Printable View
Quiz. Ready? Go!
THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 24 ACRES PER PERSON.
WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 4.5 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE ACRES PER PERSON.
No debate. Just pointless quizzery and perhaps commentary.Quote:
FOOD 3.2
MOBILITY 0
SHELTER 1.5
GOODS/SERVICES 1.2
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 6
IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 1.3 PLANETS.
!
HAVE YOU BEEN WATCHING 30 DAYS??
Not recently. I always forget. I don't even know when it's on.
Oh. I just saw it yesterday and it was about two people who did that test and came out with 12 planets or something so they went to go live in an experimental ecovillage called Dancing Rabbit and it was kind of funny. They had to recycle their own poop. :D
Oh yeah, that was first season. Good episode. :)
Dear Heavenly Beautiful Goddess ShlupQuack,
What is this barmy (<--- English Word!) Thread of yours About? :confused:
Is it a chance for Your Good Friend Devil Man to Spam?
Ergo...
What's it all about? :confused:
Please help Your Good Friend Devil Man
Because...
Your Good Friend Devil Man Is A Great Friend To His Great Friend ShlupQuack And Because He Is A Great Friend To His Great Friend ShlupQuack He Wants To Make A Valuable Contribution To Her Thread Because She Is His Good Friend :)
Ergo...
Please Tell Your Good Friend Devil Man What This Threads All About!
Ergo...
Thank You!
Yours Sincerely,
Your Good Friend Devil Man
CATEGORY ACRES
FOOD 5.7
MOBILITY 0.2
SHELTER 4.9
GOODS/SERVICES 4.7
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 16
IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 24 ACRES PER PERSON.
WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 4.5 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE ACRES PER PERSON.
IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 3.5 PLANETS.
*yawns* I have nothing better to do, so I'll take the damned test...
I doubt the answer's accurate anyway as some of the questions you really don't know the answer to...Quote:
FOOD 1.6
MOBILITY 0.1
SHELTER 0.9
GOODS/SERVICES 0.8
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 3.4
"IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 1.9 PLANETS."
Aukland?
CATEGORY GLOBAL HECTARES
FOOD .............................. 1.9
MOBILITY ......................... 0.5
SHELTER .......................... 0.7
GOODS/SERVICES .............. 0.9
TOTAL FOOTPRINT ............. 4
In comparison, the average ecological footprint in my country is 8.7 global hectares per person.
It would take 2.2 planets if everyone wanted to live like I do. How fiendish of me.
Let's see. If we need 2.4 planets to support everyone living like me, that means we'd need 59% less people. So, all we need do is kill off 3.8 billion people and problem solved. Ah maths, it may not give you the most desirable answers, but it gives you an answer none-the-less.
I use 4.2 planets apparently.
Therefore, about 1.5 billion people can live like I do, the rest of you will have to find another planet. Sorry about that.
CATEGORY GLOBAL HECTARES
FOOD 1.5
MOBILITY 0.2
SHELTER 0.4
GOODS/SERVICES 0.5
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 2.6
IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 7.9 GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.
WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 1.8 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.
IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 1.4 PLANETS.
I LIKE HOW THIS TEST IS IN ALL CAPS! THAT'S PRETTY COOL!
I have a global footprint of 6 (Mostly in food), and did I mention how I LOVE tests that make you feel guilty at the end? :mad:
CATEGORY GLOBAL HECTARES
FOOD 0.9
MOBILITY 0.1
SHELTER 0.7
GOODS/SERVICES 1.6
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 3.3
IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 3.2 GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.
WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 1.8 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.
IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 1.8 PLANETS.
Must be NANNY CHRISTMAS's job.
FOOD 2.8
MOBILITY 0.3
SHELTER 1
GOODS/SERVICES 1
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 5.1
IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 8.8 GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.
WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 1.8 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.
IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 2.8 PLANETS.
I refuse to feel guilty for living well. Don't worry, there are enough poor people to more than make up the difference.
FOOD 1.3
MOBILITY 0.4
SHELTER 0.7
GOODS/SERVICES 0.8
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 3.2
IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 5.3 GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.
WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 1.8 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.
IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 1.8 PLANETS.
FOOD 1.5
MOBILITY 0.6
SHELTER 0.3
GOODS/SERVICES 1
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 3.4
- IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 5.3 GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.
- WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 1.8 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.
- IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 1.9 PLANETS.
me living at home: 4.4 planets (i guessed on the size of my house and stuff since i dunno)
me living at school: 1.9 planets.
CATEGORY ACRES
FOOD 4.2
MOBILITY 2.5
SHELTER 2.7
GOODS/SERVICES 3.5
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 13
IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 24 ACRES PER PERSON.
WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 4.5 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE ACRES PER PERSON.
IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 2.9 PLANETS
And yet I'm unsatisfied with the way I live my life. I want to require 5 planets to maintain my lifestyle.
"IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 2.8 PLANETS." :O
IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 4.2 PLANETS.
xDDD half of that was seriously just guessing. :D
Food - 1.6
Mobility - 0
Shelter - 0.9
Goods/Services - 0.7
Total footprint - 3.2
If everyone lived like you, we would need 1.8 planets...
Edit: But how on earth were we supposed to know how big our houses and towns are?
I think that's ok. :p
>>> CATEGORY GLOBAL HECTARES
FOOD 0.5
MOBILITY 0
SHELTER 0.6
GOODS/SERVICES 0.7
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 1.8
IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 3.1 GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.
WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 1.8 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.
IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 1.0 PLANETS.
CATEGORY GLOBAL HECTARES
FOOD 1.5
MOBILITY 0.7
SHELTER 0.6
GOODS/SERVICES 0.7
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 3.5
IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 1.9 PLANETS.
We need to kill off two thirds of the population so the rest can live like I do. That sounds GREAT.Quote:
CATEGORY GLOBAL HECTARES
FOOD 1.8
MOBILITY 1.6
SHELTER 0.7
GOODS/SERVICES 1.7
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 5.8
IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 5.3 GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.
WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 1.8 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.
IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 3.2 PLANETS.
FOOD 2.7
MOBILITY 0.2
SHELTER 2.7
GOODS/SERVICES 2
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 8
IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 24 ACRES PER PERSON.
WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 4.5 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE ACRES PER PERSON.
IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 1.7 PLANETS.
Some of you seem to live "extravagant" lifestyles compared to mine...
CATEGORY ACRES
FOOD 4.2
MOBILITY 0.7
SHELTER 4
GOODS/SERVICES 3.2
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 12
IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 24 ACRES PER PERSON.
WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 4.5 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE ACRES PER PERSON.
IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 2.7 PLANETS.
I thought I did good until I saw all of you guy's results
For every planet you DON'T destroy I'll destroy two.
Yes, I feel the same way. Maybe I'm apathetic, but I won't feel guilty for living well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Roto13
I guessed for quite a lot of those, but it said 4.0 planets for me?
FOOD 2.4
MOBILITY 0.2
SHELTER 0.9
GOODS/SERVICES 0.8
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 4.3
IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 8.8 GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.
WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 1.8 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.
IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 2.4 PLANETS
:(
IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 1.0 PLANETS
That is some third-world breeding... :(
1.8 planets. DAMNIT
CATEGORY ACRES
FOOD 4.9
MOBILITY 0.2
SHELTER 1.5
GOODS/SERVICES 1.2
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 8
IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 24 ACRES PER PERSON.
WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 4.5 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE ACRES PER PERSON.
IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 1.8 PLANETS.
EDIT: K, the above is definitely my score. However, I took the quiz twice more, once answering the maximum/"worst" of ever category. This led the quiz to deem my global footprint as 77 acres, and that if everyone lived like me, we would need 17.3 planets.
I also answered the quiz as a vegan person, who lived alone with no electricty or running water, and never went anywhere on motorized transportation and I STILL got a footprint of above 4.5 acres, which led to us needing 1.2 planets to sustain the human race if we all lived like "me".
So apparently, we needs to start killins.
EDIT 2: I apologize. If I never took the bus anywhere, I would score a 3, which would be okay. Or we could still kill everybody else.
