> Did I recommend returning to a regime? Not sure where you pulled that out of. What was then the relevance of talking about abundance of food in prehistoric t

> Did I recommend returning to a regime? Not sure where you pulled that out of. What was then the relevance of talking about abundance of food in prehistoric times? > No. Not remotely true. Where do you pull these sweeping and bizarrely false statements from? This has been widely known for centuries. Charles Darwin for example talks about it in “The Origin of Species”, not even as something novel, but rather as one of the basic assumptions about his theory of natural selection. In fact, it is rather obvious. It is rather impossible to otherwise explain extremely low historical population figures, coupled with extremely high population growth rates possible. I mean, why hasn’t human population been 7 billion in 10 000 BC already? Your answer must necessarily involve “lack of ability to produce enough sustenance”. Then, why hasn’t it been even 1 billion? Or 100 million?