South Africa Flag logo

South African Skeptics

August 19, 2019, 22:21:53 PM
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
Go to mobile page.
News: Follow saskeptics on twitter.
   
   Skeptic Forum Board Index   Help Forum Rules Search GoogleTagged Login Register Chat Blogroll  
Pages: 1 2 [3]  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic:

Overpopulation

 (Read 8459 times)
Description: Earth steadily heading for a loud and crowded planet
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Rigil Kent
Clotting Factor
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +19/-3
Offline Offline

Posts: 2460


Three men make a tiger.


« Reply #30 on: January 12, 2012, 17:11:47 PM »

It never hurts as must as some people think, to admit we were wrong or made a mistake. I'm still here after all  Cheesy
You mean old Telly accepted you apologies?  Evil Evil
Logged
BoogieMonster
NP complete
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +19/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 3078



« Reply #31 on: January 12, 2012, 17:26:57 PM »

Quote
I just don't think either st0nes or boogieM took him literally either or were necessarily negative toward him or his post.

I didn't think he literally meant "lets do it", no. And I'm not trying to slate you superman. It's ironic to me that you talk about being misunderstood on a forum, as an effect of misunderstanding us.  Cheesy

I am skeptical and do question stuff as a first reaction though, because it seems that he believes this is a good idea, even though we already know the results of trying to change people's sexual orientation, subtly or otherwise.
Logged
Superman
Full Member
***

Skeptical ability: +1/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 170


« Reply #32 on: January 12, 2012, 18:42:43 PM »

it seems that he believes this is a good idea, even though we already know the results of trying to change people's sexual orientation, subtly or otherwise.

@BoogieMonster, I am answering you now since I find this post entertaining. Even a bit of disagreement can be entertaining if you don't take it too far and it becomes a fight. I don't want a fight.

1.) I am not talking about changing anybody's sexuality.
2.) Sexuality is a result of 'nature and nurture' which is the best science today can tell us about sexuality.
3.) Kingsley's Scale (a bit controversial) of sexuality on a sliding scale, I think has some truth to it. As I understand it most people fall mostly in the middle i.e. bisexuality.
4.) I think most straight identified people will realize their capacity for being bisexual if they allowed themselves to experiment.
5.) There will always still be a lot of people that are 100% gay or 100% straight. I would not want to force anything on anybody.

So I am saying if people were more open to the idea they might discover they are bisexual and can have a homosexual relationship. But as you say this is dangerous territory and perhaps not a good idea.
Logged
Rigil Kent
Clotting Factor
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +19/-3
Offline Offline

Posts: 2460


Three men make a tiger.


« Reply #33 on: January 12, 2012, 18:59:52 PM »

4.) I think most straight identified people will realize their capacity for being bisexual if they allowed themselves to experiment.

OH, OH! MRS KENT PLEASE COME HAVE A GANDER AT THIS! Cool Cool
Logged
Superman
Full Member
***

Skeptical ability: +1/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 170


« Reply #34 on: January 12, 2012, 22:19:09 PM »

Cannot sleep so I will add some more to my post.

I would like to introduce you to the rabbit hole of contradictory information.

Been reading the ol' Wikipedia. Here is the article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_orientation

Here are two some interesting quotes:

Quote
The American Psychiatric Association (APA) has stated, "some people believe that sexual orientation is innate and fixed; however, sexual orientation develops across a person's lifetime".[35] The APA also says that "most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation".[36] "[F]or some ["people"] the focus of sexual interest will shift at various points through the life span..."[37] A community may change over time.[38]


My question to the APA is now is sexuality fixed or fluid? Are they perhaps both? Very confusing isn't it.

Here is another and perhaps more truthful. More down at the bottom.

Quote
The American Psychiatric Association stated:[60]
No one knows what causes heterosexuality, homosexuality, or bisexuality. Homosexuality was once thought to be the result of troubled family dynamics or faulty psychological development. Those assumptions are now understood to have been based on misinformation and prejudice.


This is the truth as I see it we would need to get more data before we can make a non contradictory theory about sexuality. Of course today people like contradictions.
Logged
cyghost
Skeptically yours
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +12/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 1409


Carpe diem


« Reply #35 on: January 13, 2012, 07:13:23 AM »

You mean old Telly accepted you apologies?  Evil Evil
Not sure if he did - they were sincerely meant however. 
Logged
GCG
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +8/-4
Offline Offline

Posts: 1829


skeptical mantis is skeptical


adele horn
WWW
« Reply #36 on: January 13, 2012, 08:36:47 AM »

