StarGateWars Forums

Semper wrote:I'll throw it in there actually...that Biologist's and Psychologist's have thrown around the idea of Homosexuality been a evolutionary answer to over population.

I agree with that theory it makes logical sense, we'd have to discuss it sometime.

its interesting but i disagree with it. if there is over population, people will die. death is a more logical idea of control. humans are animals and in the animal kingdom things die when there isnt enough resources to sustain them. sure, homosexuality might cut population over many years, but death is the only real quick time response.

homosexuality wouldn't be efficient. in fact it is over complicated and unnecessary.

what beats me is people being fixated on over population

the world is NOT over populated and there is MORE than enough food and wealth to go round for each and every single soul on the planet!

its more correct to say that our cities are over populated and NOT the earth.

i was never any good with maths but, if i was, i would work out how much habitable land there is and then divide the habitable land mass by each man, woman and child, giving all of us 1/2 an acre of land and i bet my house there will habitable land galore left over!


sorry for going off topic but a mod can split it if s/he likes

LiQuiD wrote:its interesting but i disagree with it. if there is over population, people will die. death is a more logical idea of control. humans are animals and in the animal kingdom things die when there isnt enough resources to sustain them. sure, homosexuality might cut population over many years, but death is the only real quick time response.

homosexuality wouldn't be efficient. in fact it is over complicated and unnecessary.

Over complicated? I think you need to learn more about sexuality.
Also death did not develop out of a need for population control but is a product of thermo dynamics.

Locust Queen wrote:

Semper wrote:I'll throw it in there actually...that Biologist's and Psychologist's have thrown around the idea of Homosexuality been a evolutionary answer to over population.

I agree with that theory it makes logical sense, we'd have to discuss it sometime.

Yes, I think we shall Osi.

Avenger, your point. Re-read it. Think about where the largest concentration of homosexuality is, then compare the numbers to less densely populated areas.

Homosexuality was more common and accepted in antiquity, when what? Cities became more common a populations boomed. Prior to that human settlements were far flung communities of maybe a dozen individuals. Early cultures show very little reference to homosexuality, in fact I do not know of a single instance of it in Sumerian or Egyptian culture. Greek and Roman civilizations however....

Rome ended with a total of 3 million peple living within its walls, slaves were used for homosexual encounters and so long as a citizen was no penetrated it was more than acceptable. Greek cities while smaller were still massive in comparison to the early towns of the east. In greece homosexuality was encouraged.

After the plague it becomes a crime, it becomes unnatural and decadent, but as towns are brought into use again, and cities boom... it starts to happen. The Renaissance is riddled with account of homosexual accounts. Michelangelo and one of Medici popes were rumored to be gay. There is a direct correlation between population size.

the more people in an area the more attuned our body's become to the sense of over crowding. If there is ample food, and disease is rare what else is there to limit massive population growth?

Thriller wrote:Over complicated? I think you need to learn more about sexuality.
Also death did not develop out of a need for population control but is a product of thermo dynamics.

generally a population expands to a level that can be sustained by the resources available. if it exceeds this level then the population would decrease/stabilise. at least thats my view of the matter.

now if homosexuality were a form of population control how would it work i wonder?

i choose the noble duck as my example:
so there would be less offspring because gay ducks dont make eggs? but the resources in the area remain the same. therefore there would be more stuff available meaning the existing population would be able to increase more. this would end in a balancing act. so gay ducks wouldnt reduce population as straight ducks would make up for them.

death is a far simpler and definite means of control. when a population grows too much many of them may die, thus re-balancing their numbers to the resources available. and whether or death a product of thermo dynamics doesnt matter. milk is a product of cows but that doesnt matter when im eating a cheese sandwich. its the result thats important. life is adapted to death.

Semper wrote:Avenger, your point. Re-read it. Think about where the largest concentration of homosexuality is, then compare the numbers to less densely populated areas.

where is the largest concentration? i would guess cities. cities happen to generally be more free and accepting of new and unusual ideas ie gayness.

People don't drop dead anymore liquid, because we survive and prosper, we extend our natural lives to the point that we are no longer affected by rampant population growth.

LiQuiD wrote:

Thriller wrote:Over complicated? I think you need to learn more about sexuality.
Also death did not develop out of a need for population control but is a product of thermo dynamics.

generally a population expands to a level that can be sustained by the resources available. if it exceeds this level then the population would decrease/stabilise. at least thats my view of the matter.

now if homosexuality were a form of population control how would it work i wonder?

i choose the noble duck as my example:
so there would be less offspring because gay ducks dont make eggs? but the resources in the area remain the same. therefore there would be more stuff available meaning the existing population would be able to increase more. this would end in a balancing act. so gay ducks wouldnt reduce population as straight ducks would make up for them.

death is a far simpler and definite means of control. when a population grows too much many of them may die, thus re-balancing their numbers to the resources available. and whether or death a product of thermo dynamics doesnt matter. milk is a product of cows but that doesnt matter when im eating a cheese sandwich. its the result thats important. life is adapted to death.

This example liquid is actually counter and irrelevant to what you are trying to prove, (see straw man).
Yes if an ecosystem cannot support an organism that organism can either adapt or die. Now let's say an organism reaches that tipping point for the ecosystem that is supporting it and some of those organisms stop producing offspring. This would lower the population of the next generation. That next generation would have slightly more resources when the older, larger population dies off.

Straight ducks would not make up for the gay ducks because those gay ducks would also use resources in the area and the fact you believe gayness would be bread out of the population is laughable. When that species reached the ecosystems tipping point; they adapted by a selection of the population not reproducing (instead of dying). Semper is suggesting that homosexual behaviour is a genetic characteristic that expresses itself when populations become too large, to prevent large parts of the species from dying. This makes sense because when a population gets to large for the supporting ecosystem they tend to destroy that said ecosystem through the overpopulation and this may result in the extinction of the species (see viruses and bacteria). Maintaining a habitable ecosystem is essential for a species to live especially if that species is highly sensitive to the changes within their ecosystem.

Life strives to survive and in your scenario the population may consume the resources of that ecosystem before they would have time to replenish. Simply not reproducing is far more efficient means of population control an ecological management.