Overpopulation and Terrorism: Rats in a Cage

[smirkymonkey]

http://www.culturechange.org/issue19/overpop_terrorism.htm

Overpopulation & terrorism: rats in a cage

by John Omaha

"Many people will find it difficult to compare human populations to rat populations. Many humans will suffer for that cognitive impairment. When a pair of reproductively competent rats are placed in a closed space and provided with sufficient food, they will reproduce and reproduce until the space is filled with rats. At a critical density, wars break out. Some rats, alpha males, claim territory and defend it. Others attack. Sound familiar? Only difference between rats and humans is the language-making capability of the human left brain. We humans give names to our territories—"World Trade Center" is one. The right brain, impelled by drives and emotions, is the fundamental force operating here. The left brain makes "reasons" for what the right brain is going to do anyway. Some of these "reasons" are: democracy, Islam, God, Allah, terrorist, Third World, globalization.

What we are seeing is the result of an exponentially increasing population. This is population biology at work. Anthropologists and population biologists studied all the wars in history for which adequate data were available. They learned that war breaks out when the percentage of the population consisting of single males in the age range 16-26 exceeds a certain fraction of the total population. Whatever Osama bin Laden may call it, whatever Al Fatah, or the PLO, or Jonas Savimbi, or Mexican President Fox, or the Australians who refuse to allow the Indonesian refugees into their country, whatever the East Timorese may call it, the Afghanis, the Pakistanis—whatever name is given is not correct; the correct name is overpopulation.

And this is just the beginning. World population stands at over 6 billion now. Projections differ on how high it will go. At one point it was projected to top out at 15 billion. Then it was reduced to 13 billion. The latest numbers I have seen are 9 billion. This will happen in the next 25 years. What happens after that? Mass die off. It’s a fact of population biology. Eventually the bacteria on the Petri dish use up all the resources and die. We live on a spherical Petri dish. Almost all the resources—remember that "living space" is a resource—are used up. As groups led by alpha males come into unavoidable contact with each other, conflict erupts. Osama bin Laden is an alpha male. Yasser Arafat is an alpha male. The clerics of the Taliban are alpha males. God help us, our alpha male is George W. Bush. The attacks on the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and whatever was going on in Pennsylvania are conflicts between population segments assembled behind alpha males in an overpopulated, confined space, in which the segments are seeking to expand into territory that is resource rich compared to their own.

Unfortunately, all the players are thinking from inside the box. Bush tells us we’ll find the terrorists and punish them. The terrorists are only the proximate problem. The terrorists are the vanguard of the real problem: the surplus billions of people on this spherical Petri dish. Only when the true problem is identified and addressed will we escape the inevitable fate of our species—a mass die off that will sometimes look like terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon and will at other times look like AIDS and at other times like "ethnic cleansing" in Serbia."

Does anyone else think that overpopulation is seriously underrated as a major problem for the planet? Will Mother Nature restore the balance or will it lead to more violence and tragedy.

Wouldn't it make sense to concentrate on reducing the birth rate now, rather than wait for the increased suffering that is inevitable when too many people are fighting over too few resources?

[whistle]

1. Human rats.....interesting concept....

[shraby]

2. In the 1970s they did an experiment

with rats. Scientists let them over-populate a given space. What they found was mothers wouldn't take care of their young, often times killing the young, more fighting, cannibalism, and all sorts of "social" ills.

[Sal Minella]

6. "Population, Evolution and Birth Control," by Garrett Hardin is

the book I remember reading about the rats in.

Courtship rituals break down, gangs of young males pursue unwilling females, the whole social structure is full of anxiety and conflict.

But rats are only rats, and we all know humans wouldn't behave like rats.

[smirkymonkey]

7. I think we are being reduced to "rat-like" behavior due to the

fact that this planet is overcrowded and our dwindling resources are making life incresingly stressful and competitive.

You are right in saying "the whole social structure is full of anxiety and conflict." We seem to be at a breaking point. I live in New York City and I even see it here - the more dense the population, the nastier the behavior. I live in a quiet part of the city where their aren't many people on the streets and it's so much more civilized. Midtown is the worst.

[Art_from_Ark]

58. On the other hand, I spend a lot of time in the densely populated Tokyo

Metropolitan Area (at 30 million people the largest metro area in the world) getting crammed into commuter trains, getting stuck in the expressway system that was built for 1964 traffic, squeezing through crowds in small shopping areas like Ameyoko....

And yet, I have rarely seen any outright nastiness

[bloom]

3. I think pollution/climate change/overpopulation

is the major problem and like the article states - leads to more problems.

I'm reading Jared Diamond's Collapse.

It talks about the various elements of societal collapse. Environmental, climate change, political... it's interesting.

I'm afraid I'm not very optimistic.

If everyone decides to live like Americans - this lifestyle we are exporting - and many people do... well - it's just not sustainable for us, them or anyone.

I see the American lifestyle as more of a threat than anything.

[brokensymmetry]

27. If you like Collapse - you need to read

Overshoot. It isn't just the American lifestyle. When oil/energy peaks, we're looking at a dieoff of 4 billion - or more.

[earth mom]

37. I agree with you.

And I think I'll read that book and the other that was suggested in reply to your post. Thanks!

[eridani]

55. The example of Tikopia is very hopeful, IMO

They have maintained a stable population for 3000 YEARS on a tiny scrap of land of a couple of square miles. At some time along the way, they gave up having pigs because of the ecological cost. A very unPolynesian thing to do--must have been almost as hard as getting Americans to give up SUVs. The point of Collapse is that human choices do make a difference.

We are all Tikopians now.