Is that good or bad?Quote:
CATEGORY ACRES
FOOD 2
MOBILITY 0.5
SHELTER 6.2
GOODS/SERVICES 4.4
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 13
IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 24 ACRES PER PERSON.
WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 4.5 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE ACRES PER PERSON.
IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 2.9 PLANETS
CATEGORY ACRES
FOOD 5.4
MOBILITY 2.2
SHELTER 2.2
GOODS/SERVICES 4
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 14
Edit:
I took it again, and this time I was a little more honest/less modest.
CATEGORY ACRES
FOOD 6.9
MOBILITY 28.9
SHELTER 26.7
GOODS/SERVICES 63
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 126
IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 24 ACRES PER PERSON.
WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 4.5 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE ACRES PER PERSON.
IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 28.2 PLANETS.
IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 24 ACRES PER PERSON.
WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 4.5 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE ACRES PER PERSON.
Why does it hate me so?
>>> You guys are destroying my planet.. :mad2:
Hurry up and colonize mars already.
Quote:
CATEGORY ACRES
FOOD 5.2
MOBILITY 0
SHELTER 2.5
GOODS/SERVICES 1.7
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 9
IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 24 ACRES PER PERSON.
WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 4.5 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE ACRES PER PERSON.
IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 2.1 PLANETS.
CATEGORY GLOBAL HECTARES
FOOD 3.1
MOBILITY 0.3
SHELTER 0.6
GOODS/SERVICES 1.2
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 5.2
IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 8.8 GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.
WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 1.8 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.
IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 2.9 PLANETS.
I did this in Geography, when I was in Grade 9, I think I scored differently there.
Quote:
CATEGORY GLOBAL HECTARES
FOOD 1.6
MOBILITY 0
SHELTER 0.7
GOODS/SERVICES 0.5
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 2.8
IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 8.8 GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.
WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 1.8 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.
IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 1.6 PLANETS
I think it's telling me to commit mass genocide.
I got 2.6 planets...
What gets me is the big jump in public transport. You have like 0-25, then 25-100. I mean that just way too big of a jump.
The base for this thing is 1 Planet. You have to be a vegan living in a multistory apartment complex without water and electricity, and you can't ever travel anywhere except by bike or by foot in order to not use up more resources than the planet can hold.
Which obviously isn't true. So this is a farce.
The fact that the results of this quiz is leading people to cry for genocide pleases me.
The hypothetical intention is that if EVERYONE on the planet lived the way you do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Martyr
You have to remember this quiz is intended to demonstrate how wasteful our society is.
Consider:
1) how populated our planet is.
2) how wasteful the Capitalist culture is.
3) how many people don't have the luxuries you do.
4) The rate of population is growing every day.
5) The rate of resource consumption is growing every day.
6) We are consuming faster than the world can replenish its resources.
7) We are consuming non-replenishable resources.
8) How much energy, time, waste & resources go into simple products
(for instance a cheeseburger: grain, grain harvester, grain sack, grain feeder, water for the grain, gas to run the harvester, pesticides, a plane to spread the pesticide, gas to run the plane, metals to make the plane, metals to make the grain harvester, metals to make the grain feeder, cotton to make the grain sack, a transport truck to transfer the grain, paper work involved in maintaining the books of the company who raises the grain, meat cow, materials for a barn, water to feed cow, slaugter house, machinary in slaugther house, metal to make machinary in slaughter house, preservatives to keep the meat, electrical grinder to grind meat, energy & machine to make patties, plastic & boxes to package patties, machinary to package patties, dairy cow, hormones to inject into dairy cows, machinary that takes the milk from the cow, metal cans and reserves that store the milk, machinary and electricity that pasturizes milk, cheese making machine, plastic & boxes for packaging cheese, transport truck to deliver cheese, transport truck to deliver meat,.... etc. etc. etc. for pickles, for ketchup, for mustard, for relish... everything is the product of a process and everything is super specialized.)
What I think is falace is that even if we lived the ultimate ideal life you had just expressed we'd probably still need more planets because they're are just too many people. Without condensed city locations and mass production (which causes most of the problems) we wouldn't be able to sustain the population we have.
