Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

A forum for discussion of regional topics including oil depletion but also government, society, and the future.

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby ennui2 » Wed 03 Jun 2015, 15:00:10

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', '
')Oh, I see, you don't really believe it, tapping out doom is just a fun hobby.


Considering your abandonment of your farm, you're throwing stones in a glass house.

Please stop presuming to know what we believe and what we don't. How we choose to react to doom is our own personal choice, not subject to anyone's doomer litmus-test.
"If the oil price crosses above the Etp maximum oil price curve within the next month, I will leave the forum." --SumYunGai (9/21/2016)
User avatar
ennui2
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 3920
Joined: Tue 20 Sep 2011, 10:37:02
Location: Not on Homeworld

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby ennui2 » Wed 03 Jun 2015, 15:09:58

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', '
')As if, after 12 years of debate on this site about the remaining reserves of just one resource you think there is an objective "number" out there you can plug in?


What exactly are you trying to prove? Your argument sounds almost cornucopian, Pops. Are you saying there's nothing to worry about?

If there's any frustration I have with what's left of peakoil.com is that nobody seems to ever want to get serious. All they want to do is lapse into sarcasm, starw-men, ad homs, etc... I know I'm as guilty of that as any, but every now and then, come on, let's get serious.
"If the oil price crosses above the Etp maximum oil price curve within the next month, I will leave the forum." --SumYunGai (9/21/2016)
User avatar
ennui2
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 3920
Joined: Tue 20 Sep 2011, 10:37:02
Location: Not on Homeworld

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby Newfie » Wed 03 Jun 2015, 15:41:43

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('careinke', 'W')hy do you assume we are not doing anything? Besides, this site is great for advance warning.

Because everyone who actually believes they are doing enough will merrily jump on me for saying it and I'll be able to count them on one hand.



I think you can start with me, even though I don't have a clue of what you mean by "enough." I believe we have taken serious measures, maybe a bit unorthodox but we have put our back into it.

And I do believe LTG is pretty near spot on, although I surely don't cast it in the same disparaging light as you do.

In fact if I look at many of your posts I would say that you were pretty much in line with the LTG projections, no ultra fast crash but a long slog downward. So I really don't get where you are coming from in this thread. Very confusing.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 18651
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby Lore » Wed 03 Jun 2015, 16:36:32

Fast crashers are pretty much gone from the forum. Although there a few people that still get excited over the next event.

We do have a few that suffer from Normalcy bias though here. It's as much a trap as running in circles screaming and shouting doom.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he normalcy bias, or normality bias, is a mental state people enter when facing a disaster. It causes people to underestimate both the possibility of a disaster and its possible effects. This may result in situations where people fail to adequately prepare for a disaster, and on a larger scale, the failure of governments to include the populace in its disaster preparations.

The assumption that is made in the case of the normalcy bias is that since a disaster never has occurred then it never will occur. It can result in the inability of people to cope with a disaster once it occurs. People with a normalcy bias have difficulties reacting to something they have not experienced before. People also tend to interpret warnings in the most optimistic way possible, seizing on any ambiguities to infer a less serious situation.

The opposite of normalcy bias would be overreaction, or "worst-case thinking" bias, in which small deviations from normality are dealt with as signaling an impending catastrophe.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normalcy_bias
The things that will destroy America are prosperity-at-any-price, peace-at-any-price, safety-first instead of duty-first, the love of soft living, and the get-rich-quick theory of life.
... Theodore Roosevelt
User avatar
Lore
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9021
Joined: Fri 26 Aug 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Fear Of A Blank Planet
Top

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby ennui2 » Wed 03 Jun 2015, 16:52:28

The problem I see here revolves a lot around what I can only describe as thought or emotional "policing".

A doomer is a Cassandra, and so what a doomer wants more than anything else is to get other people to be as worried about what he or she is worried about. Worry is an emotion. But people process things different emotionally.

For instance, someone getting a terminal cancer diagnosis, a common analogy. Some people might panic and commit suicide. Some might throw all their effort into interventionist medicine, traditional or non-traditional. Some will run through their bucket-list. And others will just try to put it out of their minds.

The problem is that people think others should think, feel, and do EXACTLY as they do, otherwise there is something "wrong" with them. And that something wrong usually carries with it a pejorative like denial, ignorant, corny, whatever...

All I really strive to see in others is an open acknowledgment of doom. I do NOT expect people to pursue any prescriptive course of action, because there is simply no one-size-fits-all doomer lifestyle.

