We should find cure for aging

"First it doesn't necessarily means that population will grow if we find aging cure. Yes, people will live longer, but it will affect their reproductive system. In nature there is a rule that the bigger child mortality - the more children family has. More quality life with less child mortality - the less children family has. So the people population is regulated by nature and there is nothing to worry about. "You've shown nothing that would indicate that population growth would slow, other than some magical force in nature which there is no indication of existing. The number of children being correlated with infant mortality is ridiculous. Not only is there no citations to show that this is true, I find it more likely that poverty is more of an indicator of both birth rate and infant mortality than both are to each other. "Your whole "Harm to animals" argument is based on presumption that there will be a lotmore people on the planet which is unlikely. "This is ridiculous. According to the UN who showed 3 scenarios for population change up until the year 2300, the population will continue to grow to 9 billion in 2075 for low growth models. For the medium and high growth estimates, the population will grow until atleast 2300. . http://www.un.org...I'm pretty sure the UN didn't take into account any cure for aging in their estimates. With age related deaths being the largest cause if mortality, I'd think that even the high growth scenario is probably a conservative estimate of where total population is headed, My opponent needs to not just say something is unlikely, but to back it up with evidence. In this case the evidence is against him. "The world is changing more rapidly than ever, in all areas. For pollution - people are aware of it and today all new cars have economic engines. "It's good that companies are starting to pander to environmentalists, but it's also done nothing to curb the upward trend of pollution. It also does nothing to curb the upward trend in 3rd world countries that don't get any of these fancy hybrid cars, Not that it matters because gas powered cars are showing no signs of going away. "People are becoming more ethical, more civilized, more reasoned and there for even if population increases we will be able to sustain more people, development of clean, more efficient technology will contribute to that too. " There is no evidence that people are becoming more ethical, civilized or reasoned. We also still live in a consumer driven commercialized society. We will always "buy, buy, buy" and this will contribute to pollution from factories and a depletion of natural resources, an increasing population will only make the problem worse. "the only difference is that now, for the first time in history we have the technology and power to make it happen. " No we don't. There is no evidence that technology is at a point where we can cure aging. This is an absurd statement. "but more people = more jobs, because people create jobs. We are explorers by nature so we will never stop wanting, building, creating jobs. Jobs are changing in a way that people are working many jobs in their life My opponent not only is completely ignorant of economics, he misses the point of what I'm arguing. It's not the amount of jobs I'm concerned about, though that certainly is a problem. It's the amount of "good jobs", that are now being Bogared by perpetually youthful people. We're creating a trap that makes it very hard for people to move up in a company or gain jobs that will give them a good income as opposed to a mediocre or low income. My opponent has failed to show why curing aging is a good thing and merely expects us to just assume it is and then fails to address any of my concerns about the problems with industrialized society that will only get worse with an increased population. He asserts that technology will save us, but fails to show how this is a reasonable proposition.