''3200 tigers left in the wild.''

Farmageddon

Currently Offline

4,177

1031 posts since 19/10/09

Recent Badges:

A Free Man Managed to avoid being banned for 2 years.
Man or Robot? Managed to avoid being banned for 10 years.
Watch Your Back! Received 10,000 profile views.
13 Years Has been a VGChartz member for over 13 years.
14 Years Has been a VGChartz member for over 14 years.
16 Years Has been a VGChartz member for over 16 years.

Farmageddon on 25 November 2010

chocoloco said:

Farmageddon said:

I think if done it should be by area and it would have to be really gradual as it would bring it's own problems, many economic ones, from less spending options and product variety to older and older populations with few young people having to support both their child and their elders. It would also have to be absolutely world-wide. Most likely forced. Would cause wars.

Really, I think either things will gradually get worse and worse and people will naturally back off/die or it'll reach a critical point and explode into a dark time of many deaths before stabilizing again. Hopefully by then we're a bit wiser and make sure not to screw up again.

For the most part, I agree with your statements and remain very cinical on the future of mankind,and nature. The problem is so bad it will probabably end with an outcome that is not a benifit to nature or humanity. Just because the problem is so complex and there are to many variables to create an ultimate solution.

Yeah, good thing "nature" is quite resilent. It probably won't go down well, but it probably won't be the end of life on Earth either.

chocoloco

Currently Offline

31,100

7681 posts since 11/05/09

Recent Badges:

Boomer Bile 200 status updates.
It's a Start Bank a Total of 2,000 VG$.
Everything's Falling Into Place Add a total of 100 games to your collection.
A Badge Within A Badge Earned 20 badges.
Don't Forget To Save 10 status updates.
Leaving Limbo 100 posts on the gamrConnect forums.

Currently Playing:

Mario Kart Wii (Wii)

chocoloco on 25 November 2010

Farmageddon said:

chocoloco said:

Farmageddon said:

I think if done it should be by area and it would have to be really gradual as it would bring it's own problems, many economic ones, from less spending options and product variety to older and older populations with few young people having to support both their child and their elders. It would also have to be absolutely world-wide. Most likely forced. Would cause wars.

Really, I think either things will gradually get worse and worse and people will naturally back off/die or it'll reach a critical point and explode into a dark time of many deaths before stabilizing again. Hopefully by then we're a bit wiser and make sure not to screw up again.

For the most part, I agree with your statements and remain very cinical on the future of mankind,and nature. The problem is so bad it will probabably end with an outcome that is not a benifit to nature or humanity. Just because the problem is so complex and there are to many variables to create an ultimate solution.

Yeah, good thing "nature" is quite resilent. It probably won't go down well, but it probably won't be the end of life on Earth either.

I used the wrong termonology its not about the fact that life will survive its more about the life that is destroyed forever and of course getting back to the original topic hopefully some poeple wan't to see tigers living outside of zoos in the forseeable future.