Subject:
|
Re: what do you think of editorals regarding the environment?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 1 Jun 2001 02:55:32 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
391 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher Tracey writes:
>
> A suprisingly effective way to curtail population growth (at least in
> iteroparous organisms) is to delay the age of first production. It's
> also a lot nicer than forced sterilization.
Which is what we've been seeing in most developed nations for the past forty
years. Everyone gets their chance at the genetic lottery, with lower odds.
My spin on a couple of other points:
-- Environmental impact is affected by consumption and technology as much as
population. Current developed living standards may not be sustainable for
500 million people, let alone seven billion.
-- The massive human biomass is immensely susceptible to rampant
viral/bacteriological attack, either self-inflicted (anthrax bombs) or
natural outbreaks (HIV, Ebola).
--DaveL
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
29 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
