunshot wounds, some are suicides, some are justified shootings, some are easily explained homicides that would occur with or without the pretense of guns. Remove criminals shot in the commission of a crime, suicide by cop, suicides, and all drug and gang related shootings from the count and being shot is a statistically insignificant event in a country of 340 million people.

Try to stick with the irrelevant topic you raised.

ETA: I knew there have not been 204 mass shootings this decade.

The Mass Shooting Tracker is different from other shooting databases in that it uses a broader definition of mass shooting. "The old FBI definition of Mass Murder (not even the most recent one) is four or more people murdered in one event," the site's creators explain. "It is only logical that a Mass Shooting is four or more people shot in one event."

They are counting every stray bullet that wounds someone. Every bystander shot. Every person shot as a criminal makes his escape. Not at all the picture painted by the hysteria around "mass shootings." You are clearly implying that actual mass murders are occurring daily. You conflate statistics with all persons who die of gun-shot wounds and this nonsensical tracking of their version of "mass shootings." I'm pretty sure the FBI knows more about mass shootings than you do.

 

[Sean Renaud]

How much lead was flying during WWll?

Utterly irrelevant to really anything.

6 billion people and you are of the opinion that the most pressing problem is a few sensationalized shootings? More people are killed by cows. Not to mention mosquitoes and lack of clean drinking water.

Citation is needed on this. Cows last I checked don't even break the top 20 killer animals and none of them get these kinds of numbers. I'm curious about mosquitos and clean drinking water too. Can you provide numbers.

Guns kill no one. People using guns kill people. The pressing issue you raised was mass shootings. Mass shootings do not kill 30 people everyday. Of those that die from gunshot wounds, some are suicides, some are justified shootings, some are easily explained homicides that would occur with or without the pretense of guns. Remove criminals shot in the commission of a crime, suicide by cop, suicides, and all drug and gang related shootings from the count and being shot is a statistically insignificant event in a country of 340 million people.

Try to stick with the irrelevant topic you raised.

Yeah, guns kill people. LEts stop with that bullshit. Yes some of the deaths are suicides, a few are 'justified shootings' (which is mostly a bullshit term) some would have happened without guns and all the other crap.

That doesn't mean we don't have a problem, but that's your opinion. Why don't you just state you don't give a shit, the people dying of guns are dying in acceptable numbers and move on?

 

[BotanyBoy]

Guns kill no one. People using guns kill people. The pressing issue you raised was mass shootings. Mass shootings do not kill 30 people everyday. Of those that die from gunshot wounds, some are suicides, some are justified shootings, some are easily explained homicides that would occur with or without the pretense of guns. Remove criminals shot in the commission of a crime, suicide by cop, suicides, and all drug and gang related shootings from the count and being shot is a statistically insignificant event in a country of 340 million people.

Try to stick with the irrelevant topic you raised.

ETA: I knew there have not been 204 mass shootings this decade.



They are counting every stray bullet that wounds someone. Every bystander shot. Every person shot as a criminal makes his escape. Not at all the picture painted by the hysteria around "mass shootings." You are clearly implying that actual mass murders are occurring daily. You conflate statistics with all persons who die of gun-shot wounds and this nonsensical tracking of their version of "mass shootings." I'm pretty sure the FBI knows more about mass shootings than you do.

Well....if you just don't count gun deaths then there aren't any gun deaths because guns don't kill people.

Brilliant argument!!!

 

[Yardley]

Utterly irrelevant to really anything.



Citation is needed on this. Cows last I checked don't even break the top 20 killer animals and none of them get these kinds of numbers. I'm curious about mosquitos and clean drinking water too. Can you provide numbers.



Yeah, guns kill people. LEts stop with that bullshit. Yes some of the deaths are suicides, a few are 'justified shootings' (which is mostly a bullshit term) some would have happened without guns and all the other crap.

That doesn't mean we don't have a problem, but that's your opinion. Why don't you just state you don't give a shit, the people dying of guns are dying in acceptable numbers and move on?

See the edit.

Lets assume that Phrodeaus intended conflation is correct and that 204 out of the last 204 days a gunman walked in some place and opened up for no apparent reason and at least 4 people died as per his idiotic calculus. Lets call it 1,000 souls lost. Except they aren't souls. To Phrodeau they are just human tissue. Potential organ donors.

That is still nothing on a global scale of people dying of starvation. Which is the topic of the OP. Gun control in the dystopian future envisioned in the OP is the least of humanities problems. I would think a gun would be rather handy as resources get scarce. Or should we go full Darwin and let those able to swing a club the hardest rule?

 

[Yardley]

Well....if you just don't count gun deaths then there aren't any gun deaths because guns don't kill people.

Brilliant argument!!!

Phrodeau was citing some idiotic gun control groups miss-appropriation of the actual, defined label of "mass shootings."

All of the gun deaths I pointed to are not what is meant by the uber-scary label he affixed to the problem. He is implying that one needs to worry about being "gunned down" when "shots ring out" in the public square for no reason.

Being shot randomly by a mass murderer is not something that occupies even a small part of my safety concerns.

What do you figure the odds of your being shot by a loon?

 

[Sean]

Reminds me of Marion Barry's famous one, "if you don't count the murders, Washington DC is a very safe city."