[bloom]

67. I think one of the worlds problems

is that things are so global - people affect others around the globe - but there is no sense of community.

Getting people on the same page about caring for the world as our common home is the most important thing I can think of people doing.


Unfortunately - I think it is going to remain one big competition with the Republicans (and other corporate pleasing politicians) and multinationals making the situation worse and worse.

[lala_rawraw]

4. I think it a problem, but I think what is the bigger problem

Is that population control has been well on the way for a long time. Be it sterilization or right out mass murder. Instead of meeting to decide solutions of better food supplies, natural engergy sources, exploration, and the need for education on sexuality and such, the "alpha males" are mostly committing murder at will and for money.

That said, the above is a bad comparison full of too many conotations that I find inappropriate.

[smirkymonkey]

8. Not sure what you mean - could you explain further?

thanks.

[lala_rawraw]

9. What part?

[smirkymonkey]

20. I am of the mind that population/resource control needs to be

approached by an upstream method (family planning, sustainable agriculture, supportive communities, etc.) but I understood the article to explain WHAT HAPPENS when populution growth gets out of control, not that people should be eliminated, but that people just will be eliminated as a result of conditions (overcrowding, disease, famine, etc.)

What connotations did you find inappropriate.

[lala_rawraw]

36. I agree

With agriculture, supportive communities. I disagree with the comparison to rats, as that in and of itself has serious connotations. I also disagree or rather, find odd that the statement did not include what we already know is going with regard to full out elimination of groups and people through various means. To simply state that "people will be eliminated as a result of conditions" seems to excuse that people are already being eliminated through actions.

[rawtribe]

5. If you loved

your children, you wouldn't have had them or wont have them.

:hide:

[lonestarnot]

10. Are you sure about this?

[AngryAmish]

11. This, of course, is nonsense

Sparta started wars because they had excess of males. Oops, sorry, no they had a chronic shortage of fighting men (and Sparta didn't start wars, they ended them but that is a different story).

China has started a bunch of wars because of the one-child policy has lead to a surplus of males....oops...they haven't started a war for 26 years.

Horrible violence going on nowadays in Singapore...

[JackRiddler]

12. the poor outnumber the rich by 7:1

The rich outconsume the poor by at least 2:1.

So what's the real threat, overpopulation or overconsumption?

[blurp]

13. Underproduction

The rich outconsume the poor by at least 2:1.

So what's the real threat, overpopulation or overconsumption?

Underproduction.

[JackRiddler]

16. eh?

I read the abstracts anyway and your Garrett Hardin seems to speak of limits of carrying capacity... which would seem to imply overproduction is a problem, not underproduction. What do you mean?

[blurp]

29. Underproduction of goods/services

Of course, as Garrett Hardins points out, there are limits to just how much can be produced.

[smirkymonkey]

21. Both - the result is misery for those that don't have ACCESS

like the rich do. The less there is to go around, the more those in power will tend to hoard it or start wars to gain control of it.

I believe wars are mainly fought over resources, when it comes right down to it. Under the current situation, the poor get poorer.

[blurp]

Start reading Garrett Hardin

http://www.garretthardinsociety.org/articles/articles.html

[blurp]

14. Start reading Garrett Hardin

http://www.garretthardinsociety.org/articles/articles.html

[julianer]

15. I completely disagree

The world's problems are not caused by there being too many people or that we are like 'rats'.

This is comtemptible rubbish.

The world's problems are caused by a corrupt and inefficient economic system. There is no evidence that 'overpopulation' is a problem - undemocratic control of resources by the wealthy is a problem.

Have you never heard of the simple correlation between poverty and large families?

If you think that a large human population is a 'problem' then advocate that we share wealth and spread real democratic control so our owners cannot treat us like tradeable commodities or have 'scientists' or 'commentators' describe us as rats when they have no productive use for us.

[Lorien]

18. Come, pull your head out of the sand

Every study done in the past 20 years predicts that the world will run out of natural resources AT CURRENT CONSUMPTION RATES by 2050. Consumption rates accelerate EVERY YEAR. In less than 47 years the world's rainforests will be completely gone and the oceans will be dead ('dead zones" are already spreading at an alarming rate. Google it); these two elements produce the world's oxygen. Human beings are consuming the rainforests for short term crop use and pasture (it goes barren within ten years), we are dumping so many toxins into the oceans that huge portions of it can no longer sustain ANY life forms.Once the resources begin to vanish, wars will break out. Ours is the last generation-we are swiftly breeding ourselves out of existence. Try feeing 1000 people with what's in your refrigerator right now; it can't be done any more easily than the world can support 13 billion human souls.

[julianer]

19. Exactly

But who is consuming these resources? Is it the 'overcrowded' world or us in the west?

It is unrestricted capitalism that is causing environmental destruction not its most vulnerable and mistreated victims.

This whole discussion about 'overpopulation' is just a distraction from the real problem of ownership and distribution. It is a straw man argument - no one actually proposes any 'solutions' just harps on about what a danger it is.

Meanwhile our rich neighbours earn stock income from companies that uproot the rain forests, or denude the seas of life, while, no doubt, worrying about 'overpopulation'.

It is because I'm so concerned about the environment and the sustainability of human life that I call for a change of economic system. The present one is leading us downhill to destruction.

[Hope springs eternal]

26. Bullshit: NYC has crime rate comparable to countryside and dropping

Bullshit, take away racial and poverty ills and cities have far lower rates of violence.


In fact, the denser people are, the nicer they are. Midtown has rural and sububran people in it, that's why they're ruder.

Cities to me are the best way to live. This study is lame and doesn't address the real problem. Explain the UES/London/Paris/Brooklyn?

