3 ms·
Extant hyper-fertile populations haven't caused the existing problem in the past. That's not what people are saying so there's no such blaming going on. The poi
by jlawson 8y ago
Extant hyper-fertile populations haven't caused the existing problem in the past. That's not what people are saying so there's no such blaming going on. The point is that they'll cause the impossible-to-solve exponentially-growing problem in the future.
USA population of 350m can cut down usage. It is at least possible without mass death. When there are 7 billion+ Africans at the end of this century, it'll be rather a much more brutal challenge.
- mempko 8y agoI like how you think they won't follow the same growth curve as USA or Europe. It's insanely stupid. Also we don't have until end of century for the brutal challenge. We have it now and it's ridiculous to ploace the burden on the developing world. We have to act now, in USA, Europe and SE Asia NOW. It's not even worth entertaining the population issue of Africa in 2100 when we have more urgent problems at home RIGHT NOW. To put that in perspective, the current billion Europeans and north americans is worth about 15-20 billion africans in terms of energy consumption.
- jlawson 8y agoIt's well-acknowledged that they're not following the same curve as USA or Europe. This isn't a matter of the future; it's already happened. That's why the UN has increased it's estimate for peak African population 5 years in a row.