If someone believes that their beach-front property will wash into the sea, but they decide to enjoy the view while they can, that's their business, really. Their lack of heading inland should not be treated as denial.

Likewise, the fact that none of us here, no matter how much any of us has powered down, could be considered "no-impact-man" should not be twisted to imply that any of us don't believe in ecological limits. There's a moralistic lens and there's an intellectual one. Two different things.

It doesn't mean we can't explore the dichotomy between the two. That is, pretty much, at the heart of the matter, but the constant score-keeping and lifestyle comparisons between doomers is really not that helpful.
"If the oil price crosses above the Etp maximum oil price curve within the next month, I will leave the forum." --SumYunGai (9/21/2016)
User avatar
ennui2
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 3920
Joined: Tue 20 Sep 2011, 10:37:02
Location: Not on Homeworld

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby Pops » Wed 03 Jun 2015, 18:53:16

I could have said:
We're Dead! OMG get the Guns! or
Yeah, we're dead, we deserve it. or
Stupid MSM, It's all a plot by TPTB!

All acceptable responses.

Many times I predicted the end of the world and much of that bias came from Limits to growth and Population Bomb which I read while listening to Eve of Destruction and Bad Moon Rising. Does no one here ever review their opinions? Inspect their biases? Revisit their predictions? Am I the only fallible one?

The red pill is a hallucinogen, it makes you think you can see things others can't.

I have no special insight, no crystal ball that allows me to see while the sheeple mob is blind. I'm realizing that I have a certain mindset I'm invested in and if I don't make a conscious effort I usually chose to credit only one set of facts. Turns out, cherry picking only makes cherry pie, not gonna get rhubarb-strawberry.

As Keynes is rumored to have said: "When the facts change, I change my mind."

Lately I am thinking I should simply look at more facts. Mainly because so many of the facts I've cherry picked to fret over did not morph into the doom I feared. It seems obvious to me that my efforts are working, at least outwardly, since I stand accused of that most despicable title of — optimist! and dare I say it — Corny!

LOL. I've not joined the Chamber of Commerce, I'm merely trying to confront my biases. So rather than unthinkingly feed the echo with the knee-jerk responses at the top, I've decided to consciously challenge it and see what I learn.

--
Surprisingly Lore there are other biases, including worst case planning and that is one I have been guilty of and one of the reasons I rail so much now about the knee-jerk doom
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'B')y transforming low-probability events into complete certainties whenever the events are particularly scary, worst-case thinking leads to terrible decision making. For one thing, it’s only half of the cost/benefit equation. “Every decision has costs and benefits, risks and rewards,” Schneier points out. “By speculating about what can possibly go wrong, and then acting as if that is likely to happen, worst-case thinking focuses only on the extreme but improbable risks and does a poor job at assessing outcomes.”

Nightmare Scenario: The Fallacy of Worst-Case Thinking --Risk Management magazine


--
Ennui, I think I spelled out my change of plans somewhere, but basically it doesn't make me corny to revise my my plans. The number one reason we bought the farm was to cash out the CA RE bubble, we did that well and even made a little money fixing up the farm to boot.
from April '04:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'M')y short-term concerns are primarily the precarious conditions of the economy. Bubbles, bubbles everywhere, real estate over exuberance, weak dollar, current account deficit, huge federal, state and personal debts, jobless recovery...
Before you decide this guy is really out there, let me say peak oil is not the main reason for the move, mainly were rats deserting the California real estate market – our home value has increased about 125% in four years!


No doubt the farm would have been a great place about now if my early predictions had born out and my kids needed a place to retreat. Turns out things don't look likely to warrant a retreat soon and my kids are pretty well set up in the military in any event. So the farm, that farm anyway, was not a bad plan to save my CA profit, make a little more and have a backup JIC but it turned into a little much for just the 2 of us. And too, time has gone by and we are older. We were early forties when we began to talk about moving, now close to 60, big difference.

Current plan is to build a little more savings as I have no retirement plan and not a lot of savings. We hope to turn a couple of fixers and if I can avoid getting my tit in the wringer meanwhile, perhaps 5 years hence, build a very small very efficient house for very little money. Hopefully where it rains.

So yeah, I can see how you are confused. I've noticed folks don't change their online minds much. As far as LtG goes I'm pretty sure I've about the same outlook as I ever had, I just don't knee-jerk doomward quite so harshly.

