Sampler_List of Topics_Search
explosion? From an article by Linda
One of the tools the pro abortion
community uses to further their agenda is the OVER POPULATION MYTH. I can't
count the number of times I've picked up a newspaper or magazine, or heard
on the television.(all
too willing to propagate the lie).news,
the "ever increasing population problem" and how we're "in the process
of destroying 'mother Earth'.(Father
God never said ANYTHING about a mother Earth).because
of all the people that are covering our planet."
When in fact,
quite the opposite is true. Contrary to Planned Parenthood propaganda,
world population growth trends are measurably declining and too much so
for industrialized nations. In fact, since America is aborting 1.5 million
of it's preborn children every year, if it weren't for immigration, our
population would now be declining. But, the main
reason the world's population growth rate is declining so fast is that
the average number of births per woman.(bpw).in
the Third World is down from 6.1 in 1965 to 3.1 today, according to the
World Bank. A population remains stable at an average of 2.1 bpw, which
means the Third World has come 3/4 of the way to stability in one generation.
Most affluent countries level off at 1.7 or 1.8 bpw, which means the world's
population will eventually peak and then slowly decline.
Urban development will not cause a food crisis. Cities currently occupy
roughly 1.5 percent of the earth's surface. According to a World Bank study,
even at the peak world population.(approximately
9 billion before stabilization), cities will occupy less
than 4 percent of the total land area. Considering the expected food needs,
this small loss will not even come close to pushing mankind over the brink
into a food crisis. The world has millions of acres of good farmland in
Canada, United States, throughout South America, the Soviet Union, europe,
etc. that are underutilized or even wasted.
In recent decades, the world has lost little of its wild areas to population
growth. Forests are ceasing to be plowed down. there is concern everywhere,
evidenced by actions toward conservation. The world has been cropping nearly
the same 6 million square miles of land since 1945. The forested areas
are still what they were over 3 decades ago. Nations aren't taking more
land for food production. Increasing yields, planting more trees, utilization
of irrigation methods, and education as to improving diet away from chicken
and meat, to more a healthier grain
based diet will ensure that the balance presently achieved will continue.
Planned Parenthood hosted a lecture
a few years back in Sarasota, Florida, by Werner Fornos, who the paper
hailed as an "internationally recognized leader in the field of population
His topic for
the evening was "Gaining People, Losing Ground". The fact that it was hosted
by Planned Parenthood tells you what the solution was........(as
PP promotes in China – No choice for the Chinese).government
Please get out
your calculator, do the math and you'll see just how under populated our
planet actually is.
In Ralph Epperson's
book The Unseen Hand, he stated that
the world had approximately 4 billion people.(now
closer to five and a half). If you took the population of
the world, split it up into families of four and gave them each a piece
of land 50' x 53', the entire population of the planet would fit neatly
into the state of Oregon. Sounds amazing doesn't it?
is Food First,
By Francis Moore Lappe, showing how abundant the world's food supply is,
enough easily to support 60 billion plus, and cites a 14 year agricultural
study backing up her conclusions.(get
the book!), and which identifies that the
problem is not distribution and eating preferences, not production
incapacities, but poverty. "The famines
of the last two decades have either resulted from civil war or been confined
to the harshest, most uncertain, and thinly populated regions of Africa,
or both. The hunger remaining in the world is not due to distribution problems.
Simple poverty is to blame. The bitter irony is that most countries have
adequate agricultural resources to produce their own basic food supplies,
if they use high yield seeds and fertilizers.(Africa
if they adopt effective government
institutions that don't rob the people and discourage farmers and
industries." ... Dennis
In Mary Pride's
book The Way Home, she calculated that
you could give every person in the world 2,000 square feet.(which
is larger than most homes).and
everyone would fit into the state of Texas.
Let's take this
one step further: Imagine yourself standing up in the middle of a circle
about five feet in diameter. If the entire planet's population, stood in
identical circles, they would ALL fit in the City of Jacksonville, Florida.
Impossible? Do the math!
Now I'm certainly
not saying that we could survive like that. I'm just trying to make the
point that we are NOT overpopulated. You see, the 'population explosion'
myth is just one more attempt by the people that profit from abortion to
convince the world that killing children in the womb is not only a right,
but an enforceable must.
hunger are NOT a result of over population, but rather a result of tyrannical
governments and mismanagement of resources. Enough food rots daily in the
tropics to feed the world's population for a week. More than 2 pounds of
grains, seeds and nuts are available at any one time for each of the world's
inhabitants, not to mention, milk, cheese, fish, beef, pork, etc.
So the next
time you hear someone parroting the "Over Population" excuse for abortion......
get out your calculator and set the record straight!"
Kasun, professor of economics at Humboldt State University in California,
observes in her 1988 book The War Against Population
1) No more than 1-3% of
the Earth's ice free land area is occupied by humans.
2) Less than 11% of the
Earth's ice free land area is used for agriculture.
3) Somewhere between 8 and
22 times the current world population could support itself at the present
standard of living, using present technology.
4) This leaves 50% of the
Earth's land surface open to wildlife and conservation areas.
The lower limit of 8 times the current
been considered as being perfectly workable. According to Dr. Kasun, "better
yields and/or the use of a larger share of the land area would support
over 40 billion persons." Former Harvard Center for Population Studies
Director Roger Revelle estimated that the agricultural resources
of the world were capable of providing an adequate diet.(2,500
kilocalories per day).for
40 billion people, and that it would require the use of less than 25% of
the Earth's ice free land area. Revelle estimated that the less developed
continents were capable of feeding 18 billion people, and that Africa alone
was capable of feeding 10 billion people, or twice the current world population,
and more than 12 times the 1990 population of Africa.
to the fact that many new strains of food have been developed that can
boost food production, there are other indications that food would not
be a problem. In the September 1976 issue of Scientific American,
Dr. David Hopper asserted that the worlds 'food problem' does not arise
from any physical limitation on potential output or any danger of unduly
stressing the environment. The limitations on abundance are to be found
in social and political structures of nations and the economic relations
between them. In fact the planet, during its least populous years, suffered
from hunger and famine. It was only when state political controls receded
in the late 19th century that hunger also began to recede.
It is curious
that many densely populated countries with relatively free economies are
thriving, and are seldom mentioned in the 'over population' debate, while
sparsely populated nations with oppressive governments are "plagued with
problems relating to population". Taiwan, with a population density of
five times that of China, produces 20 times as much Gross National Product
than China. Similarly, Singapore, with a density of 11,910 per square mile,
enjoys a per capita GNP of $8,782, while Ethiopia, with a density of 101
per square mile, has a per capita GNP of $121.