Every once in a while, another disciple of Malthus springs up and proclaims the end of humanity on Earth because of overpopulation and resource starvation. Most are characterized by a narrow viewpoint through the lens of their own specialty which is often very blinding.
A bushman survives by tapping Mother Nature with no significant prior intervention. This means he must harvest occasional wild plants and other consumers of other wild plants over hundreds of acres.
An operator of a rice paddy can do the same thing using one hectare of land and a chicken coop and if lucky a cow. In Northern Europe , a family survived on several acres and a cow or two and access to grassland.
We have become much better than all that. Where we still have work is in the elimination of the oil economy and its replacement with grid power and possibly biodiesel in order to provide equipment energy. Also soils need to be augmented with biochar in order to eliminate the need for significant chemical fertilization.
After that, it is a matter of mastering the Eden
In short, I can add ten billion to our present population, while reducing their individual consumptive footprint to a fraction of today’s if not almost eliminating it.
During the next one hundred years, we will also master the magnetic exclusion vessel (MEV) and set about building space habitats able to house a hundred million at a time. We actually could build thousands of those since once built they consume nothing except fuel for fusion energy.
The reality is that mankind is on the road to becoming self sustaining on Earth, in preparation for space borne habitats. Thinking otherwise is outright nonsense.
Human race ‘will be extinct within 100 years’, claims leading scientist
JULY 25, 2010
by Stacey
As the scientist who helped eradicate smallpox he certainly know a thing or two about extinction.
And now Professor Frank Fenner, emeritus professor of microbiology at the Australian National University
He has claimed that the human race will be unable to survive a population explosion and ‘unbridled consumption.’
Fenner told The Australian newspaper that ‘homo sapiens will become extinct, perhaps within 100 years.’
‘A lot of other animals will, too,’ he added.
‘It’s an irreversible situation. I think it’s too late. I try not to express that because people are trying to do something, but they keep putting it off.’
Since humans entered an unofficial scientific period known as the Anthropocene – the time since industrialisation – we have had an effect on the planet that rivals any ice age or comet impact, he said.
Fenner, 95, has won awards for his work in helping eradicate the variola virus that causes smallpox and has written or co-written 22 books.
He announced the eradication of the disease to the World Health Assembly in 1980 and it is still regarded as one of the World Health Organisation’s greatest achievements.
He was also heavily involved in helping to control Australia
Last year official UN figures estimated that the world’s population is currently 6.8 billion. It is predicted to exceed seven billion by the end of 2011.
Fenner blames the onset of climate change for the human race’s imminent demise.
He said: ‘We’ll undergo the same fate as the people on Easter Island .
‘Climate change is just at the very beginning. But we’re seeing remarkable changes in the weather already.’
‘The Aborigines showed that without science and the production of carbon dioxide and global warming, they could survive for 40,000 or 50,000 years.
‘But the world can’t. The human species is likely to go the same way as many of the species that we’ve seen disappear.’
Retired professor Stephen Boyden, a colleague of Professor Fenner, said that while there was deep pessimism among some ecologists, others had a more optimistic view.
‘Frank may well be right, but some of us still harbour the hope that there will come about an awareness of the situation and, as a result the revolutionary changes necessary to achieve ecological sustainability.’
Simon Ross, the vice-chairman of the Optimum Population Trust, said: ‘Mankind is facing real challenges including climate change, loss of bio-diversity and unprecedented growth in population.’
Professor Fenner’s chilling prediction echoes recent comments by Prince Charles who last week warned of ‘monumental problems’ if the world’s population continues to grow at such a rapid pace.
And it comes after Professor Nicholas Boyle of Cambridge University
in the last 500 years there has been a cataclysmic ‘Great Event’ of international significance at the start of each century, he claimed.
In 2006 another esteemed academic, Professor James Lovelock, warned that the world’s population may sink as low as 500 million over the next century due to global warming.
He claimed that any attempts to tackle climate change will not be able to solve the problem, merely buy us time.
Anthropocentric BS!
ReplyDeleteReally, I think the only hope for humanity, at this point, is if we abandon most of our technology, and return to a "living off the land", natural lifestyle. We should start by banning all technology which causes ANY kind of harm to the environment. Doing damage to the natural environment, something we all depend on for survival, and for the future, should be treated as an extremely serious crime. Most especially when it is done on a large scale, by corporations, industry, and yes, governments. That would put an end to most wars, weapons of mass destruction, etc, it would also do away with a large percentage of industry, but it would start the process of allowing the earth to heal, from all the damage we have done to it. Of course, along with that, we would all have to learn a whole new way of life. Abandon our cars, our airplanes, our capitalistic societies, and return to agriculture, crafts, barter, and basic trades, as a means of survival. I think it could be done, with minimal casualties, if every citizen were also simultaneously allotted a certain amount of land to cultivate, for food production, and to erect their own housing, and were given the basic tools to do this. These plots of land should be handed down to families, so that families can continue to sustain themselves in one place, for many generations. Building codes, zoning restrictions, etc, would mostly have to be abandoned, to allow people to build alternative, makeshift dwellings, with limited resources. Many many institutions would have to be abandoned. Like public schools and colleges. Trade skills would become more important than "standard education". Higher learning would not be beneficial, in it's current form, unless it dealt with specific issues of basic survival. Mass consumerism would have to end. Self sufficiency would need to become the more encouraged form of livelihood, rather than working for wages. This would of course destroy the tax base that keeps most large gov'ts afloat. Considering how most abuse their power, it would probably be for the best. Perhaps THE PEOPLE would then, once again, have a say in how the country is run? If we don't make this change voluntarily, it will probably be forced on us, involuntarily, in any case, as resources dwindle, and infrastructures resultingly crumble.
ReplyDelete