Greg Davies wrote: > but data such as these are stark & unambiguous, as are the principals we > derive from basic population dynamics. > Garrett Hardin's work on the "tragedy of the commons" is derived from principles of "basic population dynamics," for instance, and is completely mistaken when applied to human society. We ARE responsive to stimuli, and we DO react to feedback--however imperfectly and however ponderously. Evolution is alive and well, and we are subject to its principles. > But Dr Bryan, you can take immense solace from the fact that ecologists such > as yourself, Dr Shevstov, and Dr Vasishth, who view population growth as a > non-problem, appear to be in the ESA majority. > Speaking for myself, this is simply untrue. (Besides the fact that I'm in a minority) Its not so that population growth is a "non-problem." Nor is it that urgent action is not required to deal with its outcomes. Its that taking cost-free pot shots at the rest of the world while we so profoundly ignore our own sins is a luxury we cannot afford very much longer. All I'm saying is, lets put our own house in order first, and then we can take on the challenges of the rest of the world.
Cheers, -- Ashwani [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.csun.edu/~vasishth