(Sorry for the long post, I just keep adding between emails)

Newf, you may remember the period I last visited Shanny's site. It was during the '11(?) midwest drought and the topic was the Great Starvation. I argued that summer that much of the harvest was already in the virtual bag due to sufficient early warm and rain but I was roundly shouted down from all sides for daring to impinge on the crop failure doom. After posting a few links to ease people's mind that we were not on the eve of destruction after all and getting nothing but grief for the effort it dawned on me that playing with the doom was the point, not any interest in realistic assessment. No one was interested in the good news that millions and billions were saved from death, it's quite possible that like PO.com is becoming, they were disapointed. I never went back, and I'm sure they don't care, after all I was drowning the echo.
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves -- in their separate, and individual capacities.
-- Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Government (July 1, 1854)
User avatar
Pops
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 19746
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 04:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac
Top

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby Pops » Wed 03 Jun 2015, 18:59:14

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Newfie', '[')So I really don't get where you are coming from in this thread. Very confusing.

The topic is overpopulation, my thought, as mentioned earlier, (especially in relation to the LtG chart) is die off is not required for population to peak and fall as is the popular opinion here. The observed trend is births falling faster than the LtG prediction. Many "developed economies" are already pop. negative due to urbanization and undeveloped countries are fast urbanizing.
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves -- in their separate, and individual capacities.
-- Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Government (July 1, 1854)
User avatar
Pops
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 19746
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 04:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac
Top

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby Pops » Wed 03 Jun 2015, 19:07:55

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ennui2', 'C')onsidering your abandonment of your farm, you're throwing stones in a glass house.

Please stop presuming to know what we believe and what we don't. How we choose to react to doom is our own personal choice, not subject to anyone's doomer litmus-test...

Your argument sounds almost cornucopian, Pops. Are you saying there's nothing to worry about?

So wait, are you accusing me of handing out doomer brownie points or of being a corny?

LOL, I really don't care what you do or don't. I once thought that was the purpose of the site, "bang the drum" as it were, but I don't now. This is social media, I get on here just like everyone else to see my name up on the silver screen and once in a while to get a look at what I actually think dribble out of my fingers.

From my post count seems I've done a lot of looking and not much finding :lol:
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves -- in their separate, and individual capacities.
-- Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Government (July 1, 1854)
User avatar
Pops
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 19746
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 04:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac
Top

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby ennui2 » Wed 03 Jun 2015, 19:34:27

Pops, there's only about a dozen active posters left on this site.

There are plenty of individual sites out there that cater to action at the individual or group level:

http://www.permies.com/forums/

https://www.transitionnetwork.org/

http://teresamcguffey.com/greenwizards. ... hp?q=forum

http://350.org/

Do I come here to find out how to set up a rain catchment system? No. I don't. Sorry. I can figure that out elsewhere.

This site is not an attractive hub for discussing prepping/planning anymore. There's barely anyone here! So it devolves into a little social club of people elbowing each other over their intractable ideological differences and competing predictions of the future. (Oh, plus the usual cluster of people shaking their fist at this or that boogieman.)

You're the moderator. If you think this site should be more than this, then do something. Otherwise maybe think about packing it in like The Oil Drum.
"If the oil price crosses above the Etp maximum oil price curve within the next month, I will leave the forum." --SumYunGai (9/21/2016)
User avatar
ennui2
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 3920
Joined: Tue 20 Sep 2011, 10:37:02
Location: Not on Homeworld

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby Newfie » Wed 03 Jun 2015, 22:01:07

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Newfie', '[')So I really don't get where you are coming from in this thread. Very confusing.

The topic is overpopulation, my thought, as mentioned earlier, (especially in relation to the LtG chart) is die off is not required for population to peak and fall as is the popular opinion here. The observed trend is births falling faster than the LtG prediction. Many "developed economies" are already pop. negative due to urbanization and undeveloped countries are fast urbanizing.


Thanks for the clarity. Although we have different takes on how to interpret the information.

Where we seem to agree is that we are facing, with high probability, a long slow crash, tens of decades.

We disagree on two points....

First is the possibility that the slowing growth rate will lead to a stabilized situation. I believe that the confluence of streeses, think of the other lines on the LTG graph, have so far depleted our environmental capital that we have diminished Earths capacity to support anything like the current population. If you recall MontQuests Last foray here he got into a protracted "discussion" about "population momentum." I agree with his understanding of this dynamic (if not his explanatory methodology.).

