5 ms·

Can we summarize by saying the human animal also has a boom-bust cycle in growth, overpopulating an area, running out of resources, and dying off?

flir 3y ago
<insert Agent Smith's virus speech here>
- FrustratedMonky 3y ago
  It's the smell. I must get out.
- CapitalistCartr 3y ago
  "It came to me when I tried to classify your species. I realized that you're not actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment but you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply and multiply until every natural resource is consumed. The only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet. You are a plague, and we are the cure."
  - JoeAltmaier 3y ago
    Cute. But nowhere near true. Rabbits? Bison? any number of identical behaviors in other mammals. </pedant>
    - mrguyorama 3y ago
      Population cycles are literally a 3rd grade science class topic, but americans cry "wah wah when will I ever need this", tell their kids education is just liberal indoctrination, and then they go to the movies and hear this slop and have no problem believing it because humans are god awful and evaluating trite statements.
    - FrustratedMonky 3y ago
      Other animals have natural curbs on population. Predator's, diseases. And reach some equilibrium. Humans have been very good at overcoming any natural limit on population. But think that is the point of the article? That humans have continued to expand, on the boom-bust curve, -> humans are on an every increasing upward curve, and thus heading fast into some inevitable limit that will cause a crash. So kind of like a virus that grows un-abated until it kills the host. There is no equilibrium point reached. Yes, like some other animals, just more dramatic. The host is the entire planet.
      - JoeAltmaier 3y ago
        All true. But still, entire ecosystems have been brought down by rabbits etc. Not as different as we might want to pretend.
palata 3y ago
Maybe a big difference with other species is that we know about it, we have been talking about it for decades, we know what we need to do to minimize the casualties (use less energy, do less with less), and instead of working on improving the situation, we actively work on making it worse. We read about those issues in the morning, complain about them making us anxious, and proceed to get excited about 5G, AI and SpaceX in the afternoon.
- Phlogi 3y ago
  I fully agree, we even know the reasons why we're not acting, but then...
- RetroTechie 3y ago
  If there's 1 thing I've learned from browsing through papers such as this one over the last few years: It's the social / political aspects that are THE stumbling block for effective action. Not technical, logistical or even economic ones. Read: technology won't get us out of this "polycrisis". Nor is it the #1 cause or enabler. It's people. Their priorities, ethics, behaviour & how groups of people interact. Given the history of that, it's kinda hard to be optimistic about humanity's future imho.
  - FrustratedMonky 3y ago
    That is the problem, sure, each individual can 'see' the problem, but as groups, as a species, we are captured by our circumstances, and continue to overconsume, pollute, etc... It becomes "Moloch" again, everyone has budgets, deadlines, need to eat, need to sex. As a group we don't seem able to change course. We are "on a world ruled by 195 mutually-hostile and frequently-shifting coalitions of over-evolved murder-monkeys, many of whom have nuclear weapons. " Hence, evolutionary dead end.
  - RcouF1uZ4gsC 3y ago
    Actually, technology is the thing that gets us out of crises. Everybody was talking about starvation and lack of food. However, the green revolution in agriculture ended up being able to produce massive amounts of food. People have been talking about the population explosion. However, reliable birth control emerged as a technology that has pretty much solved the problem as more and more women have access to it. If we mitigate climate change, it won’t be from people decided to conserve and use less, but due to the masssive scaling of mostly solar energy that can produce carbon free energy cheaply. I would argue that technology is the driver and not social factors. Human nature probably hasn’t changed very much. Human environment, due to technology has changed massively.
hkt 3y ago
No, because this is unprecedented and within our means to control if we have the will to do so. One hopes we're slightly more forward thinking than other species, although hope is a double edged sword.
NickM 3y ago
Well, frankly, no, that’s not a summary of the article at all.

flir 3y ago

FrustratedMonky 3y ago
It's the smell. I must get out.
CapitalistCartr 3y ago
"It came to me when I tried to classify your species. I realized that you're not actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment but you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply and multiply until every natural resource is consumed. The only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet. You are a plague, and we are the cure."
- JoeAltmaier 3y ago
  Cute. But nowhere near true. Rabbits? Bison? any number of identical behaviors in other mammals. </pedant>
  - mrguyorama 3y ago
    Population cycles are literally a 3rd grade science class topic, but americans cry "wah wah when will I ever need this", tell their kids education is just liberal indoctrination, and then they go to the movies and hear this slop and have no problem believing it because humans are god awful and evaluating trite statements.
  - FrustratedMonky 3y ago
    Other animals have natural curbs on population. Predator's, diseases. And reach some equilibrium. Humans have been very good at overcoming any natural limit on population. But think that is the point of the article? That humans have continued to expand, on the boom-bust curve, -> humans are on an every increasing upward curve, and thus heading fast into some inevitable limit that will cause a crash. So kind of like a virus that grows un-abated until it kills the host. There is no equilibrium point reached. Yes, like some other animals, just more dramatic. The host is the entire planet.
    - JoeAltmaier 3y ago
      All true. But still, entire ecosystems have been brought down by rabbits etc. Not as different as we might want to pretend.

palata 3y ago

Maybe a big difference with other species is that we know about it, we have been talking about it for decades, we know what we need to do to minimize the casualties (use less energy, do less with less), and instead of working on improving the situation, we actively work on making it worse. We read about those issues in the morning, complain about them making us anxious, and proceed to get excited about 5G, AI and SpaceX in the afternoon.

Phlogi 3y ago
I fully agree, we even know the reasons why we're not acting, but then...
RetroTechie 3y ago
If there's 1 thing I've learned from browsing through papers such as this one over the last few years: It's the social / political aspects that are THE stumbling block for effective action. Not technical, logistical or even economic ones. Read: technology won't get us out of this "polycrisis". Nor is it the #1 cause or enabler. It's people. Their priorities, ethics, behaviour & how groups of people interact. Given the history of that, it's kinda hard to be optimistic about humanity's future imho.
- FrustratedMonky 3y ago
  That is the problem, sure, each individual can 'see' the problem, but as groups, as a species, we are captured by our circumstances, and continue to overconsume, pollute, etc... It becomes "Moloch" again, everyone has budgets, deadlines, need to eat, need to sex. As a group we don't seem able to change course. We are "on a world ruled by 195 mutually-hostile and frequently-shifting coalitions of over-evolved murder-monkeys, many of whom have nuclear weapons. " Hence, evolutionary dead end.
- RcouF1uZ4gsC 3y ago
  Actually, technology is the thing that gets us out of crises. Everybody was talking about starvation and lack of food. However, the green revolution in agriculture ended up being able to produce massive amounts of food. People have been talking about the population explosion. However, reliable birth control emerged as a technology that has pretty much solved the problem as more and more women have access to it. If we mitigate climate change, it won’t be from people decided to conserve and use less, but due to the masssive scaling of mostly solar energy that can produce carbon free energy cheaply. I would argue that technology is the driver and not social factors. Human nature probably hasn’t changed very much. Human environment, due to technology has changed massively.

hkt 3y ago

No, because this is unprecedented and within our means to control if we have the will to do so. One hopes we're slightly more forward thinking than other species, although hope is a double edged sword.

NickM 3y ago

Well, frankly, no, that’s not a summary of the article at all.