3 ms·
There probably wouldn't be 7.4 billion people either. People burnt non petroleum resources in that part of the world for a very long time.
by goatlover 9y ago
There probably wouldn't be 7.4 billion people either. People burnt non petroleum resources in that part of the world for a very long time.
- mc32 9y agoI'll give you that but I think it likely without advances, we'd've exhausted forests with 3bill subsistence level humans.
- pishpash 9y agoSubsistence level humans don't get to 3 billion. They'll get periodically wiped out by idiosyncratic events.
- mc32 9y agoDepends what you mean by subsistence. I meant like the farming we had in America in the 1900s, or Rural Mexico, rural Kenya in the 70s, Russia 1920s. You can sustain a lot of people --but it requires clearcutting, and burning. Lots of inefficiency and waste.