Second, I am far less opptomistic than you on the possibility of a fast crash, even if it is just in certain geographic areas. While I could be wrong it's not unreasonable to ask if that is not what we are seeing in Syria at the moment.

As to what to do about it, I see a lot of your points and agree, I think, mostly with your directions. Observe, adjust, measure, repeat. For us the specifics are different than your chosen path, neither right or wrong, just different. Our plans seem to be working for us, for now.

I think it is a mistake to craft you futre plans that spare not compatible with the person you are, or wish to become. But knowing what and who that is is difficult at best.

I do think you give LTG short shift understanding that it is a 40 year old work. Sure their time table may be off a bit, one way or the other. It is unlikely either of us will be around long enough to definitively know this turns out, barring some extensive fast collapse. But also recall that even they did not stand by the curves once the downturn started in earnest. They did and do fell that once the downturn gets going there are too many u constrained variables to make any significant prediction.

To your points about some folks seeming to desire a sever die off I get where you are coming from, kinda. And I recall you saying recently that you understood the desire to have the breaks put on early so as to limit the pain of the downturn. I hear these two sentiments as one. Sure the verbiage is different, but the underlying emotional understanding, and cunumdrum is the same.

People (self included) are scared. We can see better than some other that humanity is over extended in oh so many ways. Do some of us over react at times? Sure. You know what that feels like. You went through an emotional process to find a way to deal with and contain the fear. Others of us are also going through this process, maybe not the same way you did, nor with the same results, but we are working through it. You came to a certain resolution that has worked for you, and maybe you've outgrown the conversation. But others here are still struggling. Look at Desue as an obvious example.
Last edited by Newfie on Wed 03 Jun 2015, 22:17:14, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 18651
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean
Top

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby C8 » Wed 03 Jun 2015, 22:10:38

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', '
')
Many times I predicted the end of the world and much of that bias came from Limits to growth and Population Bomb which I read while listening to Eve of Destruction and Bad Moon Rising. Does no one here ever review their opinions? Inspect their biases? Revisit their predictions? Am I the only fallible one?

The red pill is a hallucinogen, it makes you think you can see things others can't.

I have no special insight, no crystal ball that allows me to see while the sheeple mob is blind. I'm realizing that I have a certain mindset I'm invested in and if I don't make a conscious effort I usually chose to credit only one set of facts. Turns out, cherry picking only makes cherry pie, not gonna get rhubarb-strawberry.

Lately I am thinking I should simply look at more facts. Mainly because so many of the facts I've cherry picked to fret over did not morph into the doom I feared. It seems obvious to me that my efforts are working, at least outwardly, since I stand accused of that most despicable title of — optimist! and dare I say it — Corny!

LOL. I've not joined the Chamber of Commerce, I'm merely trying to confront my biases.


This is a neat quote and shows much growth. I had the same experience. Most people who post a lot don't do this (let alone moderators)- there is something about making one's opinions public that has the effect of committing a person to stay loyal to one's past and allies. After enough failed attempts by myself and others to predict the future I am done with the task and am totally content with sitting back to watch the parade without guessing who will be marching next.

With regards to the NYT reporters- where to start? I have no doubt that these individuals have no intention of reducing their consumption or asking folks to stop destroying trees to be chopped up into the NY Times. I am an independent and am disgusted with elements of both political parties- but liberals take the cake for decrying the evils of capitalism and consumption while they live it up at Martha's Vinyard or Cape Cod. They always want to reduce somebody else's consumption.
User avatar
C8
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1074
Joined: Sun 14 Apr 2013, 09:02:48
Top

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby Scrub Puller » Wed 03 Jun 2015, 22:43:36

Yair . . .
I seldom copy and paste but this lobbed in my in box


$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'S')omalia is not a humanitarian disaster; it is an evolutionary disaster. The Current drought is not the worst in 50 years, as the BBC and all the aid organizations claim. It is nothing compared to the droughts in 1960/61 or 73/74.
And there are continuing droughts every 5 years or so. It's just that there are now four times the population; having been kept alive by famine Relief, supplied by aid organizations, over the past 50 years. So, of course, the effects of any drought now, is a famine. They cannot even Feed themselves in a normal rainfall year.

Worst yet, the effects of these droughts, and poor nutrition in the first 3 years of the a child's life, have a lasting effect on the development of The infant brain, so that if they survive, they will never achieve a normal IQ ..
Consequently, they are selectively breeding a population, who cannot be Educated, let alone one that is not being educated; a recipe for disaster.