[smirkymonkey]

34. Do you even live in NYC?

Have you ever been in Midtown during rush hour?

[AuntiBush]

41. Would you at least admit that during rush-hour it's packed with

those urban-dwellers just wanting to get home, out of their hot cars from working in their stressful jobs all day?

Stress during rush hour can occur in the smallest bedroom communities.

Growing-up in one of the bigger cities in American, I loved the diversity. We got a long great, from all walks of life and age groups. Now that I'm in the burbs there is no comparison.

Would rather live back in the inner-city where there is life and tolerance of others.

And about "over-population:" If one compares that word to the masses starving in so many 3rd world countries, like Africa per se, I don't see how it's possible. It's been hashed for decades. I think the real problem we're going to have to face is that the wealthest corporations (think out-sourcing) no longer need us. Sadly so.

Who will do their dirty-work if we were gone? Shrugging... the idiotic other half that voted for them?

[ananda]

40. I agree with julianer

I do see the problems of overpopulation, but I think the root cause is an unequally distributed and oppressive economic system.

Correct the economics and I think the overpopulation will take care of itself.

Sue

[smirkymonkey]

22. There are two separate problems - Unfair distribution of resources

AND overpopulation. Both need to be addressed - it's not only about resources, but human waste, overcrowding, incompatible cultures and religion.

I don't know what the answer is, but human nature being what it is, I don't see fair distribution of resources coming up any time in the near future. Even in impoverished third-world countries, there are still those at the top skimming off the aid dollars and living in luxury while the masses starve.

[smirkymonkey]

32. For god's sake, read between the lines - my intent was not to

imply that humans (or as some of you are reading it, the poor) are "Rats".

However, rats can and have provided researchers with valuable information that has shed light on human behavior (for example, the Skinner Box) and human physiology.

You are right - the world's problems are LARGELY caused by a corrupt and inefficient economic system. AND we also need to address the issue of overpopulation as well. It is very complex, but ultimately what it comes down to is that population grows exponentially, while resources are finite.

From Wikipedia:

"Effects of overpopulation
The world's current agricultural production, if it were distributed evenly, would be sufficient to feed everyone living on the Earth today. However, many critics hold that, in the absence of other measures, simply feeding the world's population well would only make matters worse, natural growth will cause the population to grow to unsustainable levels, and will directly result in famines and deforestation and indirectly in pandemic disease and war.

Some other characteristics of overpopulation:

Child poverty
Birth rate is high
Life expectancy is low
Low level of literacy
High rate of unemployment in urban areas (leading to social problems)
Rural people are not gainfully employed (caught in cycle of poverty)
Insufficient arable land
Little surplus food
Poor diet with ill health and diet-deficiency diseases (e.g. rickets)
GDP per capita is low (under US$765 per annum)
Many live in unhygienic conditions
Government is stretched economically
High crime from people who steal resources to survive
Mass extinctions of plants and animals as habitat is used for farming and human settle.

[julianer]

57. Well any study that

compares humans with rats is not going to get my approval.

The Wikipedia quote is stupid. It flies in the face of all the evidence about population which is that when there is less poverty there are fewer people. Look at your own family history (if it is not a rich one) and you will probably see a trend toward smaller and smaller families as wealth has increased. Are we not also regularly scared by stories of population decline and the inability to look after our old people?

So, I would ask you to stop insisting that 'overpopulation' is a problem. It is not even definable as far as I know.

Large populations are sypmtoms not causes.

[Lorien]

17. I posted about this very experiment three days ago

my father attended a similar one at a university he was teaching at. In his tests, the rats turned on one another; killed their young, one another, and even knawed their own limbs. :scared:

[KlatooBNikto]

23. Over the years, I have traveled many times to India, China,many other

parts of Asia and Latin America. Among the poorest countries like India and China with the highest population densities, I have found only optimism about the future and less conflicts than what is portrayed in this post. India and China, especially are now on a steady path of growth, have lessened their aggressive rhetoric and have reached out to their neighbors in cooperation.They have essentially become net exporters of food. Life expectancies in both countries are on the increase, due to better community hygiene, reductions in infant mortality and better medical service.Educational opportunities are growing.

The pessimism I see in the above post is a reflection of the mindsets of "haves" that as the "have nots" make their presence felt feel that in a zero sum game they are going to be the losers and that the days of unbridled growth for them are over. They also see the people of underdeveloped countries as a burden on the planet rather than as assets, a point that the late Professor Julian Simon emphasized in his work on population.

We are not rats;we are people with the ability to think and act.Our ability to think makes it possible for us to create wealth.That is the crucial difference.

[smirkymonkey]

24. However, it's not just about wealth and food -

I was looking into the Gareth Hardin site supplied by the poster "Blurp" and found this:

"Every human born constitutes a draft on all aspects of the environment: food, air, water, forests, beaches, wildlife, scenery and solitude. Food can, perhaps, be significantly increased to meet a growing demand. But what about clean beaches, unspoiled forests, and solitude? If we satisfy a growing population's need for food, we necessarily decrease its per capita supply of the other resources needed by men.

India, for example, now has a population of 600 million, which increases by 15 million each year. This population already puts a huge load on a relatively impoverished environment. The country's forests are now only a small fraction of what they were three centuries ago and floods and erosion continually destroy the insufficient farmland that remains. Every one of the 15 million new lives added to India's population puts an additional burden on the environment, and increases the economic and social costs of crowding. However humanitarian our intent, every Indian life saved through medical or nutritional assistance from abroad diminishes the quality of life for those who remain, and for subsequent generations. If rich countries make it possible, through foreign aid, for 600 million Indians to swell to 1.2 billion in a mere 28 years, as their current growth rate threatens, will future generations of Indians thank us for hastening the destruction of their environment? Will our good intentions be sufficient excuse for the consequences of our actions?"

