asked in Science+Technology by ELITE (3,054 points) 8 36 66
replied by ELITE (3,662 points) 7 15 56
Could be but, we cannot control all human to breed again and again because its us human to produce.
replied by ELITE (3,548 points) 4 25 92

There is a possibility of over population being the cause of man's destruction on the long run if it's not controlled.

Please log in or register to answer this question.

4 Answers

1 thanks
answered by LEGEND (6,011 points) 6 13 27
selected by
Best answer
No doubt the increasing human population is putting a huge dent on the environment. The capacity is no longer holding and natural resources are fast depleting. Still exploitation of the environment is increasing as the human population is increasing. I think humans If stopped breeding (not completely though as that would mean extinction) but in a systematically controlled pattern, we would be able to manage the environment and resources in a way that would sustain humans for longevity.

This is reminds of the "one child policy" in China from 1979. This was a temporary measure to help balance economic growth and rapid population growth. Human population is definitely a pobelm. We can not eliminate humans to reduce the population but we can definitely minimize birth rate.
replied by ELITE (3,054 points) 8 36 66
Hi. Thank you for this answer. Have you ever heard of the Cornucopian viewpoint on population? This theory points out that while humans pose grave dangers to the environment and natural resources, they, too, are the ones responsible in developing new ways to improve the status quo and the well-being of human beings. Hence, the slogan humans are the ultimate resources.

May I know your opinion on this?

Thank you.
replied by LEGEND (6,011 points) 6 13 27
Yes I've heard about this theory. A cornucopian believes that increase in human population comes with increase in knowledge, innovation and crafts. Hence human technology will help develop ways to accommodate for the exponential population. 

I'm not sure about that. With respect to the environment, it isn't the earth that is expanding but rather the population of People on earth. If this population isn't controlled, the energy on earth won't hold as opposed to the cornucopian theory. 
replied by ELITE (3,054 points) 8 36 66
With regard to China's one child policy, will give your approval to that kind of policy if in case your country considers it?
replied by LEGEND (6,011 points) 6 13 27
Yes I would. It doesn't have to be the exact policy but the nature of sort. In my country, the poorest regions have the highest  birth rate. So if birth rate can be minimized, resources wouldn't fall short. 
replied by ELITE (3,054 points) 8 36 66
Why do you think the poorest regions have the highest birth rates other than not having access to birth control methods?
replied by LEGEND (6,011 points) 6 13 27
To be honest, it is quite evident around here that it is because of illiteracy and ignorance. The people in those regions are uneducated and lack enlightenment. Even when they have access to free birth control methods, they do not patronize It. 

Take for instance polio in the northern region. The north has the highest percentage of children handicapped by polio because their parents would not let them get vaccinated. 
replied by ELITE (3,054 points) 8 36 66
We do have the same condition here. I think what the institutions need to do is to encourage the people to change their attitude or to do their best just so the minority will have access to quality education.

Thank you very much for your response.
0 thanks
answered by VISIONARY (9,008 points) 7 17 73
Yes,I agree to that it will be for the good of humanity,environment and resources if we could stop breeding their animals and behaves like the higher animals that we are.

The environment is depleting because of so many people in it,houses are built indiscriminately so as to accommodate more people and the environment is jampacked with noise which pollute the environment.

No more farmland to cultivate natural food because factories are expanding to accommodate more workers and as such more waste are generated in to the environment from too many factories.

Some rare species of animals and other consumable animals are going extinct because of high trapping and killing of the animals for human consumption.

Deforestation isn't left out too many people leaving the forest and land bare from fallling trees and other plants for human consumption. The more population the more the environment is degraded.
0 thanks
answered by LEGEND (6,086 points) 3 27 50
I don't think so. I think over population is one of the biggest problem up to date, but it is not the reason why the environment is getting dirtier and uglier. I think we should stop being selfish and increase our awareness of preserving our natural resources. We should be aware that dynamites will wreck the fish, too much cutting of trees could cause big floods. If we continue dumping plastics our drainage will get clog and we get floods after. If we continue killing endangered animals then in the future we are in danger too. We need to balance everything. If we use one, or cut one trees, we need to plant two. We only need to know how to take care of our environment because that is one of our purpose why we are her on earth. We have brains to clear the mess we made so we need to do it.
replied by ELITE (3,054 points) 8 36 66
edited by
Thank you for taking the time to answer my question. I agree with you that humans, as prime users of natural resources, should take full responsibility in taking care of the environment.

However, overpopulation has been a problem several decades ago, and it continues to be one of the biggest problems until now. In fact, as early as 1798, Robert Malthus in his work "An Essay on the Principle of Population" said that the power of population is indefinitely greater that the power of the earth to produce sustenance for man. There will come a time that the resources will not be enough if population continues to grow exponentially.
0 thanks
answered by (299 points) 1 12 22
Humans should breed responsibly. If you can't support a human being, don't bring one to the world and add the poor baby to the list of unfortunate people who have no access to food, shelter, clothing, and education. The increasing population is continuously degrading our environment. Humans produce carbon dioxide, waste products, consume resources, hence overpopulation will just worsen the current state of the environment. I'm not saying we should completely stop breeding but as i said in my first sentence, breed responsibly. I believe that education plays an important role in saving the environment and if we will not be able to provide our offspring with basic education, they might end up just destroying the earth by breeding irresponsibly as what their parents did and of course end up ravaging the earth.

Related questions

5 answers 1replies
11 answers 3replies
asked Sep 20, 2018 in Love+Relationships by chantmaze (21 points) 1 6 25
2 answers 1replies

3,187 questions

9,857 answers

4,647 replies

2,538 users

Most active Members
October 2019:
  1. Leyley - 38 activities
  2. skyex - 8 activities
  3. ochaya oscar james - 8 activities
  4. traiti - 7 activities
  5. Shiv Prakash - 6 activities
  6. LydiaC3006 - 6 activities
  7. Maxime - 5 activities
  8. DuncanLane91 - 4 activities
  9. merleneNMS - 4 activities
  10. lincy - 4 activities
Most answered Members
September 2019:
  1. Leyley - 25 answers
  2. amnelso - 4 answers
  3. Leiah Watkins - 2 answers
  4. lincy - 1 answers
  5. carlclear - 1 answers
  6. Marvin James 1 - 1 answers
  7. greencrayon - 1 answers
  8. Jolejnik - 1 answers
  9. Jasmin - 1 answers
  10. scoopity - 1 answers