We are seeing this impact now, and it can only exacerbate, to the detriment of their neighbors, and their environment as well. This scenario can only end in an even worse disaster; with even worse suffering, for those benighted people, and their descendants. Eventually, some mechanism will intervene, be it war, disease or starvation.

So what do we do? Let them starve?

What a dilemma for our Judeo/ Christian/Islamic Ethos; as well as Hindu/Buddhist morality. And this is beginning to happen in Kenya, Ethiopia, and other countries in Asia, like Pakistan. Is this the beginning of the end of civilization?

AFRICA is giving nothing to anyone outside Africa -- apart from AIDS and new diseases. Even as we see African states refusing to take action to restore something resembling civilization In Zimbabwe, the Begging bowl for Ethiopia is being passed around to us out of Africa, yet again.It is nearly 25 years since the famous Feed The World campaign began in Ethiopia, and in that time Ethiopia's population has grown from 33.5 million to 78+ million today. So, why on earth should I do anything to encourage further catastrophic demographic growth in that country? Where is the logic? There is none.

To be sure, there are two things saying that logic doesn't count. One is my conscience, and the other is the picture, yet again, of another wide-eyed child, yet again, gazing, yet again, at the camera, which yet again, captures the tragedy of children starving.

Sorry. My conscience has toured this territory on foot and financially. Unlike most of you, I have been to Ethiopia; like most of you, I have stumped up the loot to charities to stop starvation there. The wide-eyed boy-child we saved, 20 years or so ago, is now a low IQ, AK 47-bearing moron, siring children whenever the whim takes him and blaming the world because he is uneducated, poor and left behind. There is no doubt a good argument why we should prolong this predatory and dysfunctional economic, social and sexual system but I do not know what it is.

There is, on the other hand, every reason not to write a column like this. It will win no friends and will provoke the self-righteous wrath of, well, the self-righteous hand wringing, letter writing wrathful individuals; a species which never fails to contaminate almost every debate in Irish life with its sneers and its moral superiority. It will also probably enrage some of the finest men in Irish life, like John O'Shea, of Goal; and the Finucane brothers, men whom I admire enormously.

So be it. But, please, please, you self-righteously wrathful, spare me mention of our own Irish Famine, with this or that lazy analogy. There is no comparison. Within 20 years of the Famine, the Irish population was down by 30%. Over the equivalent period, thanks to Western food, the Mercedes 10-wheel truck and the Lockheed Hercules plane, Ethiopia's population has more than doubled.

Alas, that wretched country is not alone in its madness. Somewhere, over the rainbow, lies Somalia, another fine land of violent, AK 47-toting, khat-chewing, girl-circumcising, permanently tumescent layabouts and housing pirates of the ocean. Indeed, we now have almost an entire continent of sexually hyperactive, illiterate indigents, with tens of millions of people who only survive because of help from the outside world or allowances by the semi-communist Governments they voted for, money supplied by borrowing it from the World Bank!

This dependency has not stimulated political prudence or commonsense. Indeed, voodoo idiocy seems to be in the ascendant, with the president of South Africa being a firm believer in the efficacy of a little tap water on the post-coital penis as a sure preventative against AIDS infection. Needless to say, poverty, hunger and societal meltdown have not prevented idiotic wars involving Tigre, Uganda, Congo, Sudan, Somalia, Eritrea etcetera. Broad brush-strokes, to be sure.

But broad brush-strokes are often the way that history paints its gaudier, if more decisive, chapters. Japan, China, Russia, Korea, Poland, Germany, Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia in the 20th century have endured worse broad brush-strokes than almost any part of Africa. They are now -- one way or another -- virtually all giving aid to or investing in Africa, whereas Africa, with its vast savannahs and its lush pastures, is giving almost nothing to anyone, apart from AIDS.

Meanwhile, Africa's peoples are outstripping their resources, and causing catastrophic ecological degradation. By 2050, the population of Ethiopia will be 177 million; the equivalent of France, Germany and Benelux today, but located on the parched and increasingly Protein-free wastelands of the Great Rift Valley. So, how much sense does it make for us actively to increase the adult population of what is already a vastly over-populated, environmentally devastated and economically dependent country?

How much morality is there in saving an Ethiopian child from starvation today, for it to survive to a life of brutal circumcision, poverty, hunger, violence and sexual abuse, resulting in another half-dozen such wide-eyed children, with comparably jolly little lives ahead of them?

