2007-12-08 07:02:06 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics ➔ Biology
Not only new energy, but we have to find resources that can be used AND sustainable - the population is explosive and depletes everything quickly. Health is another issue - though not that big of a problem because of the health care we have today.
2007-12-08 07:09:44 · answer #1 · answered by haine 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Stopping the population explosion. Reduce the birth rate to 1 child per 2 people for a several hundred years. Without doing that, nothing else counts.
2007-12-08 08:32:36 · answer #2 · answered by Joan H 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
What is needed to survive is simple. Sunlight, water, food, and air. In fact, if you have a hemicorporectomy (amputation of the waist down) you can live with one kidney, half a liver, one lung, and no limbs.
2007-12-08 07:10:00 · answer #3 · answered by phoenixstripes2002 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No, because of the fact in an enclosed device you may desire to kill something with the intention to proceed to exist. the two you are going to kill them or their inhabitants advance will kill you the two whilst an opportunistic ailment takes over or they consume all your nutrition. No, because of the fact its relaxing & people who do no longer savour killing animals have a twisted sense of actuality the place their self understanding has overtaken their sense of self. dropping sight of the reality which you're an animal is undesirable. Its like wishing there replaced into no water & numerous land to frolick on... that's a chilled imaginitive and prescient on your head, yet its stupid to all of us else. Its no longer something to idealize. No, because of the fact i think of ingesting rocks and airborne dirt and dust would be crappy. we'd would desire to advance stone faces that would desire to make it confusing to kiss. it would be cool to photosynthesize interior the fast term. it would not be a good assets to have whilst the sunlight blows up & we would desire to pass to a different planet. Its no longer a good mindset. No, because of the fact killing is a factor of all existence. each style of animal consumes something else residing. If we'd stop to consume different animals & flowers, I assure you there will be yet another animal that would not have a ethical dillema making us its prey. Being prey sucks. Edit: i don't have self assurance a man made ability for ingesting protein would be smart. Genetic variety is fundamental to organic and organic existence's skill to proceed to exist. we'd be unfolded to a wipeout whilst something comes alongside to injury that genetic tension. Take case in point the frankenfoods being pushed to unfavorable african countries. they do no longer seem to be a sustainable source of nutrition becuase of the shortcoming of genetic variety. The corn will sustain a huge inhabitants till something like a computer virus comes alongside which will consume that genetic tension. evaluation that with the 40 or so genetic species of corn that advance in worldwide places like afghanistan. they don't have a huge furnish, yet there only isn't one catastrophic experience which will influence all evidently occuring morphs of the nutrition. an identical technique would would desire to be employed for man made hybridization which you recommend. it would be cool if we could do it, yet realistically, there would be just some strains that would desire to assist the specific mutation you recommend.
2016-11-14 02:34:23 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
New energy sources, population control and more efficient food production spring to mind.
2007-12-08 07:06:03 · answer #5 · answered by Luke B 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
People shoulnd't really on technology just in case :)
2007-12-08 07:04:50 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
The answer should be water i guess.
2007-12-08 07:06:38 · answer #7 · answered by nimaomega 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
the ozone
2007-12-08 07:10:11 · answer #8 · answered by THE CROP KICK CHICK 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
oodles of money and love
2007-12-08 07:04:59 · answer #9 · answered by november_special 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