Western Civilization is unsustainable/Earth is screwed.

“The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s the world will undergo famines--hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now.”

Paul Ehrlich 1968

 

I love that quote. Thanks for finding it and putting it up.

 

That's the number I've heard, just like you. We could probably squeeze in a few more if we decided to give up on beef and just eat grain, but the world does have a carrying capacity, just like a ranch has a carrying capacity. Much more than the carrying capacity and your cows end up starving, then dying.

- - - Updated - - -

We've already starved off a bunch. That just gives the rest of us a little breathing room.

 

Can ranches of the same size support more cattle now than 200 years ago? and why is that?

 

We didn't starve "hundreds of millions." Famines have been localized affairs driven by weather and politics, not the Earth's "carrying capacity." I don't believe anyone has actually figured out what that is, and if they did, it would be a changing number as technology increases "carrying capacity."

 

Yes indeed. I mean really, don't come talking to me about the earth having reached it's capacity when the west can manage to throw away a thrid of it's food and has problems with people actually eating too much! I'd say we're nowhere close to the limit. The west already produce a surplus of food, and if the rest of the world was as efficient we'd have even more. The problem now though, is that the food isn't disributed as it should be, but that's another problem entirely. And then we have future breakthroughs like genetically engingeered foods which will be increase the yields by -I don't even know- to look forward to. Provided certain well-meaning fools don't stand in the way of that of course..

 

I never heard that number before today. That's why I want a source, and nobody seems to have one. The thing is, Ehrlich in the 1960s thought that number was around 4 billion. He was wrong, and I feel the same way about the 9-10 billion number. I don't really buy that there is a fixed carrying capacity.

Research the green revolution. Our percentage of starving people on earth is lower than it was during the 1970s. We increased the carrying capacity of earth with technology. (as I expect we will do in the future).

 

Try exceeding it and we'll know soon enough.

I'd bet "hundreds of millions" is about right.

 

That's really a terrible answer. We don't know what they carrying capacity is until we've exceeded it?

 

Malthusian theory. Don't necessarily disagree. What's the solution? Less irresponsible procreation? I

 

The fact is that over crowding is not a clear step function threshold, it is a blurred slope, where we exchange standard of living and longevity for total population.

As Living Conditions decrease, people will instinctively reduce their procreation, and the whole will oscillate over a few generations time frame, as it slowly settles into a homeostasis at the real sustainable capacity.

The "Invisible Hand" of Standard of Living will quite naturally limit out population growth to a reasonable number, which will adjust itself again as changes in technology and available resources change, allow greater or lesser numbers.

Ever wonder why homo-sexuality seems to be on the increase? Well, that's just another natural human instinctive over-population reflex mechanism. There are many others...

Humans will not over-population cause their own extinction, we're too well designed, by 65 Million years of evolution, to ever come close to allowing it.

-

 

Every time I read an article like this about the collapse of western civilization I can always imagine the writer salivating at the prospect.

 

I think what they are hoping for is that you are quavering in terror at the prospect of their proclaimed DOOOOOOOMMMM, and rubbing their hands in greedy glee at the power and money they can glean from their "Solution" to your Terrors.

It is really just a kind of Cheesy Domestic Terrorism.

-

 

If there is an "indivisible hand" that relates standard of living and procreation, then the US is already at a steady state since our population, except for immigration, is stable.

 

No need to throw in the towel.

Fight for change (in ideas, politics, agendas, policy presented... etc.). DO NOT GIVE UP!! FIGHT HARD!!

My ancestors knew to fight for change (descendants of those held in slavery), now it is EVERYONE'S TURN to do just that.

Fight for change!! It can be accomplished.

 

All of this Chicken Little-ism doom and gloom is just abject pessimism and lack of faith in human ingenuity. It was true 200 years ago when Malthus was making his predictions and it is true today.

As for "Western Civilization" in particular...it is probably the most capable of any other "civilization" on the planet to deal with population increases. Westerners saying otherwise are just contrarians for the most part. I sure don't see any of them eschewing "Western Civilization" to go live in a mud hut eating grubs and sterilizing themselves.

 

These arguments should not be based on faith.

Also, the population increase was brought about by industrialization.

 

Id have to say I do agree with this entire concept that the earth may be reaching its limit.
That is, of course, unless we reach the technological level required to extend that limit. What I mean is, we would have to increase our knowledge of plant genetics so that they may be modified to bring in higher yields. We would have to look into finding new consumable animals. We would need the technology required to recycle all of our waste efficiently. We would need better sources of energy. And to finish we would need technology that would allow us to expand into places on earth that were previously unlivable.

 

That's about right. The carrying capacity can be increased somewhat if everybody eats more chikin'. The CC is a moving target up to a point, but I'd bet we can't wring 10 billion out of this planet.

 

Don't know about that. Living conditions have been improving in N. America and Europe and it's not leading to an increase in white birth rates. Quite the opposite.

 

We may not ever find out since we may never get up to 10 Billion, but if technology continues like it has been, I would expect we could handle 10 billion. This "carrying capacity" meme doesn't have any real scientific meaning so using the term doesn't really mean anything.

 

Oh yes, I can really see that invisible hand at work in Africa right now. Humans don't work like you say they do. What evidence have you got for your claims? Of this invisible hand, that homosexuality would be part of it, this natural human instinct? Wishful thinking I say.

 

It has meaning for cows, deer, buffalo, wolves, etc. How are we different?

 

Technology, adaption, and more, obviously. Seriously, you didn't know that?

 

Cows, deer, buffalo, wolves and so on are not going to develop tools agriculture, or ranching.