Of course, it might make you feel better, which is a prime reason for so much charity! But that is not good enough.For self-serving generosity has been one of the curses of Africa. It has sustained political systems which would otherwise have collapsed. It prolonged the Eritrean-Ethiopian war by nearly a decade. It is inspiring Bill Gates' program to rid the continent of malaria, when, in the almost complete absence of personal self-discipline, that disease is one of the most efficacious forms of population-control now operating. If his program is successful, tens of millions of children who would otherwise have died in infancy will survive to adulthood, he boasts.

Oh good: then what? I know, let them all come here (to Ireland) or America. (not forgetting NZ or Australia!)

Cheers.
Scrub Puller
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 296
Joined: Sun 07 Apr 2013, 13:20:59
Top

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby Keith_McClary » Thu 04 Jun 2015, 02:30:08

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Scrub Puller', 'A')FRICA is giving nothing to anyone outside Africa
Oil and strategic minerals and diamonds.
Facebook knows you're a dog.
User avatar
Keith_McClary
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7344
Joined: Wed 21 Jul 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Suburban tar sands
Top

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby Scrub Puller » Thu 04 Jun 2015, 03:29:11

Yair . . .

Keith_McClary

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'S')crub Puller wrote:
AFRICA is giving nothing to anyone outside Africa


I did NOT write that. It's transcript of a column from a column in the Irish Times . . . and I did mention it was a copy and paste.

I noted that comment too but, in the context of the article it makes no neverminds.

Precious few of the African population are deriving any benefit from oil and diamonds and the article, in spite of a few faults just tells it like it is.

In other words a journalist submitting to little Irish paper has a better grip on reality than the NYT . . . which is not surprising really.

Cheers.
Scrub Puller
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 296
Joined: Sun 07 Apr 2013, 13:20:59
Top

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby Newfie » Thu 04 Jun 2015, 08:02:57

Yup, a sad but true conundrum.

One of many we will shortly face I fear.

No good answers.

I am reminded, once again, of Al Bartlett and his comparison o f good and bad things.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 18651
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby Pops » Thu 04 Jun 2015, 10:44:57

Newf, it seems to me that Erlich and the LtG folks were victims of the common malady of third eye blindness. It isn't a rap on them, only recently on message boards such as this have the truly prescient humans come forward, LOL.

Seriously, at least a couple of big things came along and changed the picture, chemical contraception, improved plant genetics and globalisation. The seeds of all three were growing at the time of publication but didn't really get going for a while.

I'm pretty sure the problem that they thought would bend the mortality curve upward was starvation. This is calories/person per day:

Image

I'm actually surprised it has increased that uniformly. I would expect the distribution in finer scale looks more varied. Hard for me, a mere mortal, to tell what the future holds, but right this instant you and I both know there is a huge amount of food that goes to feed animals,

Image


--
In our zeal for a die off we never ever talk about contraception except to dismiss it as too little, too late. The fact is, we did take Bartlett's advice and start doing something 20 years ago — actually closer to 60. In the 1960s when they were developing their ideas, Erlich, Meadows et al probably did not imagine the rate of adoption of contraception. It is obvious to me, looking the the chart, that they were no more prescient than you or me because the biggest error on the chart is in how fast the birth rate fell and how far it diverged from the trend. One can toss out platitudes about how great the model is but I'm pretty sure you can't argue with the fact they missed out on the one simple metric that is not only key but is fairly well documented, birth rate.

This is global:

Image


--
The other population metric to look at is mortality. Here too they were too pessimistic (in the Meadow's "standard run" which is always quoted) and didn't foresee improvements. The thing that has driven the population explosion is not the breeders in Africa, it is the government and employer provided medicine in the developed world. Mortality rates falling faster than birth rates causes the increase in population—less dying, not more breeding. Mortality rates look to be low and flat now, having fallen much faster than predicted and having stabilised earlier as well. Obviously a person can interpret that the prelude to the die off as I'm sure many do, but the other take is that a) mortality can only go so low (at least so far) and b) once it stops falling the rate of growth can quickly fall as long as birth rate continues to decline.


--
Another metric not included in the LtG scenario that turned out to be very important is containerization. May seem esoteric but container shipping enabled globalization by reducing the cost of shipping some large percentage, I'm not gonna look it up but I'm pretty sure I'm not exaggerating when I say it was probably one of the biggest economic developments of the late 20th, right up there with ending Bretton Woods and computerized financial gambling. And again, SeaLand didn't get going until the late '70s and it wasn't until the '80s sometime that longshoremen were shut out and the system really got going.

