3 ms·

Yes. It’s easy to say “Malthus was wrong” because food production has so far kept up with population growth. What that doesn’t account for is that food producti

by jl6 4y ago

Yes. It’s easy to say “Malthus was wrong” because food production has so far kept up with population growth. What that doesn’t account for is that food production has been subsidized by natural resources like aquifers, topsoil, pollinating insects, cheap oil to make fertilizer and mechanized farm machinery - all of which we need to stop abusing either to save the climate or because they will run out anyway. We need renewable farming as well as renewable energy, and I don’t see any guarantee that such a thing can support a world of 8+ billion people.

ben_w 4y ago
That's not why Malthus will eventually have the last (sardonic) laugh. All of the things you listed can be made renewable on timescales exceeding the natural lifetime of the sun with only engineering (rather than scientific) breakthroughs, including making the sun last longer and moving the earth to a different orbit to suit the light of the engineered sun. No, Malthus gets the last laugh because the sub-population that reproduces most, regardless of whether that is caused by genes or memes, quickly dominates the overall population; this means that even despite the currently sub-replacement birth rate, it's reasonable to forecast the population to rise to whatever level is necessary to overwhelm food supply, for any level of food supply. That can be fixed in principle, but the only solutions I can think of requires tech that makes the two forms of social/mind control in Westworld seasons 3 and 4 look like a child's finger painting in comparison to the filmography of the aforementioned show.
- eloff 4y ago
  Indeed. The only way this doesn't happen is that no subgroups continue to reproduce beyond the replacement rate. I think that's highly unlikely. We can see certain religious groups in developed countries that have way more than 2.1 children per couple. It seems likely to me that development and education doesn't completely make the problem go away.
imtringued 4y ago
Actually, the odds of renewable farming to support 8 billion people is much higher than current practices because non renewable practices are constantly losing capacity and must let land stay fallow after decades of in intensive farming.

by jl6 4y ago

ben_w 4y ago

That's not why Malthus will eventually have the last (sardonic) laugh. All of the things you listed can be made renewable on timescales exceeding the natural lifetime of the sun with only engineering (rather than scientific) breakthroughs, including making the sun last longer and moving the earth to a different orbit to suit the light of the engineered sun. No, Malthus gets the last laugh because the sub-population that reproduces most, regardless of whether that is caused by genes or memes, quickly dominates the overall population; this means that even despite the currently sub-replacement birth rate, it's reasonable to forecast the population to rise to whatever level is necessary to overwhelm food supply, for any level of food supply. That can be fixed in principle, but the only solutions I can think of requires tech that makes the two forms of social/mind control in Westworld seasons 3 and 4 look like a child's finger painting in comparison to the filmography of the aforementioned show.

eloff 4y ago
Indeed. The only way this doesn't happen is that no subgroups continue to reproduce beyond the replacement rate. I think that's highly unlikely. We can see certain religious groups in developed countries that have way more than 2.1 children per couple. It seems likely to me that development and education doesn't completely make the problem go away.

imtringued 4y ago

Actually, the odds of renewable farming to support 8 billion people is much higher than current practices because non renewable practices are constantly losing capacity and must let land stay fallow after decades of in intensive farming.