[KlatooBNikto]

30. This portrait of India is outdated overcome by many developments there.

When a population is ignorant, disease ridden and unable to utilize its resources wisely, even a small population will be a burden on the environment.As the same people become aware of the possibilities of education, technology, medicine and good agricultural practices as India has done, even a larger population becomes an asset and capable of marshalling its resources to create more sustainable lifestyles for all. This is happening throughout Asia.

In the end, those who are the haves, see the other people as burdens;fortunately the people of Asia see themselves as capable of living frugally and contribute to the planet's well being. They are not burdens to be dismissed by a know nothing like Hardin.

[blurp]

33. Hardin a "know nothing"?

1936 University of Chicago - B.S. Zoology
1941 Stanford University - Ph.D. Microbiology

Awards, Honors & Milestones
1930 Grand Prize, Chicago Daily News Essay Contest (Age 15; Essay on Edison)

1932 University of Chicago, Scholarship

1932 Chicago College of Music; Scholarship in Dramatic Arts

1942-46 Staff Member, Carnegie Institution of Washington, Division of Plant Biology, Stanford, California

1946-78 Ascending faculty positions in the Department of Biological Sciences, University of California, Santa Barbara (UCSB)

1952-53 Ford Fellow, California Institute of Technology

1963 Became Professor of Human Ecology, University of California, Santa Barbara

1964 Visiting Professor, UC, Berkeley

1964 Remson Bird Lecturer, Occidental College

1966 Faculty Research Lecture, UCSB (All-campus honor)

1968 "The Tragedy of the Commons", Science 162:1243-1247

1970 Visiting Professor, University of Chicago

1970 Nieuwland Lecturer, University of Notre Dame

1970-71 National Visiting Lecturer, Phi Beta Kappa

1972 Messenger Lecturer, Cornell University

1972-73 National Lecturer, Cornell University

1972-73 National Lecturer, Sigma Xi

1973 Environmental Hall of Fame Award, Friends of the Earth ("The single author who had the most different titles mentioned by voters")

1973 Elected Member, American Academy of Arts and Sciences

1974 Elected Member, American Philosophical Society

1974 Aquinas Foundation Lecture, Drew University

1974 Tracy I. Storer Lecturer, UC, Davis

1975 Elected Honorary Member, National Association of Biology Teachers

1975 Honorary Doctor of Humanities, University of Puget Sound

1975-76 Member, Advisory Committee on Ethical and Human Value Implications of Science and Technology; National Endowment for the Humanities & National Science Foundation

1976 Patten Foundation Lecturer, Indiana University

1977 Honorary Doctor of Humane Letters, Northland College

1978 The Institute for Scientific Information announced that Hardin's 1968 essay "The Tragedy of the Commons" was "one of the most cited items in its field" in the Social Science Citation Index and the Science Citation Index

1978 Became Emeritus Professor of Human Ecology, UCSB

1978 Lecturer, Dartmouth College (Chosen by students)

1979 Jesse and John Danz Lecturer, University of Washington

1979 Chief Executive Officer and Board Chairman of the Environmental Fund, Washington, D.C.

1970's and 1980's Chairman and then Honorary Chairman of Population-Environment Balance

1980 Margaret Sanger Award, Planned Parenthood Federation of America

1986 Distinguished Service Award, American Institute of Biological Sciences

1987 Mack Lipkin Lecturer, American Museum (N.Y.)

1989 Humanist Distinguished Services Award, American Humanist Association

1990 Award, Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR)

1990 Population-Environment Balance Carrying Capacity award

1990 Honored by day-long symposium by the American Institute of Biological Sciences at the Smithsonian Institution on the occasion of this 75th birthday. Proceedings published as Festschrift in Population and Environment, vol. 3

1991 Inaugural Lecturer, Cook-DeWitt Center, Grand Valley State University, Michigan

1992 The Pacific Division of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, June meeting symposium on "The Tragedy of the Commons: A Retrospective"

1994 Phi Beta Kappa Annual Award in Science, for the book, Living Within Limits, Oxford University Press, 1993

1996 Revised edition of Stalking the Wild Taboo, The Social Contract Press

1997 Constantine Panunzio Distinguished Emeriti Award, honoring continuing scholarly productivity following retirement. Given to one faculty member each year from the 9 campuses. In its first decade, a first time award to a member of the Santa Barbara campus

1997 As of June, "The Tragedy of the Commons" had been reprinted over 100 times, in anthologies in the fields of biology, ecology, environmental sciences, law, economics, sociology, political sciences, philosophy, ethics and English composition

1997 Revised edition of Mandatory Motherhood: The True Meaning of "Right to Life", The Social Contract Press

1999 Revised edition of The Limits of Altruism: An Ecologist's View of Survival re-titled Creative Altruism: An Ecologist Questions Motives, The Social Contract Press

1999 Publication of The Ostrich Factor: Our Population Myopia, Oxford University Press

[KlatooBNikto]

35. He may be loaded with credentials but he can be a know nothing when it

comes to cultures of which he has only a rudimentary knowledge. A similar person called Paul ehrlich came with even more impressive credentials and produced a best seller called the Population Bomb predicting dire consequences for the world if the populations of India and China were allowed to grow.he even predicted catstrophe to occur before the year 2000. Professor Julian Simon made a bet with him that no such consequences would ensue, a bet Ehrlich lost.It is in that context I call him a know nothing.But I should say he comes laden with a golden horde of credentials, all the same.

[bemildred]

25. Selective use of fact.

There are very concentrated populations that get along.

