I call Jupiter!

[SamIam]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

In all of recorded human history, armageddon is always predicted and has never happened.

Didn't I call you hand-wringers out in the 7 billion people thread? Your win-loss record is like 0 and infinity.

Can't you see what's right before your eyes? The agricultural history of the last century includes such massive gains that poor people are now obese!

Oh come on, UT! Now you're just being disingenuous. You can't compare poor people in a wealthy country like the US with people in the third world suffering from famine.

Would you call these African famine victims "obese"? You're comparing apples and oranges.

[ZenGum]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

In all of recorded human history, armageddon is always predicted and has never happened.

Didn't I call you hand-wringers out in the 7 billion people thread? Your win-loss record is like 0 and infinity.

Can't you see what's right before your eyes? The agricultural history of the last century includes such massive gains that poor people are now obese!

Just noting that we disagree here. I don't have time (and didn't when the population thread was active) to discuss properly. Here is the short version:

1. Well, not "armageddon" but overpopulation leading to overconsumption causing ecological collapse leading to economic collapse leading to population crash and cultural regression.

It isn't just about population, but population times ecological impact per person. Economic activity is a pretty good proxy for ecological impact, and that is also rushing upwards. I mentioned elsewhere that 25% of ALL the economic activity in human history has taken place in the last ten years.

2. never happened ... not true. Jared Diamond (biologist turned historian) has a book called Collapse in which he carefully documents and analyses over a dozen (I think it was 17) human civilizations which have collapsed in exactly this way. Easter Island was the most obvious example, but there were others in the American South-west, Africa, other island nations, etc. All of them followed the pattern I describe in 1; and all of them kept growing and seeming fine right up until the collapse.

Each ecosystem (including the earth) has a certain amount of bio-capital and can produce a certain amount of bio-interest each year. So long as we live off the interest, all good. And yes, our clever food production CAN extract more interest without damaging the capital; but that isn't the only thing happening. Every year we exceed the bio-interest and nibble at the capital.

Our current appearance of prosperity is an illusion maintained by nibbling at the capital. The end comes suddenly and with only vague warnings that are easy to miss or deny.

If you disagree, try to buy some Atlantic cod or Atlantic tuna. These have been so overfished as to be commercially extinct. There are plenty of other fish stocks like them and more going that way. Same for forest resources, water resources, soil nutrients. Then add in the toxic pollution, the debt problem, oil supply problem, the demographic bulge problem and any others you feel like. (This is why I'm not too worried about climate change. I think it is real and will be bad, but we've got other much more urgent threats than that.)

3. poor people obese.

Has already been answered, but even if it were true, is entirely consistent with the situation described in 2. above.

BUT!
You are right in that it is possible that continued scientific progress will give us the means to deal with all of this crap. Lord I hope so. This requires that we make these breakthroughs before we collapse, and that we don't bollocks the place up irreparably in doing so. So for these reasons I have not given up hope, and also believe it is worthwhile trying to be gentle with the Earth to stretch out the time we have to get our act together.

Remember, this was the SHORT answer. I'm trying to conserve bits.

[Pete Zicato]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

In all of recorded human history, armageddon is always predicted and has never happened.

This is a non-sequitur. Fill a glass with water. It never overflows... Until it does.

[piercehawkeye45]

Depends on your definition UT. Just because the human race isn't wiped out by an event doesn't mean it won't extremely hurt the global society.

If you look at the last 5000 years there is a trend of empires expanding to their limits, then collapsing and taking down all the societies around them with them. Another society, usually a backwards society at the time, then slowly takes over the niche of the old power and the pattern continues.

[infinite monkey]

They are coming back to get me. Dec 24th.

I doubt any of you are in on it, but if you are I'll see you there.

[Undertoad]

PH, let's call it a decimation of human existence: a reduction by a tenth.

[Undertoad]

Those children existed during the Malthusian predictions and continue to exist now that the predictions are generally considered wrong.

That's oh for infinity+1, play again?

[Spexxvet]

If I've told you once, I've told you an infinite number of times: don't exagerate!

[SamIam]

You bet!

Facts and Figures on Health

* Poor nutrition and calorie deficiencies cause nearly one in three people to die prematurely or have disabilities, according to the World Health Organization.

* Pregnant women, new mothers who breastfeed infants, and children are among the most at risk of undernourishment.

* In 2005, about 10.1 million children died before they reached their fifth birthday. Almost all of these deaths occured in developing countries, 3/4 of them in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, the two regions that also suffer from the highest rates of hunger and malnutrition.

* Most of these deaths are attributed, not to outright starvation, but to diseases that move in on vulnerable children whose bodies have been weakened by hunger.

* Every year, more than 20 million low-birth weight babies are born in developing countries. These babies risk dying in infancy, while those who survive often suffer lifelong physical and cognitive disabilities.

* The four most common childhood illnesses are diarrhea, acute respiratory illness, malaria and measles. Each of these illnesses is both preventable and treatable. Yet, again, poverty interferes in parents’ ability to access immunizations and medicines. Chronic undernourishment on top of insufficient treatment greatly increases a child’s risk of death.

* In the developing world, 27 percent of children under 5 are moderately to severely underweight. 10 percent are severely underweight. 10 percent of children under 5 are moderately to severely wasted, or seriously below weight for one’s height, and an overwhelming 31 percent are moderately to severely stunted, or seriously below normal height for one’s age.

Just because you don't see such suffering and deaths from lack of food or severe malnutrition happening in Philly doesn't mean there isn't any problem.

