Think about it for a while. It'll come to you (maybe).

I normally stay out political stuff... buts lets just apply some simple logic:

Problem#1- Bathrooms (only a problem for some)
Problem #2- Over population ( a problem for all, no matter where you live/worship)

Solutions;
All bathrooms are unisex, just like at home. #1 solved.

Population: Super-bug (antibiotic resistant) wiped out 2/3 of worlds population:
#1 & # 2 solved.

Oh well, not every joke lands.

What is the home nation of the NCAA?

This is a crazy thread so let me add my 0.02

1) Biology teaches us that if a population reaches anywhere remotely near the carrying capacity of a closed ecosystem you will have massive population decline.

Since the human population of earth keeps increasing at a fast rate that means we are no where near the carrying capacity of earth.

I am not saying that we should stick our heads in the sand and say "all is OK so who cares" but there seems to be a few people that believe that we have already surpassed it, and that is obviously wrong.

So let's look at food supply and population growth

2) IMHO the biggest issue with food supply today and the foreseeable future is not food production but distribution and human stupidity.

a) distribution is relatively easy to understand.Have you ever finished eating and there was still food on your plate and you threw it out? If the person that was hungry had that extra food from the get go maybe none of you would be hungry. But it does not stop there, have you ever thrown out food because it went bad or you got tired of eating left overs? what do you think (at a larger scale) happens at the restaurant or at the store or at the farm?

the better the distribution the higher the carrying capacity becomes.

b) human stupidity is a bit more tricky since it is a bit of a catch all. Also People should not take it seriously since it is a societal and not an individual issue.

I have a home with a yard, some trees, some flowers, hedges and some grass (nothing out of the ordinary). Now if the previous owners had planted fruit trees instead of the trees I have, those trees would be producing food, if I planted vegetables or shrubs that give fruits instead of flowers, that would mean more food and if instead of grass it was dandelion greens, herbs and other greenery you can walk on that is edible my yard would produce even more food. But it does not make sense to cut down those healthy huge old trees and if I removed my hedges and planted blueberry bushes or raspberry bushes people would think I am nuts and if I removed my grass and went with dandelions, my neighbour that mows his lawn twice a week, goes over it with tweezers and a vacuum would go nuts.

If people have planted a home garden, has everything been perfect? probably not, the same is true with all food, There are many tons of oddities produced constantly and many get thrown away because they don't conform to the standard.

Think of that jeans you are wearing, it is made of cotton, even though it is still wearable, you get rid of it because it is no longer fashionable, but that cotton needed to grow and that means that field and those resources could not be used to grow food. it is the same for any piece of clothing made from any natural fiber.

.....

b) population control:
first I am sure we can all agree that some people should have never had children. Unfortunately that is easier to determine once it is too late.

second on sterilizing part of the population that is a crazy idea since except for those few exceptions who is to decide on the chriteria and make the the final decision on who might make a good parent or not.

thirdly as someone else stated, if you sterilize everyone in a few years there will be no one left and before that no one to work so that you can retire or be taken care of in your old age.

fourthly a healthy population needs to have a triangular shape it does mean population expantion, but look at this graph


it is based on reproductive age, but that is not that different from "socialy productive" age (making good money and paying lots of taxes) take out some of the lower yellow and add them to the blue and some of the orange and add them to the yellow and you would be there. But that being said, like the graph shows Canada falls into the small growth rate and that is why there is talk of raising retirement age [Link: thestar.com] The yellow part needs to work for the easier blue and harder orange part to exist. IF population control is really necessary then shrinking the orange part makes more logical sense (but not emotional sense) then limiting births in order to get one of the pyramids to the right

3) washrooms.

I don't get the issue, does anyone have gender segregated bathrooms at home? the urinals can be a bit of an issue (not enough privacy in general) but when it comes to stalls just put a longer door if needed and let everyone use any of them it will also help with lineups.

Do you know how many chickens per square foot you can have in a commercial chicken house? They are born there & die there.

So your great grandchildren - they will be born into a box, where they will spend their lives going from their resting box, to their work area, then back to their resting box; their whole lives until they die. Earth population = 20 billion. But hey, the death rate hasn't caught up to the birth rate yet so we are fine.

Has got to be the stupidest thing I've ever heard and yet another example of why we are headed there!
I did say *comfortably* sustain. I guess some people think a 3'x3' cell is comfortable, eating a bowl of protein mush 3x a day is delicious, and getting a antibiotic shot everyday is enjoyable.

Please all those in favor raise your hands, I need to know where to aim.

Wait, stick to the facts. Isn't that 65 million, proven conclusively by the scientific method?

