But that would remove the rule that every child deserves to live because they actually kill children or sell them if the children in a house exceeds the limit of children that should be in a household.
just build a dome on one of the planst, lead a tube from earrth tothere and send a quick supply of oxygen
note you said as yet..... it and it probally will get in the next couple of decades, the way technology updating is increasing currently... i'd say it wouldnt take a while
You don't have a wife, first of all. Sex isn't only to make babies either. You mean it would take a while. If civilization fails, it probably wouldn't be in our lifetime. But I doubt that we'll be able to colonize planets in this lifetime either.
70% of N. America is wilderness, 85% of Russia is wilderness. We are only just starting to explore ocean habitates. We do not lack space, we lack energy. To those that talk of civilisation and suggest that it is one thing within human kind, and consider that the death of civilisation is a death to humanity. You need to open your eyes to what civiliastion is and why all civilisations need to die in order to preserve both this planet and to give way to new civilisations. European and American civilisations have been dead for a very long time, but no one noticed, that's how things always happened in the past; until the next big ideological change occours that forces us westerners from the post-modern era into an new era none of us will notice any real change, culture will change and things will be different but without an underlying ideology civilisation will not exist. I doubt we ever needed any of the forms of civilisation that has led us to where we are today, I especially doubt that any new form of civilisation would serve its members any better that those of yesteryear. But back to the question, no, this planet has space for allot more people, at the moment it may also have the energy to sustain more, but the weak link in the chain is ourselves. Currently we have enough food production to feed everyone in the world 3 times over, and we cannot even get that right. Some people are greedy, not in the sense that they eat 2 times what most would eat but in the sense that they would deny others a basic decent living in order to show how their living is, oh so, special. Some people have mentioned going to space; not going to happen as only the rich could afford such a thing, and those that could afford it can only afford it because of their terrestrial interests; and there is no way the poor would be shipped off to space, even if it where possible, as it is much cheaper to have another war, and have the (from the super-rich perspective) ignorant plebs fight in that war or die in that war.
if the world runs out of space in the next billion years, i think that we'd have advanced enough tech to be able to face overpopulation, and yeah- maybe even be able to live on the moon.
Yeah in my opinion, the world would most likely run out of space when the sun burns out. Theory of conservation of energy, most of our energy comes from the sun, to reproduce we need energy from food and going down the long line of food chains starts out with plants that gets energy from the sun. So basically the sun is constantly supplying is with energy any other form of energy we get on earth just gets converted into a different form.
energy cannot be created or destroyed, only changed from one form to another.In other words there will still be energy even after the sun is gone. The energy the sun is currently producing as EM waves will change to another form.
That's what I mean we are basically taking all the energy from the sun. And well we may or may not run out of space but if we keep reproducing then yes we might as we choose to use the energy the sun has provided us to reproduce. Otherwise it will all turn to heat and due to green house effect, eventually die from global warming. And right now we cant convert heat energy to something else. Sure there is solar power but that is not efficient. Think about it, everything we do, running, machinery, any kind of kinetic movements, all the energy are eventually converted to heat.
Loonylion has pointed out a very important aspect of energy, and due to the unusual energy cycle on earth this means understanding the use of Carbon as an energy source. Carbon http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon is without any doubt the most complex of elements. There is no question that carbon in some forms contains stupid amounts of energy, alas carbon is a hard nut to crack. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wigner_energy This may prove to be important in possible carbon conversion/energy projects. But from an energy perspective we obviously have a long way to go before we can recover controlled energy from mass carbon deposits. (Sadly there will never be any further understanding of carbon as a fuel source unless we can continue to use experimental nuclear reactors, and if a pure carbon solution to energy can be found it could only be at a nuclear level, if carbon becomes a core fuel in nuclear energy the environmental impact would be zero.)
exactly what I wanted to say, the space to build is not a problem here, it's more of our technology development and resources that we lack. when we'll find a way to live in arctic temperatures and buil structures in such temperature that's when we will maybe start to run out of space, but then again, by that time, we might have developed a space program letting us inhabit other planets
space habitat is a long time away, do you know how long it would take to terraform a planet? hundreds of millions of years and that depends on how habitable it is at the start and how big the planet is. for now we are completely depended on the earth and its resonances