[Undertoad]

We're talking about your outdated and generally considered wrong notion of ecological fairy tales about the world being unable to produce enough food

We're not talking about the inability of Africa to govern itself to the point where it can apply the basic agricultural technologies that improve such production.

[SamIam]

Oh? Someone has figured out how African nations can govern themselves out of drought? (Drought being a major factor in the most recent famine in Somalia).

Never mind.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Sam, check over the theory that in Africa famines only occur through some human intervention, perhaps well intentioned but as often malicious, and would not occur absent these interventions. There are those students of famines who figure this is why there are famines in the first place. Once a drought happens. The problem really springs from resource misallocations (viz. & e.g., corruption, thievery and so forth) during times of relative plenty in these pocket-handkerchief economies.

The United States, for an example of clearly doing something differently, has droughts and crop failures all the time. Localized. You don't see American skeletons shuffling down the Interstates as refugees trying to get away. You've never seen it in American history, period. Might have something to do with doing capitalism and free markets and other much-abused notions.

[regular.joe]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

Sam, check over the theory that in Africa famines only occur through some human intervention, perhaps well intentioned but as often malicious, and would not occur absent these interventions. There are those students of famines who figure this is why there are famines in the first place. Once a drought happens. The problem really springs from resource misallocations (viz. & e.g., corruption, thievery and so forth) during times of relative plenty in these pocket-handkerchief economies.

The United States, for an example of clearly doing something differently, has droughts and crop failures all the time. Localized. You don't see American skeletons shuffling down the Interstates as refugees trying to get away. You've never seen it in American history, period. Might have something to do with doing capitalism and free markets and other much-abused notions.

Do you mean to say that The United States had a decade of crippling poverty, breadlines, homelessness, chronic unemployment, malnutrition, mass migration of families, shanty-towns and a large percentage of people did not starve to death during the great depression? A quick note about how the U.S. handled the resource allocation during this time of great suffering. In September of 1934 over 6 million young pigs were slaughtered to stabilize prices, with most of the meat going to waste. Capitalism and free markets at it's finest for sure.

I love the U.S. and think it is important that we are honest about our past. Capitalism and free markets are definite components of a free society. But, if profit margin is the only moral compass then tragedies like the slaughter of 6 million pigs and wasting the meat during this countries worst drought will happen, and of course it's their own fault because this disaster was caused by human intervention and deserves no efforts on our part intervene.

Now, the native populations of the Continental U.S. estimated at between 5 and 10 million people in the 1500's was reduced to apprx. 250,000 in the territory of the United States at the end of the 19th century. Most died of disease and famine. But, they weren't Americans and probably don't count. They have a different history then American history.

[Lamplighter]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

<snip>
The United States, for an example of clearly doing something differently,
has droughts and crop failures all the time. Localized.
You don't see American skeletons shuffling down the Interstates as refugees trying to get away.
You've never seen it in American history, period.
Might have something to do with doing capitalism and free markets
and other much-abused notions.

Another truly remarkable statement that I don't think you want to hang your hat on... !

Try Google Images for just one word: "Okies"

Who knows, if you were born in Calif, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, etc.
these working people (farmers, etc) might be your ancestors just 3 generations back.
.

[SamIam]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

Sam, check over the theory that in Africa famines only occur through some human intervention, perhaps well intentioned but as often malicious, and would not occur absent these interventions. There are those students of famines who figure this is why there are famines in the first place. Once a drought happens. The problem really springs from resource misallocations (viz. & e.g., corruption, thievery and so forth) during times of relative plenty in these pocket-handkerchief economies.

The United States, for an example of clearly doing something differently, has droughts and crop failures all the time. Localized. You don't see American skeletons shuffling down the Interstates as refugees trying to get away. You've never seen it in American history, period. Might have something to do with doing capitalism and free markets and other much-abused notions.

Over 12 million Americans died of starvation during the dust bowl/ Great Depression. As others here have stated, your understanding of American History (among other things) leaves something to be desired.

Also, you are misrepresenting what I posted. I never said that famines occur because of "human intervention". I believe that was UT's thesis, not mine.

Certainly, famine in Africa is a complex subject with many over-lapping factors. Human over population and climate change are important triggers to famine. And you really can't compare the US to Africa in that regard. The population density in Africa is much greater than it is here for one thing.

Unlike the US population, the population of Africa still tends to make a living from farming (or tries to). African farms tend to be extremely small and over-grazed, as well as over farmed. Too many grazing animals strip large areas of land of its vegetation, making it susceptible to wind erosion and flooding. The nutrients that each crop takes from the soil are not replaced due to lack of fertilizers and the inability to allow fields to lie fallow once a harvest has come in. I could write a book on this, but there are already ones out there far better written than anything I might attempt. Jared Diamond's "Collapse" is an excellent introduction to the subject.

Frankly, I am amazed that both you and UT are both touting the intervention of government. Roosevelt helped rise the US out of the Great Depression by increasing taxes on the wealthy, creating far reaching new social programs - like social security, and instituting the great public works projects of the time like the Hoover Dam.

In our current political atmosphere, Conservatives would rather roast in hell for eternity before raising taxes on the wealthy by so much as a penny. The Right wants to curtail or end as many social programs as possible and actually advocate leaving the less fortunate to die from hunger on the streets of our cities.

Far from rescuing us from any potential environmental disaster, conservatives would call upon social Darwinism to take care of the problem. Admit it guys. You can't have it both ways.