On 10/14/2014 05:32 PM, Thaths wrote:
On Wed Oct 15 2014 at 8:05:28 AM Bruce A. Metcalf <[email protected]>
wrote:
What makes today's bad decisions worse than those of prior years is just
this: overpopulation.
Was Malthus wrong? How?
No, I believe he was correct, but he was thinking of gradual or local
corrections. I think even the most basic observation of population
trends will show that there's a whole lot of noise in the data, meaning
peaks and abrupt drop-offs.
My concern is that where such severe drop-offs were once local
phenomena, they have the potential today to be global.
Yes, it would be sad if a whole nation died (especially if it's the one
I'm in at the time), but the species and probably most of the culture
would endure. Similarly, if the species were to be decimated (random
death of 1 in 10), we would survive.
But what if the population swing goes too far negative, and we lose
either the ability to sustain our culture, or even the species?
It is true that we could consider efforts at population control to be a
fifth horseman. But to do so, we have to become willing to get up on
that horse and ride him. With even the Chinese flinching, I have about
lost hope that anyone will.
It's like Betty Davis said, "We're in for a bumpy ride!" I just don't
want us to fall off.
/ Bruce /
