4 ms·

The Malthusian argument is threadbare and false. Humanity has always been on the brink of demise. We've always been barely able to feed our people. This took u

The Malthusian argument is threadbare and false. Humanity has always been on the brink of demise. We've always been barely able to feed our people. This took us from hunter-gatherers to the development of agriculture, on to irrigation, fertilization, terraced farming, crop rotation, selective breeding, genetic manipulation. In terms of energy, as we depleted the forests of wood for burning, we've gone through similar transformations, learning to harness other means of light and heat like wax, whale oil, and so on. It turns out that the greatest resource we have is not vegetable or mineral, it's the human mind. Intentionally shutting off the creation of new minds - the engines that are going to find the means of solving all the other problems - is counterproductive.

ipsin 10y ago
This "we've gotten this far!" argument applies to global warming as well, doesn't it? I don't believe the proposition that global warming is not a problem because human ingenuity will fix it. Our land and oceans are already straining under our population load.
- CWuestefeld 10y ago
  Yes, they're straining. But they've always been, through recorded history. The only difference is that when we look back at them through 21st century glasses, the problems don't even look like problems anymore. I mean, we stopped denuding the forests to get firewood, so a visitor from, say, 3 centuries ago would be astonished at how well wooded the land is near cities. You can canoe down the Delaware River today and feel entirely surrounded by the trees, yet around the time of the Revolution, those hills were bare. We hunted whales almost to the point of extinction. But we came up with better energy sources, and while this was recent enough that the whales haven't quite recovered yet, they're not threatened in this manner anymore. So you'll have to explain to me how this time it's different than the countless other times when our ancestors (look back at Malthus!) claimed that we were on the brink of disaster.
  - yequalsx 10y ago
    We are numerous enough and produce enough toxins and pollution that we are close to the point where no one can escape the effects. That's why this time is different. The scale is much larger now.
  - antisthenes 10y ago
    > Yes, they're straining. But they've always been, through recorded history. You keep repeating that, but it simply isn't true. The oceans have not been straining in the pre-industrial era in the slightest. > You can canoe down the Delaware River today and feel entirely surrounded by the trees, yet around the time of the Revolution, those hills were bare. This is a typical anecdote that falls flat in the face of data. Look at global forestation rates in the pre-industrial era and today. > So you'll have to explain to me No one owes any explanation to a person who denies facts when presented with them. You made claims without evidence, therefore your claims can be dismissed without evidence.
yequalsx 10y ago
I'm not making a Malthsian argument. I'm stating a fact. At current levels of consumption (which includes much more than food) we are beyond carrying capacity of the planet. Technology may eventually make this a false statement but it currently isn't false. There is much more to living than just food. That we can grow enough food is not a persuasive argument that there aren't too many people on the planet. People shit, pollute, destroy, and consume.
- CWuestefeld 10y ago
  At current levels of consumption (which includes much more than food) we are beyond carrying capacity of the planet. Technology may eventually make this a false statement but it currently isn't false. But this has ALWAYS been true. You haven't given any reason to think differently. There is much more to living than just food. ... People shit, pollute, destroy, and consume. Exactly. Yet we've invented sanitation. And if you look at the trends, our higher standard of living has given us the luxury to curtail the pollution and destruction. America's air and water is MUCH cleaner now than it was when I was growing up (just as the Clean Air Act was getting started). Thanks to smart scientists and engineers, we've learned new ways to do things that that are far more environmentally friendly. In a way you're right. The problems will never be entirely fixed, because nothing is infinite. But a very long history shows that while we're always on the brink of destruction, we're also always on the brink of brilliant new insights that break us through those barriers. The source of those brilliant insights is the minds of the people. Calling for drastic reductions in birth rates would be killing the goose that lays the golden eggs: innovation is what's going to keep saving our butts.

ipsin 10y ago

This "we've gotten this far!" argument applies to global warming as well, doesn't it? I don't believe the proposition that global warming is not a problem because human ingenuity will fix it. Our land and oceans are already straining under our population load.

CWuestefeld 10y ago
Yes, they're straining. But they've always been, through recorded history. The only difference is that when we look back at them through 21st century glasses, the problems don't even look like problems anymore. I mean, we stopped denuding the forests to get firewood, so a visitor from, say, 3 centuries ago would be astonished at how well wooded the land is near cities. You can canoe down the Delaware River today and feel entirely surrounded by the trees, yet around the time of the Revolution, those hills were bare. We hunted whales almost to the point of extinction. But we came up with better energy sources, and while this was recent enough that the whales haven't quite recovered yet, they're not threatened in this manner anymore. So you'll have to explain to me how this time it's different than the countless other times when our ancestors (look back at Malthus!) claimed that we were on the brink of disaster.
- yequalsx 10y ago
  We are numerous enough and produce enough toxins and pollution that we are close to the point where no one can escape the effects. That's why this time is different. The scale is much larger now.
- antisthenes 10y ago
  > Yes, they're straining. But they've always been, through recorded history. You keep repeating that, but it simply isn't true. The oceans have not been straining in the pre-industrial era in the slightest. > You can canoe down the Delaware River today and feel entirely surrounded by the trees, yet around the time of the Revolution, those hills were bare. This is a typical anecdote that falls flat in the face of data. Look at global forestation rates in the pre-industrial era and today. > So you'll have to explain to me No one owes any explanation to a person who denies facts when presented with them. You made claims without evidence, therefore your claims can be dismissed without evidence.

yequalsx 10y ago

I'm not making a Malthsian argument. I'm stating a fact. At current levels of consumption (which includes much more than food) we are beyond carrying capacity of the planet. Technology may eventually make this a false statement but it currently isn't false. There is much more to living than just food. That we can grow enough food is not a persuasive argument that there aren't too many people on the planet. People shit, pollute, destroy, and consume.

CWuestefeld 10y ago
At current levels of consumption (which includes much more than food) we are beyond carrying capacity of the planet. Technology may eventually make this a false statement but it currently isn't false. But this has ALWAYS been true. You haven't given any reason to think differently. There is much more to living than just food. ... People shit, pollute, destroy, and consume. Exactly. Yet we've invented sanitation. And if you look at the trends, our higher standard of living has given us the luxury to curtail the pollution and destruction. America's air and water is MUCH cleaner now than it was when I was growing up (just as the Clean Air Act was getting started). Thanks to smart scientists and engineers, we've learned new ways to do things that that are far more environmentally friendly. In a way you're right. The problems will never be entirely fixed, because nothing is infinite. But a very long history shows that while we're always on the brink of destruction, we're also always on the brink of brilliant new insights that break us through those barriers. The source of those brilliant insights is the minds of the people. Calling for drastic reductions in birth rates would be killing the goose that lays the golden eggs: innovation is what's going to keep saving our butts.