Stephan: In 1968 biologist Paul Ehrlich freaked the world out with his book The Population Bomb which argued that humanity faced a catastrophic crisis as a result of over-population and growing shortages of raw material supplies which would lead to grave economic consequences as prices for those materials went up. Ehrlich added, "If I were a gambler, I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000."
For over a decade Ehrlich made an international reputation proclaiming this, appearing on Johnny Carson nighttime show 20 times. Then in 1980, an economist, Julian Simon, who had had enough of Ehrlich's prophesies challenged him to a bet. Simon wanted something that could be objectively verified, and he proposed to Ehrlich that he pick five commodities whose prices he was willing to bet would go up and they settled on the price of five metals — copper, chromium, nickel, tin, and tungsten, and whether in a decade the prices would go up as Ehrlich predicted.
Enrlich lost the best, and in October 1990, Simon was going through his mail and found an envelope from California. Inside was a check from Paul Ehrlich for $576.07. There was no note.
As to the Ehrlich's population claims, yes the population is going up, but most developed nations do not actually have sustainable birthrates, 2.3 births for each death. Here is the latest on this trend.
Human populations are set to decline in countries from Asia to Europe – and an unusual form of rewilding is taking place.
The village of Selas near Molina de Aragon, part of a vast region of central eastern Spain that is one of the least populated areas in Europe. Credit: David Ramos/Getty
For many years it seemed that overpopulation was the looming crisis of our age. Back in 1968, the Stanford biologists Paul and Anne Ehrlich infamously predicted that millions would soon starve to death in their bestselling, doom-saying book The Population Bomb; since then, neo-Malthusian rumblings of an imminent disaster have been a continual refrain in certain sections of the environmental movement – fears that were recently given voice on David Attenborough’s documentary Life on our Planet.
At the time the Ehrlichs were publishing their dark prophecies, the world was at its peak of population growth, which at that point was increasing at a rate of 2.1% a year. Since then, the global population has ballooned from 3.5 billion to 7.67 billion.
But growth has slowed – and considerably. As women’s empowerment advances, and access to contraception improves, […]
And yet Stephan when I do a quick search on population data I find overall population is increasing because of Africa, Middle East and South Asia. The highest birthrates are almost entirely in the poorest regions and over the last years these have had the most instability, conflict and generated the most refugees/migrants. What will happen when ocean level rise shows up driving millions from coastal zones? Maybe spreading the growing populations to areas of decreasing populations would rebalance the planet except for that xenophobia thing.
The ongoing destruction of the natural world is driven by the material needs of this expanding population. That and the capitalistic monetization for profit of everything including clean water and breathable air.
It would seem that David Attenborough’s observations and many other scientific observations are dismissed because there is human die-back in some areas of the planet. There are still and will be for some period too many humans eating and crapping up this beautiful world. I’m old from a short lived bunch so I will be fertilizer soon enough doing my part to balance the world.
There is a cultural reset going on or so I believe, among the younger folk who want to create a future of balance and respect for all life forms. An understanding that we all are expressions of the natural world something many aboriginal cultures have known for thousands of years. I imagine that existing and new technologies will make it possible to have large populations live in productive balance with a revitalized natural world. Examples of a passive sort are reported in this very article.
And yet Stephan when I do a quick search on population data I find overall population is increasing because of Africa, Middle East and South Asia. The highest birthrates are almost entirely in the poorest regions and over the last years these have had the most instability, conflict and generated the most refugees/migrants. What will happen when ocean level rise shows up driving millions from coastal zones? Maybe spreading the growing populations to areas of decreasing populations would rebalance the planet except for that xenophobia thing.
The ongoing destruction of the natural world is driven by the material needs of this expanding population. That and the capitalistic monetization for profit of everything including clean water and breathable air.
It would seem that David Attenborough’s observations and many other scientific observations are dismissed because there is human die-back in some areas of the planet. There are still and will be for some period too many humans eating and crapping up this beautiful world. I’m old from a short lived bunch so I will be fertilizer soon enough doing my part to balance the world.
There is a cultural reset going on or so I believe, among the younger folk who want to create a future of balance and respect for all life forms. An understanding that we all are expressions of the natural world something many aboriginal cultures have known for thousands of years. I imagine that existing and new technologies will make it possible to have large populations live in productive balance with a revitalized natural world. Examples of a passive sort are reported in this very article.