Eliminate the people - Eliminate the problemQuote:
Originally Posted by ShlupQuack
The planet can support six billion people just fine. The problem is poor resource distribution. Eliminate corrupt government, eliminate the problem.
>>> Its not a farce, I think the results depend on the country and city you live. I have water and electricity, I live in a small multistory apartment complex, I rarely eat meat and I dont go anywhere..Quote:
Originally Posted by Martyr
And I still need one planet..
I am being beaten by like a few people only, awesome.
There are a huge number of people on the planet, but honestly, the quickest way to lower the population growth rate would be to bring everyone else up to a reasonable standard of living. It's pretty simple really, when a country is in Third World conditions, no one's particularly well educated or empowered, the social cost of having children is very low, the rate of children who die in childhood is very high, and the only way to have people around to take care of you in your old age is to if you have kids, so the logical thing for everyone to do is to keep smurfing and smurfing in their free time, because really, there's nothing else to entertain people when they're living on less than a dollar's worth of purchasing power every day. When you raise people to the standards of living of, say, most of Europe, people are far better educated, women are empowered to do more things than just mothering, and a child is a social liability until it graduates college or gets its law degree. Not to mention that, unless you live in a country where forty million people are medically underinsured, one hundred and ten million people are medically uninsured, and there's no national health care system to take care of those who can't fend for themselves, the state will take care of the elderly.Quote:
What I think is falace is that even if we lived the ultimate ideal life you had just expressed we'd probably still need more planets because they're are just too many people. Without condensed city locations and mass production (which causes most of the problems) we wouldn't be able to sustain the population we have.
So the solution to overpopulation is to stop hoarding everything for ourselves and allow the people in the rest of the world to have some as well. Of course, this would require a massive paradigm shift on the part of the most powerful people in the world, and as Upton Sinclair wrote, it is difficult to get a man to understand a thing when his salary depends on his not understanding it.
I didn't take the test. I commute via automobile several hundred miles from Boca Raton to Sarasota most weekends, so I'm probably awful. Unfortunately, I don't have too much of a choice in this, since our country's public transportation system sucks ass.
We really shouldn't be giving the Third World much more until they can clearly show that they are responsible enough to manage what we give them. So far their track record isn't great.
That's because they have governments that are more concerned with stuffing their coffers than they are with helping their people. I don't think that's coincidental, either.
I posted some more on this subject here.
We really don't want your aid, either.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yamaneko
K. We'll stop. Sorry 'bout trying to keep you from dying there. Road to hell, good intentions, you know how it goes.Quote:
Originally Posted by 41-Inches-WideWe really don't want your aid, either.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yamaneko
2.9 planets for me.
Cool! Let's get to colonizing already then.
hehe, i found that almost as random as me
FOOD 1.6
MOBILITY 0.1
SHELTER 0.8
GOODS/SERVICES 1
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 3.5
IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 1.9 PLANETS.
Good thing not everyone lives as me then.
As I explained in the other thread, that's because "aid" is usually used by capitalistic societies as a euphemism for "economic exploitation." If actual helpful things, such as buying land for starving people and teaching them how to farm it, were being done, I'm sure the sentiment would be much different.Quote:
Originally Posted by 41-Inches-WideWe really don't want your aid, either.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yamaneko
Also, just out of curiosity, where are you located?
CATEGORY ACRES
FOOD 5.9
MOBILITY 0.2
SHELTER 2.2
GOODS/SERVICES 2.2
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 10
IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 24 ACRES PER PERSON.
WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 4.5 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE ACRES PER PERSON.
IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 2.4 PLANETS.
I take a stance as such: I don't think foreign aid is helpful. The long term consequences is damaging and the people never get any help the aid is supposedly there to help them out. Actually, I think it's the one that keeps the third world still drowning in debt.Quote:
Originally Posted by I'm my own MILFK. We'll stop. Sorry 'bout trying to keep you from dying there. Road to hell, good intentions, you know how it goes.Quote:
Originally Posted by 41-Inches-WideWe really don't want your aid, either.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yamaneko