Sushi: The Global Catch
- Thread starter virginjohn
- Start date
no, the amount of people in the world is ridiculous
the oceans aren't getting bigger, neither is the amount of land, yet we continue to multiply exponentially
it's time to thin the herd, about 4-5 billion would be a good start
This documentary was mainly geared towards Japan and quite rightly so as Japan is a very small nation consisting of 3 islands.Japan just does not have the land to supply it's population with cattle/pigs etc like Canada can for it's population and thusly Japan relies on the ocean for it's primary food source.....considering that Japan has been doing this for hundreds of years it comes as no surprise of the revelation that the fish stocks are getting close to being depleted.It is a bit harsh to say but Japan pretty much rapes the oceans for their abundance and the country has faced numerous issues with other countries for fishing inside territorial waters(Canada's codfish stocks did not get depleted by Canada alone)Japan has also come under fire for it's scientific whale research program with the main accusation being that they harvest the whales caught for food and not scientific research.At the same time if Canada's only produceable edible protein was Alberta beef and it had to supply the whole country then Canada might face the same problem if our primary food supply got out-stripped by population growth.
I will say that it was an interesting documentary and I think that Japan should have been looking into large scale fish farming 20 years ago.
SR
Exactly, that is the kind of nonsense that does not help the problem. It only makes the environmentalists look crazy.You willing to go first?
Everytime one of you globalist yuppie wannabe chumps says things like this it cracks me up as they never do the world a favor and start by offing themselves.
Pretty interesting documentary. Thanks for bringing it up. However, I don't think anything will be done about it in our lifetime. We can't even save the Rhinos. We are getting to that point that the only Rhinos that will be left in this world our those ones named Spearmint. :nod:
Not necessarily a bad thing.
I agree, nothing we can do to save tuna.. so eat as much Toro and Tuna as you can while its available
If you can shoot staight enough to take me out Hubba, then I guess so, give it your best shot, lolYou willing to go first?
but you might need to leave your house
ha ha ha , I don't know what the fuck a globalist yuppie wannabe chump is
but I'm pretty sure I'm not one
are they mean, insensitive assholes who don't really like people? lol
They are typically the elite who think they are better than others, they also fund eugenics programs. So in other words they believe the planet would be best off if 90% of the population was exterminated therefore making it easier for them to go back to a noble/serf system. Guess which side of that system you'd be on if you survived.
If you can shoot staight enough to take me out Hubba, then I guess so, give it your best shot, lol
but you might need to leave your house
ha ha ha , I don't know what the fuck a globalist yuppie wannabe chump is
but I'm pretty sure I'm not one
are they mean, insensitive assholes who don't really like people? lol
ha ha ha ha, oh fuck, you think that system isn't and always hasn't been in place?
what colour is the sky in your deluded world
it's just a different set of people, it will exist and always will exist, regardless of how many people are on the earth
I'm not stupid enough to believe I'm nothing more than a speck in the universe
I just know it's better to have 1 or 2 billion people pissing and shitting in the river when it comes time for those that are here, to try and clean it up to drink, lol
Jiro Dreams of Sushi
This will make you crave for more Sushi. :nod:
Greatest Sushi Chef in the World
Japan's National Treasure
Kaizen
This will make you crave for more Sushi. :nod:
Greatest Sushi Chef in the World
Japan's National Treasure
Kaizen
Assuming you are talking about rounding people up and killing them... is that a good idea? No, and it clearly would never succeed. But he's right. The Earth is a finite resource and the Global Human Population is too damn large. Even if you don't believe 9Billion people is too much to support on Earth when *do* you think it becomes unsustainable? The Earth is a finite resource and grow-grow-grow is not sustainable.
Personally I think we are beyond the Balance point and we are eroding the environment. Its still working, but we are wearing it down.
- Every year we put so much fertilizer in the ground that the nitrogen leaches into the water. When it congregates at river mouths, it creates algae blooms that consume all the oxygen and kills all the marine life in the area. Don't believe me? Google "Marine dead zone"
- We just saw the bit about Japan and their seafood catch.
- Power requirements and resulting pollution are crazy. Global Warming, climate change... even if you don't believe it, there is only so much oil in the Earth. Global Production has peaked. Demand continues to grow.
Round people up and kill them off? No... But I *would* support:
- Global, National and Regional awareness campaigns.
- Programs inserted into education curriculums the world over (but lets start at home)
- 1 child Incentive Programs
- Effort to shift Economic focus from "growth" to "balance"
We need to stop the "Growth is good" mantra. It'll kill us eventually.
The above is my opinion. You are free to disagree
NAG75
New and cleaner technology will make any growth sustainable.
If people can tap into geothermal/solar/wind more efficiently and economical and/or make nuclear power extremely safer than it is now.... it would solve tons of problem. Desalination is a simple and proven technology, but too energy intensive currently to be widespread. Having free water and supplying them to say.... half the Sahara desert or Nevada would do wonders in food production. Heck, they used to grow wheat in Saudi Arabia until they realized it was too costly. If energy prices dramatically drops, food and habitation wouldn't be an issue anymore. Greenhouse farming in cooler climates for "exotic" fruits would cut transportation pollution. Having tons of dry-land farmed salmon would help too.
Clean and efficient technology is the way to go, not 1-child policies or weird environmental-handicapping theories.
If people can tap into geothermal/solar/wind more efficiently and economical and/or make nuclear power extremely safer than it is now.... it would solve tons of problem. Desalination is a simple and proven technology, but too energy intensive currently to be widespread. Having free water and supplying them to say.... half the Sahara desert or Nevada would do wonders in food production. Heck, they used to grow wheat in Saudi Arabia until they realized it was too costly. If energy prices dramatically drops, food and habitation wouldn't be an issue anymore. Greenhouse farming in cooler climates for "exotic" fruits would cut transportation pollution. Having tons of dry-land farmed salmon would help too.
Clean and efficient technology is the way to go, not 1-child policies or weird environmental-handicapping theories.
Well this argument is not new, the most famous case was made by Malthus more than 200 years ago. Everyone knows Earth is a finite resource it is not some radical insight: $10 is a finite amount of cash and so is $10 billion. So just stressing the fact that we have finite resources conveys no information as how we should behave.
As for oil the high price has had the effect that now we have developed new technologies and are accessing oil reserves which were thought unrecoverable not long ago (see Bakken shale in ND). I am not worried we will run out of it anytime soon I am more worried how much its consumption will cost us in the future. And here we need to do a cold hearted cost benefit analysis which is something most of my environmentalist friends are not willing to do. For most of them environmentalism is a form of religion (I guess becoming born again christians was not hip enough). It might very well be that restricting growth now is worse than letting a richer future population deal with the problem. I am not saying this is the case but it is one of the outcomes of a properly done cost benefit analysis.
yes, lets drain the oceans, fuck the fish, lol
solve a problem by creating another
if more people is so great, shouldn't people flocking to China, India, Southeast Asia, Africa instead trying to leave?
exponential growth and diminishing returns, that'll never happen
FYI the oceans make up 71% of the earth's surface and about 1.3 billion cubic KM total. Fresh water makes up only 0.003% of all water on this planet. It's practically impossible to even make a dent on the amount of water available.
Nice try, there will be no problem of running out of water.
People are moving because of the lack of opportunities and the higher standard of living elsewhere. You don't think have access to clean water and improved agricultural productively will increase the standard of living for those places?
I know PERB is an adult site... but please, stay in school.
