Quote:
Originally Posted by MartinSE
I agree entirely; that is why I included the word "like" as in "it seems like"
BTW, while I do disagree with the content of the reference you made - establishing an artificial limit to population, they do have some valid points, in that for the first couple hundred thousand years (a few billion if you don't include people), the population of the earth was naturally limited by factors like exposure, food, disease, etc. And I disagree with enforcing an artificial limit since we now have science and technology that allow more people to survive at a higher standard of living.
And you know, what could go wrong with unbridled population growth artificially supported by science and technology that so many believe to be politically motivated?
|
Wars and diseases are the classic limiting factors on population growth. To me, improved science and technology could be used in both directions - to allow more or fewer people to survive at a greater or lower standard of living. Improved science and technology can be used for greater food production and cleaner air OR it can be used for wars and greater death. Note the world's unease about the use of NUCLEAR missiles in The Ukraine.
......as far as disease goes.......due to the increased world trade and airline flights, diseases can be spread more rapidly and affect more people.
.......so to my mind, improved science and technology just magnifies the 2 basic population controls......namely war and disease. Just as it has been for centuries. For example, before Columbus and the English colonies, the Native American population was huge. The sailing ships bringing the Europeans can be thought of as an improvement in nautical science and technology. The Europeans carried new DISEASES to the Native Americans and their population dropped by something like 90%. You might even say that DISEASES are what the Europeans brought to that famous Thanksgiving dinner?