I don't think he is seeing the big picture . He thinks that these third world countries HAVE to have so many children. I think the governments of places like China , India , parts of Africa should enforce a strict childbirth limit of maybe one or two per woman that way the human species and doesn't overshoot the carrying capacity of the earth . Possibly even here in the U.S because although we have less children, each childs carbon footprint is many times more that of one from the third world .

Where's the inconvenience?

Organic Farming will never ever be a silver bullet, it's only a rich's people fad.

thank vietsub

guys chill.

here is  a convenient truth, WE are all dead by the time this shjit matters. :D




win?

the growing population is a problem too.. more mouths to feed, more competition, less overall quality of life, especially for the third world. nobody seems to be addressing that

lol guys climate change is real but al gore is just selling it and i do not trust this guy

You say there is no single solution, but in my view you were scared of using that word: veganism.

Here's my concept to solve this problem:
- Encourage vegetarianism via dialogue or reward. Eating the plants directly is way more efficient than feeding them to animals and consuming the resulting meat.
- Invest into open source GMO technology. The biggest problem with most GMOs is the way companies like Monsanto try to make profit out of them. We need national or international systems to support development of more efficient plants.
- Slow down humanities growth or even reverse it. This is really difficult to do and no country wants to do it because of economical reasons. But it is the most efficient factor we currently have available.
- Discourage mass consumption. Reducing the amount of stuff we consume per person is very effective when done on big scale, but again doesn't work with our economical goals.

One construct to make this work would be some kind of international semi-communistic political system. Organized and carried by a central leadership, which decides on all global matters like the survival of our planet. Local decisions could be carried out by respective sub-governments, sub-sub-governments, etcetera.
This idea for a political system is not new. In 1918 in Germany a similar system were established (--> "Räterepublik"; English: "Soviet republic"), which had quite a lot of problems. Thanks to the difference in scope, the (theoretical) lack of detractors and most importantly the modern ways to communicate (-->"The Internet") many of these problems would be resolved.
This is not fully thought through and worked out, but rather the ideas I developed in my head. I wouldn't intend this to be the final form, but rather a base to build on.

(I am fully aware that what I suggested is impossible to be done [from one day to another.])

Time to dry up the oceans too?

Here's the 3rd inconvenient truth that people seem uncomfortable to address - there are too many people on the planet!
We need to reduce the worlds population - I'm not talking about genocide, but education and a collective responsibility to breed less. Wouldn't that solve many problems at once? Wouldn't that be the silver bullet?

there is no future