Earth Day: the most crucial issue

Earth Day: the most crucial issue

Summary: Today at least one branch of the popular media tried to deal with the single most crucial issue affecting greentech, resources, the environment, the planet, your life and mine. POPULATION, as in how many people can this rock support?

TOPICS: Tech Industry

Today at least one branch of the popular media tried to deal with the single most crucial issue affecting greentech, resources, the environment, the planet, your life and mine. POPULATION, as in how many people can this rock support?

You can listen to the NPR show here. April 22, 2009. Perfect Earth Day topic.

Many animals now extinct once numbered in the millions or billions, from trilobites to some once-abundant dinosaurs to Passenger Pigeons. Nature has not seen fit to allow every "successful" species to remain.

And the questions surrounding human population affect every aspect of life on the planet from viral to vertebrate, from richest to poorest among us. Issues of personal freedom versus collective will. Women's freedom and education versus patriarchal value systems. Birth control, religion, science, hunger, drought, distribution of resources, exploitation of finite resources, energy, political power, political chaos. Pollution and toxification of our planet and its earth, sky and water. Not to mention all the wonderful research into how rats behave when over-crowded. The list of brain-twisters goes on and on. And it's good somebody was talking about it today, Earth Day. The planet does NOT need us, but we sure need it. Will we ever act like it? [poll id="121"]

Topic: Tech Industry

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.


Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Finally!

    Finally, Mr Fuller... something I agree with you 101%. The earth is in danger of running out of resources and people continue to make children like the earth is limitless. I mean, come on people! What happens when we start a backslide of food production, or when petroleum passes its peak production, or when disease starts spreading out of control in the inner cities? I don't think that's the kind of population control we want. Make a choice to slow the population growth before nature does it for you!
    • I agree, too!

      Not only are we pushing past the reasonable limits of resource utilization vs population density, the average quality of life for the population is decreasing. The reason is, those humans with the fewest resources and the least amount of education are the ones breeding the fastest. This causes an overall shift in the average quality of life toward the low end. This worries me. If we consider ANY form of population control someday, it ideally needs to be applied across the board to [i]everyone[/i], not just those with the fewest resources. I fear whomever decides those rules for population control will do otherwise for self-serving reasons.

      Ideally, the population would also be more evenly distributed with regard to available resources, but that encroaches on free will, which would remove one of the things which makes us decidedly human. For this reason, I think it is a bad idea. Nobody wants to be forced to live somewhere else or with others who aren't similar to themselves. It's human nature to be familial, tribal, and to seek self-similarity. Efforts to fight this nature over human history have usually resulted in violent uprisings or bouts of genocidal behavior. And those are definitely NOT acceptable ways to reduce population!

      So, we would have to be VERY careful how we went about any type of proposed population control. I don't think it will happen in my lifetime. However, I can see a day in the future where it becomes necessary for the survival of humanity.
  • Nature finds a way

    I don't think we are anywhere near the saturation point on this planet, and have to smile when I note that people had made dire predictions when we were 1/2, 1/4, or 1/10 the current population. But clearly some density will be reached where a "flashpoint" trigger happens, such as a global plague that needs concentrated humanity to spread.

    Or we can do it to ourselves. I speak only slightly tongue-in-cheek when I state that our new Messiah may be just the person to put the wheels into motion whereby hundreds of groups the world over obtain the capacity to create suitcase nukes, and then use them on each other and on us to the extent that we simply accept the occasional loss of an entire city such as Houston, or, say, Philadelphia as part of a new world order. Now there's population reduction on a massive scale.
  • Scientific American has a good article this month

    on Food Supplies - or rather the lack of them. Seems that worldwide production of grains peaked a few years ago - and is now going down. We are at an all-time low of food stockpiles (only 60 days worth). Looks like we will run out of food before ANYTHING else . . .
    Roger Ramjet
  • RE: Earth Day: the most crucial issue

    "The planet does NOT need us, but we sure need it."

    As if it matters whether or not a hunk of rock "needs" us. Couldn't care less.
  • RE: Earth Day: the most crucial issue

    Well into my sixth decade here on Gia, having survived the 20 or 30 Doomsday predictions gone before, I'd say, the only resource the Earth is likely to run out of is garbage cans to receive this latest greenie nonsense and the future ones to come.
    Capable men, despite the weight of such bilge generated by these charlatans, always manage to not only overcome problems, but to thrive and progress.
    What a pack of sissies!
    • Well said...

      Now if only more people would come to their senses about all this nonsense.
  • RE: Earth Day: the most crucial issue

    Too bad they set the poll up wrong, the correct answer is: All of the above.

    For reference:
    "is the result of better science and healthcare, get over it"

    Yup, but getting over it isn't an option.

    "means labor costs will continue to decline"

    Yup, but only in areas where the economies are still developing. At some point a status quo will be reached and the cost will level off.

    "is worse threat than global warming or pollution"

    Yup, because overpopulation is the root cause of these symptoms, think Band-aids where sutures are needed.

    "is supported by the economic and political status quo"

    Yup, because population control and birth control are both taboo in the economic and political mainstream. And with population control, there are less consumers which would drive down the economy.

    "could ultimately lead to cataclysm and human extinction"

  • RE: Earth Day: the most crucial issue

    Since the first Earth Day, the Greenie predictions have all been wrong. Not only that but their get togethers leave the biggest messes.
    If man dissapeared tomorrow nothing would change with the "Climate". It will still do what it wants to.
    All the Greenies have done is lied to children and scaired the hell out of them.
    Junk science taught in school, preached on TV and thrown into documentaries which ruins their credibility.
    The science isn't setteled, the sun DOES have an effect on the climate, Sir Albert of Gore does not walk on water and IS NOT carbon neutral, he uses about 100 times the resources that the average person does.
    Carbon credits are a scam wich is why Sir Albert buys them from himself.
    To worry about cow and moose farts and termite methane showes how stupid the lie is.
    To anyone old enough to remember factory towns we are very clean.
    Money is at the root of the whole global cooling, global warming, climate change farce. Government grants. That is what it is all about.
    Yes we should do our best to take care of the earth. I'm not against that. I'm just tired of the lies that the earth firsters spew out.
    When they cut the power line from their house, shut off the gas and water, give their SUVs to charity then walk on water, I'll listen. Maybe.

    Clueless Jim