Not sure of your point. If it is that some mistreat the chicken in order to save a couple of bucks, I am sure you are right. If it is that the standards themselves are not humane enough and makes the chickens life miserable, you might be right, but I neither know enough on the subject nor am I able to speak to chickens to ask their opinions (would you rather live like this or have never been born?).

As a kid I used to have a friend whose dad was a farmer and I spent a lot of time on their farm in the summer. They would grow "ethnic" greens (rapini, dandelion greens....) but he also had, for fun, some animals (need something to occupy the time through the winter months) including chickens. When we went to the chicken coop the chickens would always be bunched close together in the same area even if the rest of the enclosing was empty. Why? same reason other birds live in flocks and other animals live in herds and some fishes travel in schools. Evolutionary biology. If you are alone and a hdfungry predator decides it is lunch time there is a 1/1 chance you will be lunch. If you are in a group of 100 there is a 1/100 chance that you will be lunch and a 99% chance of survival.



what a load of BS

1) I am 47 and as far as I know I don't have any kids, so it would be idiotic for me to worry about my great grandchildren

2) let's just be clear, the scientists estimate that if everything goes well (best case scenario for increase) at the end of the century (i.e. 2100) the earth population will be around 11B, to get to 20B our great grand kids will probably be great grand parents + if they are still alive

3) the earths land mass is around 150M square km, if we assume a population of 20B that would average out to 80,000 square feet of land per individual, since people now live on water and others in homes with multiple levels (including apartment buildings and condos I don't get why people will need to live in a 3'x3' cell. At 20B (assuming enough food) that would mean society will most likely look like today with some living in small apartments and others living in mansions, while others might not have a neighbour near by.

4) I don't get the mush part. Is it because you are assuming that the person will be so old that they can't eat anything solid? is it a storage issue (like a bomb shelter)? or a transportation issue (like a mars colony bringing food from earth)? other wise it just does not make sense. what I mean is today I can have a delicious chicken breast or leg or turn it into mush and then nuggets (at least it was mush once). if you mean traditional meats won't exist and it will come from insects like these cricket flour protein bars [Link: naakbar.com] then why won't I be able to buy whole crickets and eat them (nice and crispy). Even if it is 100% from plant why won't we be able to choose a less processed version or like oat meal change that grey mush into something more interesting like oatmeal cookies?

5) *comfortably* sustain is not a scientific term. Do you mean eating lobster, saffron, truffles, caviar, kobe beef, fois gras...? dishes made with rare and expensive ingredients? then yes obviously not everyone can just live on them. On the other hand if *comfortably* sustain means everyone can have enough food so that they don't go to bed hungry and malnourished, then the earth can easily handle that today and for the foreseeable future.

If there is not enough food people are constantly hungry and malnourished (and it happens for very few people today due to distribution) it leads to health issues which will mean lower life expectancy, less fertility and more children dying. When it happens to enough individuals it would ultimately have a negative effect on population growth. The fact that population decline is not an issue (but growth is) shows that if there is a shortest f food that it is inconsequential, the fact that so much food gets thrown away shows that the small issue that exists is not one of production but distribution. Since there is no real reason that anyone should go hungry to bed today.

Careful...you are about to fall down the Anthony hole.

According to the right wing bathroom patriots...Unisex bathrooms are exactly what will cause the destruction of humanity. Two birds with one stone.

Can't we all just pee in the backyard, or off the balcony if you don't have a yard?


Maybe pee out the window )remembering to remove the screen first, otherwise it makes a mess, and note the breezes, because there can be blow back)...?


Life is too short to worry about this stuff.

The problem with carrying capacity when it comes to humans is that we aren't depending just on the environment. We are depending (very heavily now and more so as we move forward) on our technology. If we were depending just on the environment, we probably are well past the capacity.

And that makes any calculations sort of useless. Anything that interrupts that technology's availability can cause a negative cycle. I.e. it'll probably just be a bump and we get over it. But it may not. There are so many inter-dependencies, and those are dependent on so many factors, that it's always possible you can have a perfect storm scenario. Even then most of those would not be civilization collapsing scenarios. But they could cause significant collapses.

Also, the higher the population, the more people are likely to be impacted by any man-made or natural disaster. The cost of those things therefore go up at a non-linear rate. And the local infrastructure/technology collapse that occurred because of one of them can be one of those cracks that suddenly spreads in an unexpected way.

Has anyone tried the smokehouse BBQ bacon sandwich at chic fil a? It's pretty good. I think it's a seasonal item, so hurry and try it.

Sure have. It was great. They had a smokehouse salad testing in select markets. It too was terrific.

My kids prefer the grilled chicken nuggets over the regular ones