I am what would be considered bisexual.  but it's a shitty label that i hate, because for some people it translates as an excuse to be promiscious. but i digress.
growing up in a staunch afrikaans household, gay was not even something that existed.  i had a gay aunt who lived with her partner of many years.  there was never any open hostility towards her (that i can remember), and her partner attended family gatherings and the like.  and yet being gay was belittled, degraded, etc.
i had not the foggiest was gay was.  one of my best mates was as gay as the day is long, i had no clue.  my high-school crush turned out to be supergay.  i was clueless.
my first lesbian encounter was with my ex landlady.  uncomfortable at best. 
then i met my first girlfriend.  and i pursued her.  i had no idea what i was feeling, or what it meant, but i was besotted.  i was engaged at the time, so i left him for her.  and within months, i was out and proud. (in sasolburg no less).
when we broke up, i ended up dating an indian man.  i had random flings with women inbetween.  but have had my long-term relationships with men.
point of the story, sexuality is fluid.  if you let yourself not be constrained by peer pressure.  or society.
i grew up straight, because it's all i knew.
when a strong, butch woman came along, i explored that.  i had never thought to put a label on myself.  i hate having to explain to people what i 'am'.  i neither prefer the male or female form.  a gorgeous man can be a doos.  a hot girl can be a bitch.  so i tend to like geeks.  of either gender.  procreation tackle nonwithstanding. 
both gay and straight society boxes you in.  pressurizes you to be one or the either.  both communties are relatively tolerant of the other, but seemingly, the thought of being fluid between the two sides, are allmost deemed a cop-out.  you are a draadsitter.  a lot of gay women wil not touch a 'bisexual' woman.  i cannot vouch for gay men.
straight men love the idea of having their missus with another woman, but would shit bricks if she wanted to see him with another man.  present forum company included.
i think that male/female is relative.  to upbringing, hormone levels, DNA transfer at conception, whatever.  there is no hard-and-fast rules.
many, many shades of gray.
sexuality changes as the individual matures, get wizer. plenty straight, married men, pick up boys for a blowjob on a friday night, their wives oblivious.  is he gay?  maybe.  but he had to conform, so he does.
and just leaves acres of pain.
Logged
Rigil Kent
Clotting Factor
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +19/-3
Offline Offline

Posts: 2460


Three men make a tiger.


« Reply #37 on: January 13, 2012, 09:01:43 AM »

Insofar as it is even possible to classify these things, your description reminds me of a condition called pansexuality.
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pansexual

I genuinely like the term. If I had to be anything but straight, I would have fancied being pansexual. It sounds kinda sophisticated and at the same time mysteriously dangerous. The sort of orientation one might expect from art collecting mafiosi.

Rigil
Logged
brianvds
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +12/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 1826



WWW
« Reply #38 on: January 13, 2012, 10:13:58 AM »

I think it is more the standard of living than education that helped Europe. A good education goes a long way in ensuring a good income but to just try and teach people about the evils of overpopulation is not going to do it.

Indeed: all over the world, the single greatest factor in reducing population growth has been urbanization and the attendant higher standard of living that goes with it (as well as education and empowerment of women). Rather ironically, the people who can most afford larger families are the least likely to have them, and vice versa.

You needn't teach people a thing about the dangers of overpopulation. They won't listen anyway. You need to get them into cities where they have a chance of a career and a high income and a middle class or at least lower middle class living standard. Then most of them automatically have fewer children and you end up with the European and Japanese situation where the population is actually shrinking.

You then need to keep the ecological footprint of those cities as small as possible by high-intensity, industrial-style modern farming.

Thus, once again rather ironically, the greenest policies to follow are precisely the policies that organizations like Greenpeace have been fighting tooth and nail over the past few decades.
Logged
Mefiante
Defollyant Iconoclast
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +61/-9
Offline Offline

Posts: 3749


In solidarity with rwenzori: Κοπρος φανεται


WWW
« Reply #39 on: January 13, 2012, 10:40:20 AM »

Rather ironically, the people who can most afford larger families are the least likely to have them, and vice versa.
There’s actually an understandable reason for this.  Besides the education aspect, for people living in poverty, it makes sense to have more children because this improves the chances that (1) the family can fend for itself, (2) the family line will persist, and (3) the parents will be well looked after in their old age.  It is, in effect, feudalism in a microcosm:  The more serfs you have, the better your social station.  For the modern middle and upper classes, there is much greater certainty about each of those points.

Thus, once again rather ironically, the greenest policies to follow are precisely the policies that organizations like Greenpeace have been fighting tooth and nail over the past few decades.
… which is another instance illustrating the necessity of a sceptical approach, especially in cases where a minority claims “special knowledge” that is emotionally held and zealously defended when challenged.

'Luthon64
Logged
BoogieMonster
NP complete
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +19/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 3078



« Reply #40 on: January 17, 2012, 15:18:06 PM »

Quote from: Someone
The road to hell is paved with good intentions
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3]  All   Go Up
  Print  


 
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
Page created in 0.631 seconds with 24 sceptic queries.
Google visited last this page March 28, 2019, 22:15:06 PM
Privacy Policy