There are relatively diffuse populations that like to fight, tribal warfare and all that.

Xenophobia and group disputes over food, water, and land are much better explanations than crowding for warfare.

It is true, almost a tautology, that if we do not control our numbers ourselves then at some point it will be done for us, and that that will most likely be a ugly process, it always has been in the past, but that is a different matter from attributing war to crowding.

Edit: or "terrorism", which is itself a bullshit term.

[brokensymmetry]

28. Excellent post.

I've nominated it, and I urge others to read it.

Population is a critical issue; sometime, read about Rwanda. A big chunk of land, used to feed and support entire families was THREE ACRES.

[K-W]

31. Hogwash.

Terrorism is organized violence, such as has existed for the entire history of humanity in a vast diversity of cultures and societies, and in the proper context it is clear that there is far far less organized violence in the world today. The fact that our nation is seemingly invulnerable to any other form of violence, and thus terrorism is our paranoia inducing achilles heel doesnt make terrorism some new or special problem.

Terrorism is simply the use of violence to promote fear, to seperate it from any other form of violence is to miss the fundemental issue which is violence, particularly organized violence which is corrolated to local population densities certainly, but far far far more corrollated to poverty and disenfranchisement. That is what motivates people to support or condone such organizations, that is what gives them space to form and grow.

Should we start thinking about population control, yes certainly(more for environmental than social reasons), but there is every indication that as civilization progresses birth rates drop. When there is no longer an economic situation that reinforces the need propegate, and particularly when children shift from an asset to an expense, birth rates drop and population plateaus and seemingly shrinks.

It is far more important to reduce the enviromental impact per person than to worry about population growth, because if we can reduce our impact on the enviromnment and develop a civilized economy population growth shouldnt be a problem.

[blindpig]

38. I find it unbelievable that so many discount overpopulation

Right now, if we utilized this planet to the max it would require 3 1/2 Earths to provide the world's population with the lifestyle of middle class Americans. As we are approaching the breaking point of a number of resources, oil, clean water and fisheries, to mention a few, I wonder how we will handle twice that number? Not to mention climate change, which only the greedy, foolish and hopelessly myopic deny.

And what of the rest of this planet's inhabitants? Apparently the extermination of the majority of the planet's lifeforms is just collateral damage. To my mind it is a preventable, horrible tragedy.

I'm about sick of people on our side saying that concern about overpopulation is racist. To be sure some on the dark side will use it as an excuse for their hatred. But is it racist to want humankind to live with the rest of nature instead of upon it? Is it racist to want the people of the future to have decent lives with sufficient resources? I think not.

Overpopulation is not just a problem of 3rd world people, it is world wide, even here. Much of the American West is heading for a train wreck called water shortage. Our topsoils are washing away and when peak oil grabs us , be it 10 or 30 years, the green revolution will be history and we'll not be growing soy to fuel vehicles, we'll be hard pressed to grow enough food and get it to market.

Only a rational animal can take control of it's destiny and learn to control it's natural, primitive self destructive tendencies. More and more it appears that we're not nearly as rational as we pretend to be.

[KlatooBNikto]

39. Fortunately for all of us, the majority of the world does not live like

Middle Class Americans;nor do they aspire to do so. Japan, probably the most prosperous and populous nation in terms of density, lives on a land whose area is smaller than Texas with a population nearly 120 million strong. IMO, they live pretty well. India and China with populations three times that of the U.S. are headed in that direction. Their birth rates are declining as living standards are increasing.

Overpopulation is actually a way to describe everything from our Western perspective. Culturally and economically what a Western person would call overpopulation would be perfectly acceptable to an Indian, or a Chinese or a Japanese.Those people also impact the environment less than we do.So, even if they have more people, because of the lower level of demands they place on the environment, they can sustain a larger population.And this is precisely the reason they can get along well when a Western Rat finds it impossible to live in its cage without Julia Child serving steaks everyday.

[blindpig]

53. "Overpopulation is actually......"

I disagree. Overpopulation describes a population which has exceeded carrying capacity. That's just biology.

There is no doubt that we are the worst of the worst when it comes to overconsumption. Other people live lighter on the land per capita but there's a whole lot of them and in the case of India still growing hand over fist. Perhaps they've been living lighter in part because they have not had the opportunity to do otherwise. Look what happened as soon as China started getting serious dollars: after hunting out their own wildlife they've been raping Southeast Asia of it's wildlife. The demand reaches here too, bear and turtle populations are being hammered for this questionable pharmacology which is more likely a status thing for the rising middle class. Given the opportunity other people can gratuitously abuse the environment just like us. But we're still the worst.

Be assured, Middle Class America is not my ideal. It is absurdly presumptive and utterly unsustainable. The way things are going I think that Cuba is a model for survival of civil society in the lean times to come.

[CrispyQ]

42. Six billion miracles is enough!

I love that bumper sticker.

I agree with what you've said. It is very sad how we treat our cohabitants of this beautiful planet with such wanton disregard. Why are we surprised when we treat each other the same way?

Personally, I’m of the Agent Smith school of thought:

“I'd like to share a revelation that I've had during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species. I've realized that you are not actually mammals.

“Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment. But you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply and multiply until every natural resource is consumed and the only way you can survive is to spread to another area.

“There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus.

“Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet. You are a plague. And we are... the cure.”

=====

Your last paragraph is spot on!

[KlatooBNikto]

44. I do not accept the idea that human beings are a plague upon the earth.

I am an old man and I have seen populations grow in many different places on earth, some very poverty stricken and others less so. Overall, I believe that the world is a much better place for all since the end of WWII.And that transformation has come about mainly as a result of human ingenuity, human effort and the empowerment of the populations of China and India to make their contributions. Those
countries have realized that their populations which were liabilities when not well educated or healthy can be turned into remarkable assets when they are educated and have access to health and hygiene.

No, I think, when I talk to people in India or China they are uniformly optimistic about their future.I believe them.

[CrispyQ]

60. I admire your optimism, although I don't share it.

Human greed in an incredible force to overcome.

Have you read "The Last Hours of Ancient Sunlight" by Thom Hartmann? It's a wonderful book about the two types of human culture. There are the competitive/growth oriented cultures & there are the cooperative/sustainable cultures.

The competitive societies live beyond their means, consuming more than the land they live on can provide. The only way they can support their growing populations is to find new territories to move into -- just as Agent Smith said. They are also fearful of other societies & when they encounter them they convert or kill them. Religion is an important aspect to controlling & converting the 'common folk.' "You are with us or against us" sums up this group.

The cooperative societies live within their means. They respect the Earth & her finite capacity. They know that man cannot extract himself from the natural world. They respect their neighbors -- they may not agree with their ways or beliefs, but they also depend on these neighbors for bartering, for help in difficult circumstances & also as a resource for genetic diversity. This also establishes stronger bonds between the cultures. "We're all in this together" sums up this group.

Thom, believes we can change the course we are on & salvage the mess we created. I'm not saying we can't -- we certainly can. I agree with your statement about human ingenuity & that is exactly what is needed to turn things around. My question is, will we? Or, will we do it in time? I'm very doubtful. I believe the degradation of our environment is increasing exponentially & we have very little time to reverse course, if it's not too late already.

Ahhhh, enough doom & gloom for one day! It's a wonderful book, as all of Thom's books are. I think you would enjoy it.


http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1400051576/qid=1119796510/sr=8-1/ref=pd_csp_1/002-2349647-1398402?v=glance&s=books&n=507846

[Pooka Fey]

43. Excellent video resource: Bartlett, "Arithmetic, Population, & Energy"

A popular lecture given by Dr. Albert Bartlett, Professor Emeritus of Physics, University of Colorado at Boulder, in this video speaking at the North Carolina School of Science and Mathematics in 2004
Link to Realplayer stream, originally posted in Peak Oil group forum:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=266x97

I also agree that overpopulation is seriously underrated as a major problem for the planet. I will never cease to be amazed at the level of denial and "Disney" style wishful thinking (credit to Kunstler) that some people display when confronted with the reality of this issue. Also the arrogance, that human populations are inherently more deserving of the earth's resources than the other species with whom we share the planet; that thousands of animal and plant extinctions are justifiable as a consequence of our relentless, virus-like reproduction because "we're HUMANS, formed in the image of God!". Then come the accusations that those who raise awareness of this issue are racists or classists.

To anyone who has a mental/emotional barrier to the concept of "finite"; I invite you to open your homes to the earth's poor until there is one human inhabitant per square foot standing shoulder to shoulder. After 9 months to 1 year when the first crop of babies joins your household, tell me what will it be like then? Then the next year? Perhaps such an experiment would break through a 'faith-based/religious' level of denial. From reading some of the posts on this thread, it would be the only thing. Your intelligent articles and links haven't made a dent. I share your frustration.

[smirkymonkey]

45. "To anyone who has a mental/emotional barrier to the concept of "finite"

That's it in a nutshell - and most people are looking at this from a perspective of race, class, and wealth distribution.

In a perfect world everyone would have exactly the same amount of resources needed to live. IT DOESN'T MATTER, because it will soon run out! It's simple mathmatics people. I did not pick a very good article in the OP, but I thought it was thought provoking and controversial enough to get people discussing this matter.

I consider myself a solid liberal, but I get frustrated at this PC bullshit and progressive denial about some of the very serious issues facing this planet.

[KlatooBNikto]

47. It is hardly denial when ordinary people living ordinary lives with

optimism give the lie to the pessimistic rants of Western pessimists each day.For those who have lived in poverty and deprivation for centuries, the ability to shape their lives using Western science and technology has been a godsend and their optimism reflects that gratitude. Even with all the progress countries in Asia, Latin America and other places have made each person there leaves a footprint that is less than hundredth of the footprint we make in this country. There can be no denying that their lives are improving and with it will come lower population because lives will not be lost to the ravages of famine, disease, natural calamities as they used to do.

The only serious issue facing the planet is how can we help these people achieve a minimum of health care, communal hygiene, education and the rest of the problems can be solved by the people themselves.

Bill Gates's work on providing clean water for every village in India, Africa and Latin America is what we need more of.Not handwringing about how these people impose a heavy burden on maintaining our bloated lifestyles.

[smirkymonkey]

48. Yes, I agree with making people's lives better in these countries

and educating them so that they can help themselves later on. I am not saying we should ignore those who are existing in overpopulated third-world nations by any means. However, there are places where overpopulation is causing MISERY for the existing population and it will only get worse.

As long as the population grows exponentially in a world with FINITE resources the problem will get worse and there will be a massive die-off.

I feel like people are just seeing the word "overpopulation" and hearing a litany of things that just aren't implied. "These people" are not imposing a burden on OUR lifestyle - that is not the message here at all and I wish people would stop reading it that way.

We even have the problem right here in this country, as resources and jobs become scarce MORE people are going to suffer and it's usually those at the bottom who suffer the most. It's everyone's problem and everyone's responsibility.

[KlatooBNikto]

49. I agree. It is our moral responsibility to see countries like India and

China develop along the lines they have already done.It is their efforts that have brough them to the current stage. A similar effort needs to take place in other parts of Asia, Latin America and Africa. We must have faith in the people of these countries.They have displayed enormous courage in the face of adversity in the past. I am very optimistic that their future will be bright.If we cannot put our faith in people, who else can solve the problems you have alluded to?

I will simply give you an example of a friend in Shanghai I had the privilege of meeting many years ago. He told me of a cart that will come early in the morning through the streets and pick up corpses on the sidewalk.Even though Shanghai is now a city of over 75 Million people and grown over hundred fold, you will not see a single person starving or emaciated or begging as in the old days. That is not an accident.It has happened because of the efforts of the people. Shanghai now ranks as one of the most exciting and growing cities in the world all because the people of Shanghai have marched to their own drummer disregarding the pessimistic voices from the West predicting dire consequences if Shanghai's population exceeds a predetermined number.

[eridani]

56. Because Shanghai is comparatively rich--

--it exports its problems to the rest of China, where there is major ongoing destruction of topsoils and forests.

[Pooka Fey]

54. Think I should introduce KlatooBNIKto to 'Peak Oil '? Naaah.

"It is our (Americans?) moral responsibility to see countries like India and China develop along the lines they have already done. It is their efforts that have brought them to the current stage. A similar effort needs to take place in other parts of Asia, Latin America and Africa. We must have faith in the people of these countries.They have displayed enormous courage in the face of adversity in the past. I am very optimistic that their future will be bright."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why spoil a Utopian wet dream like the above with Western Pessimism like "Hubbert's Peak"? I mean, if there's infinite space, farmland, and water resources for an indefinite number of human beings on this planet, OF COURSE there must also be infinite amounts of petroleum to fuel China, India and Southeast Asia's industrial development.

Peak Oil?? Nah!!! The U.S. invasion of Iraq had nothing to do with needing to guarantee the U.S.'s access to the last remaining large oil reserves on the planet, now that China and India will be in competition with the U.S.A. for these last precious resources. The Iraq War was about IMPROVING THE LIVES of those poor little brown people that we hold a moral responsibility towards by spreading democracy and freedom. :puke:

No overpopulation worries for Klantooetc., because 3rd world nations will automatically control their reproductive rates once we Westerners provide them with everything we have here in God-Land, uh, the U.S.A.: universal education, free health care, and B/C for all women, (married or not) without having to worry about being illegally denied by a Right Wing Christian pharmacist.

HEY WAIT A MINUTE!!!!!?!? :mad::mad::mad:

Should I mention that China is the U.S.'s our biggest creditor, that they basically OWN us, and once they call in those loans the U.S. economy will collapse like a house of cards? Maybe it's the Chinese who have the moral obligation to forgive the poor little bankrupt U.S.A.'s unsustainable debt-load. Oh wait, it's only guilty Western progressives who think like that. My bad. Looks like I forgot to take my sarcasm-moderating pill this morning. :-(

[KlatooBNikto]

59. FYI, India and China hold more than 40% of the world's population and yet,

their total consumption of fossil fuels is dwarfed by the U.S. alone which has less than 6% of the world's population.So, these two countries are not even making an impact on Peak Oil. When I talk about improvement in living standards, in these countries it may be as simple as getting access to communal drinking water,covered sewers,simple paved roads,electricity, a bicycle in the family, a local clinic,and a school. Where does fossil fuel enter this in any way except in the meager quantities these people need? No one in China or India except in the big cities even dreams about owning an automobile.

What has been accomplished so far in India and China is an incremental improvement in their standards of living along the basis of the simple things I have mentioned. That, in itself is a remarkable success story, a testament to their courage and spirit.To denigrate this by bringing on the spectre of Peak Oil and say that somehow Chinese and Indian people are going to hasten the day of our collapse is ridiculous.

On edit: And for those who say that we are like rats in a cage and correlate high populations with high aggression, I say that the total violent crimes in India and China are dwarfed by those in the City of Detroit alone.That fallacy comes from comparing sentient beings to rats. Despite all those fearmongering,countries like India do not have spasms of violence each day nor does China.In fact, one feels totally safe walking the streets of Bombay or Shanghai as I have done many times in the past.

[Pooka Fey]

61. Species Extinctions and Habitat Destruction in India

The major proximate causes of species extinction are habitat loss and degradation affecting 89 percent of all threatened birds, 83 percent of mammals and 91 percent of all threatened plants assessed globally (IUCN. 2000). The main causes of habitat loss are agricultural activities, extraction (including mining, fishing, logging and harvesting) and development (human settlements, industry and associated infrastructure). Habitat loss and fragmentation leads to the formation of isolated, small, scattered populations. These small populations are increasingly vulnerable to inbreeding depression, high infant mortality and susceptible to environmental stochasticity, and consequently, in the end, possible extinction. Changes in forest composition and quality, and the resultant habitat type lead to declines in primary food species for wildlife.

Exploitation such as hunting, collecting, fisheries and trade are a major threat to birds (37%), mammals (34%), plants (8% of those assessed), reptiles and marine fishes. In India, poaching is another insidious threat that has emerged in recent years as one of the primary reasons for the decline in numbers of species, such as the tiger. Poaching pressures, however, are unevenly distributed since certain selected species are more heavily targeted than others are. Alien invasive species are a significant threat affecting 350 (30% of all threatened) birds and 361 (15% of all threatened) plant species. Islands are particularly susceptible to invasions of alien species.

The underlying causes of biodiversity loss, however, are poverty, macroeconomic policies, international trade factors, policy failures, poor environmental law/weak enforcement, unsustainable development projects and lack of local control over resources (Wood et al. 2000). Population pressures and concomitant increases in the collection of fuelwood and fodder, and grazing in forests by local communities too take their toll on the forests, and consequently its biodiversity.

http://www.teriin.org/biodiv/threats.htm#IUCN.%202000

References

IUCN. 2000
Red List of Threatened Species
Gland, Switzerland: The World Conservation Union

Wood, A., Stedman-Edwards, P. and Mang, J (eds.). 2000
The Root causes of Biodiversity Loss
UK: World Wide Fund for Nature. Earthscan Publications. 399 pp.

[Pooka Fey]

63. Top 4 for mammal extinctions; 1. Indonesia, 2. India, 3. Brazil, 4. China

Globally, however, biodiversity is under siege. The 2000 IUCN (World Conservation Union) Red List of Threatened Species indicates that species extinction is on an increasing spiral. Since the last assessment of globally threatened species in 1996, the number of Critically Endangered primates has increased from 13 to 19. While the 1996 IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals, listed 169 Critically Endangered (CR) and 315 Endangered mammals, the 2000 analysis lists 180 CR and 340 Endangered mammals.

Madagascar has the most Critically Endangered and Endangered primates and has lost 90% of its original vegetation. Indonesia harbours the highest numbers of threatened mammals with both India (80 species) and Brazil (75 species) having moved ahead of China (72 species). For birds, the Philippines has lost 97% of its original vegetation and has more Critically Endangered birds than any other country. The most threatened birds are in tropical Central and South America and Southeast Asia. Indonesia has the most threatened birds (115) followed by Brazil, Colombia, China, Peru and India with 113, 78,76,75 and 74 species respectively.

http://www.teriin.org/biodiv/biodiv.htm
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I'm seeing a correlation between large human populations per country and number of animal extinctions per country. Does anyone besides me think there might be a cause and effect relationship here?

[KlatooBNikto]

65. The biggest mammal extinctions in India and China occurred when

both countries were stricken with famine in the 40's and 50's.

[Pooka Fey]

68. Link for that statement? n/t

[agincourt]

46. Most of our troubles go back to overpopulation,

but nobody seems to see it as a problem, as if billions and billions more people can be added indefinitely. Because of some cry-wolf situations in the past we have blinders on for the situation today.

[Conservativesux]

51. Movies like "ZPG" & "Solent Green" from the 1970's were based on

facts, not fiction. Rats do go crazy and kill each other when overpopulated.

But people dont want to be confused with facts that get in the way of breeding offspring into a world of 6.4 billion people and an oil supply that is running out fast.

When the oil pipe runs dry, people will be dying like flies and it could have been prevented with a little foresight.

Thankfully I shall have passed on from this mortal coil before then.

[sweetheart]

50. Yet there is a statistical correlation

between suicide bombers and armed occupations. It is not rats in a cage
or new yorkers would be killing each other... no no... it is repressive
brutal, inuman(e) dominations of other peoples land that breeds terrorism.

[Theres-a]

52. Thanks for posting this!

[Pooka Fey]

62. Global Extinction Crises Escalates

Global extinction crisis escalates
More than 15,000 species of plants and animals are facing global extinction.

The Global Species Assessment (GSA) is the most comprehensive evaluation ever undertaken of the status of the world's biodiversity. It shows trends in biodiversity since the last major analysis in 2000 and also highlights which species are at greatest risk of extinction, where they occur, and the many threats facing them. The GSA is produced by the Red List Consortium, an alliance of six conservation organisations including BirdLife International.
In 1996 it was revealed that one in eight birds (12%) and one in four mammals (23%) were threatened with extinction (falling into the Critically Endangered, Endangered or Vulnerable categories). The new figures show that one in three amphibians (32%) and more than two fifths (42%) of turtles and tortoises are globally threatened.

The catastrophic decline of amphibians is a worrying indicator of the state of the planet's freshwater resources. The vast saltwater ocean depths are also under pressure - providing little refuge to many over-exploited marine species. Nearly one in five (18%) of assessed sharks and rays are threatened with extinction.
Many plants have also been assessed, but only conifers (25%) and cycads (52%) have been completely evaluated.

Humans, either directly or indirectly, are the main reason for most declines. Habitat destruction and degradation are the leading threats but other significant pressures include introduced species, pollution, disease and over-exploitation for food, the pet trade, and medicine. Climate change is also increasingly being recognised as a serious threat. (www.birdlife.org)

http://www.cites.org.cn/newsletter/newsletter14-e.htm#5

[AlienGirl]

64. I don't think overpopulation is the problem

Overpopulation is *a* problem, but it's not the cause of human violence.

Chimps, who are far from overpopulated, also engage in a range of warlike behavior. I think the problem is something deep in the primate psyche, and what we must learn to do is control it, since it will never be eradicated.

Tucker

[JanMichael]

66. Rats? Cages? The world is a vampire, sent to drain....

Secret destroyers, hold you up to the flames
And what do I get, for my pain
Betrayed desires, and a piece of the game
Even though I know-I suppose I'll show
All my cool and cold-like old job
Despite all my rage I am still just a rat in a cage
Then someone will say what is lost can never be saved
Despite all my rage I am still just a rat in a cage
Now I'm naked, nothing but an animal
But can you fake it, for just one more show
And what do you want, I want to change
And what have you got
When you feel the same
Even though I know-I suppose I'll show
All my cool and cold-like old job
Despite all my rage I am still just a rat in a cage
Then someone will say what is lost can never be saved
Despite all my rage I am still just a rat in a cage
Tell me I'm the only one
Tell me there's no other one
Jesus was the only son
Tell me I'm the chosen one
Jesus was the only son for you
Despite all my rage I am still just a rat in a cage
And I still believe that I cannot be saved

Smashin Pumpkins