Container shipped globalization is important because it drives urbanisation, which in turn makes kids a liability rather than asset. It also meshes with increased food supply in enabling the thing I've railed about for years, regional ag specialization. I see it as a huge danger but to this point it has reduced food costs by driving efficiency, hard to believe but true.

Globalisation and a growing middle class however bring up the "let them eat hot dogs" scenario, where the newly middle class starve out the lower classes by feeding increasing amounts of grain to animals (yes, just like the west has been doing for years) to get their Western Bacon Burgers. (BTW, the back up and "relief valve" for starvation is now, more than ever, eating "animal feed"; corn & soy especially. Something to practice)

The economy is where I start to get pessimistic, funny because the "Magic Hand" is the god that most optimists pray to when confronted by such inconvenient facts as overpopulation. It was the savior cited in the NYT piece no? Capitalism is becoming a system of stoking bubbles and skimming the froth. Individual initiative and private property are its cornerstones and I'm all for them. But as the great surplus has developed, the system that "built that" has evolved into a big casino in many respects, might as well bet on the come when the great innovation of the day is Angry Birds. Nothing new in that thought.

My opinion of the future is it's possible for the Meadows scenarios 6-9 (sustainability) to come about, but I don't think it will be voluntary but simply the extension of existing population trends. Nonrenewable resources will continue to not renew and we'll deal with that, but the inflection points won't be boiling in our skins or the PO date or EBOLA!.

One thing I haven't changed my opinion on is "collapse" will manifest up close and personal as a pink slip.
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves -- in their separate, and individual capacities.
-- Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Government (July 1, 1854)
User avatar
Pops
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 19746
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 04:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby Pops » Thu 04 Jun 2015, 11:47:17

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', 'M')y opinion of the future is it's possible for the Meadows scenarios 6-9 (sustainability) to come about, but I don't think it will be voluntary...

Just to note here that the Meadows suggest a societal change to voluntarily limit ecological footprint by actual governmental action. My opinion is this might happen to some extent (outside the US mostly) but that the natural decline in population will happen regardless, mostly due to maturing economies as urbanisation reaches some climactic level.
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves -- in their separate, and individual capacities.
-- Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Government (July 1, 1854)
User avatar
Pops
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 19746
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 04:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac
Top

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby Pops » Thu 04 Jun 2015, 14:08:52

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('C8', 'T')his is a neat quote and shows much growth. I had the same experience. Most people who post a lot don't do this (let alone moderators)- there is something about making one's opinions public that has the effect of committing a person to stay loyal to one's past and allies.

Thanks 8, that rings true. I think lots of folks would rather abandon the board rather than admit a change of mind or even attitude adjustment for that matter.
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves -- in their separate, and individual capacities.
-- Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Government (July 1, 1854)
User avatar
Pops
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 19746
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 04:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac
Top

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby Newfie » Thu 04 Jun 2015, 19:40:40

All well and good Pops, yet I think it is those very things you cite that make me conclude we are heading for trouble. There is this persistent optomisim that things will work out, is that not the "magic hand"? ( I think you meant "silent hand"?)

At what point does the population stop growing?
At what point does this large population stop pinning for better food, more gizmos, more consumables?
At what point do we cease to over draw on the oceans bounty?
At what point do we stop dumping carbon into the atmosphere?
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 18651
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby Lore » Thu 04 Jun 2015, 19:45:58

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Newfie', 'A')ll well and good Pops, yet I think it is those very things you cite that make me conclude we are heading for trouble. There is this persistent optomisim that things will work out, is that not the "magic hand"? ( I think you meant "silent hand"?)

At what point does the population stop growing?
At what point does this large population stop pinning for better food, more gizmos, more consumables?
At what point do we cease to over draw on the oceans bounty?
At what point do we stop dumping carbon into the atmosphere?


At no point until there is a severe kickback. There is no precedent to say that I'm wrong about that.
The things that will destroy America are prosperity-at-any-price, peace-at-any-price, safety-first instead of duty-first, the love of soft living, and the get-rich-quick theory of life.
... Theodore Roosevelt
User avatar
Lore
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9021
Joined: Fri 26 Aug 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Fear Of A Blank Planet
Top

PreviousNext

Return to North America Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest