Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[JimH]

Here's more of what I've been thinking about in Paris.

Warning -- some material may not be suitable for all audiences.

Jim
-------------


I recently interviewed Lincoln Brower.  Lincoln is the foremost scientist studying the monarch butterfly.  Both Lincoln and the butterfly are rare creatures.

I don’t know what Lincoln weighs, but the monarch weighs about 1/10 of an ounce.  You could mail ten of them from Minnesota to Texas for 34 cents if you could get them to stay in an envelope.  

They are remarkable because they make this trip or more each year on their own four wings.  Each fall, as the northern growing season begins to slow down, the monarchs head for their winter home in Mexico.  

Their parents have traveled north in late spring in pursuit of their food plant, the milkweed.  As milkweeds appear in each latitude in the U.S., so do the monarchs.  They lay their eggs, the caterpillars emerge, they feed for a few weeks on the milkweed leaves, and then they form a chrysalis to make the transformation into a butterfly.  

When the butterfly emerges about twelve days later, he or she looks around.  If it is still early enough, his or her mind is on producing another generation.  If it is late, then it is time to make for Mexico.

The journey takes about six weeks from the northern latitudes of the U.S.  In the beginning, individuals fly by themselves. If you look up high in the sky during the peak migration in the north, you can see one going past every minute or more.  The journey south is all the more remarkable because the individuals who are retracing the steps of the northern migrants are not the same ones.

At night they seem to cluster together, hanging on tree limbs, usually near the flowers on which they have fed.

As they continue south, the individuals link up with others, so that they form what you might almost see as a cloud.  At the peak, the migration is a river of these little creatures.

Their destination was unknown until discovered in the 1970’s.  It is several specific locations in the mountains of a small area of Mexico, where they find the Oyamel Fir tree at an elevation of about 10,000 feet.  

Here on a few acres, millions of monarchs spend the winter.  Here Lincoln Brower has been coming to study these butterflies for about 30 years.  And here it is that there is a problem.

The problem is this.  There are too many people.

Some might argue that the problem is otherwise; that it is the fact that the people are cutting the forest where the monarchs live, or that it is the government that fails to protect this forest, or it is the fact that the sawmills consume ever more logs to make their particle board.

In the end, it is the story that is happening all over the planet.  Each year there are more people competing for the same scarce resources.  

When I interviewed Lincoln, it was not the butterflies that left the enduring image with me, but his vivid description of the old forests that surrounded his home town in central New Jersey during his childhood.  As he talked, I could see the old trees and the young Lincoln looking up the huge trunks, looking toward the sky in search of butterflies.

Houses have replaced those trees now.  Where the trees formed their forests, now houses form new communities.  More people every year.  More traffic, higher prices, more crowding, fewer resources.

There were 150 million people in the U.S. when I was a student.  Now we are approaching 300 million.

Worldwide, the population has passed 6 billion.  There are 1 million more every 5 days, or 70 million each year.

The United States was once a positive influence in birth control issues, through direct aid and through the United Nations.  Now, for religious reasons, our Congress is caught up in arguing about the rights of the “unborn”.  Our birth control programs have been stripped or eliminated.  Our wild species are disappearing because old men argue about a few cells that are at a stage that none of them could distinguish from an unborn fish.  

It’s OK to let tigers disappear from the planet.  Chimpanzees aren’t important.  Who cares about songbirds?  

But try to divorce a single human sperm from its target egg and you’ve committed a sin – something you will rot in Hell for.

This would be laughable if it didn’t mean the disappearance of so much of our natural land and animals.  If it didn’t mean that houses will soon be so expensive that most people will live in stacked cubes.

Population is at the root of every environmental issue.  Cut the population in half, and half the pollutants disappear, without changing the behavior of a single person.

Population and birth control are key elements in the fight against poverty and crime.  Lower populations mean fewer people competing for the same housing.  Smaller family size or older first parents mean more stability at home, more resources for the individual child.

It is deplorable that Planned Parenthood, the only organization that has much affect on birth control here in the U.S., is vilified by the old men who argue for the rights of the “unborn”.  It is sickening that doctors have been murdered by the disciples of these old men.

Doing something about population starts at home.  Two children per family creates a stable population.  Three children per family means a fast growing population.  

The actual number is more like 2.1 children per family, since, for a variety of reasons, some children will not reproduce.

If you have more than two children, it’s been done and it shouldn’t be on anyone’s conscience.  What is important now is to let our children know what they need to do to make a difference.  

And if you care about open space, about birds or butterflies or trees, take a look at what the organizations you support are doing.  Is your church fighting for the rights of the “unborn”?  Does your party advocate funding birth control?

If you don’t care about the natural world, then look at it this way.  One of the important characteristics of population dynamics is that populations often collapse.  Growing beyond the carrying capacity is one of the key factors that causes a collapse.  Famine and disease can spread quickly when the conditions are right.

It is the tiny animals, those that start at the monarch’s size and go on down, that are the fabric upon which food chains are built.  Destroy the soil microbes and a lot of bad things happen.

Whether we love nature or hate it, we are dependant upon its success.  At the moment, it is not succeeding.  Humans are doing a very good job at killing it.

The problem is simple -- there are too many people.

[sekim]

JimH-

Perhaps a better parallel  to the human aspect would be the snow goose. Populations of these birds are at an all time high now. So much so that spring hunts are now taking place to try to reduce the numbers. It is a good example of how overpopulation can destroy an ecosystem. The birds nest in the artic regions of North America. If you know anything about growing seasons you will know that it is very short there. It takes roughly ten years for some of the moss' and lichens to regrow after being grazed upon by the geese. Now, after years of this overgrazing, the birds are nesting in areas with no food for the young birds. Biologists fear that the birds are heading for a huge crash. Starvation is but one of the problems. Some other side effects may be diseases that could potentially wipe-out large numbers of the birds.
Sometimes being sucessful isn't all it is cracked up to be.

[Michael Horton]

MachineHead

Typically is these oversuccessful examples it is because we have wiped out the successful species'natural preditors--sometimes over a period of time, and sometimes simply so that people can shoot the so-called overpopulated species in the name of protecting them from their own success.

[sekim]

MHorton-

First off, hello! It is nice to see you're back.

True, I oversimplified intentionally. There are many reasons for the example above. Including those you had stated. Here is another that really comes into play with my example. Farms. Prior to human intervention the geese were indeed held in check by natural sources. Since humans worldwide expansion he-she has had effects on everything that walks, crawls, or swims. And most of the time it is for his-her own benefit. And our success at farming has made it unnaturally successful for the goose example given above. Unwittingly or not, we have changed the shape of this particular species fate.

My point was that of humankind in general. Our success may be our own worst enemy. But this is something that we cannot help. For whatever reason, buried deep in our genetic material is something that drives us to do what we do. Now here is a question for you-do we end up like the snowgoose, or are we smart enough to prevent this from happening to us?

[sekim]

Something a little lighter-

http://www.monarchwatch.org/

Something more somber-

http://www.ducks.ca/conservator/184/tundra.html

[KingSparta]

Regardless if your talking about monarch butterflies or other life forms I believe all have the right to live.

Sounds strange from a Pest Control Guy?

The only problem with that is when it interferes with the rights of humans to have a pest free environment the human has the higher right.

I forget where it was, but they felt that the fish had a right to the water, so then environmentalists took the water from the farmers. This move not only affected the farmers, but all humans who would have gotten the food. Also when they did this they endangered 2 other animals that were on the endangered list.

I do not like to see any animal abused, to include rats, i found a Rat in a Trap at the pig farms that the owner put out his leg was bleading. I freed him and put the trap in the trash.

[Michael Horton]

Thanks Machinehead, and good to be back.

[Gatobrit]

JimH - thanks for posting an interesting and thought provoking piece.

I am with you 100% in your argument. Over population will be the primary cause (I believe) of the the greatest threats to our planet in the coming centuary - polution, political unrest.

Social mores and religeous doctrin aside, poverty is the root cause of both over population and terroism, religeous intollerance etc.

It's a fact that countries with a higher standard of living tend to have populations that grow at a lower rate (if at all) than elsewhere. (I'm sure this is the case in the US - I'm part of the doubling that JimH mentions - I'm English but I will be a US citizen in a couple of years - something I'm looking forward to.) If you could somehow count the 150 million population from (way?) back then and count the population from their decendants I'm sure the increase would be negligable.

Terrorism spreads quickly if some person can point to another group of people who "have more" and tell you that they are "imperialist" or "evil" and you're living in poverty and sqallor.

Polution and problems caused by it years in the future is not something I would worry about if I wasn't sure where my families next meal was coming from.

We need a Marshall Plan style process to improve the lives of people around the world - not a hand-out but a hand-up.

I can't remember the exact quote but "All evil needs to triumph is for good men to do nothing." We (I) like to think we're good men.

Us, Them. With, Without, Have, Have Not.

In peace.

[Badger]

Wow, this is a tough one……I don’t see how it can be solved as long as people view people as more “valuable” than animals or plants.  I personally value people over animals, but I know there are many that don’t..  I don’t believe there is such as thing as an “unborn” person but I’m not as threatened by the “old men” as JimH is.  The anti-abortion platform that these people stand on is shrinking fast.

So let’s take the other extreme & limit the number of offspring (personally, I think mandatory abortion or sterilization would be appropriate in many cases).  But who's gonna decide how many offspring….why two?  Why not one?  Why not zero until this thing slows down.  Surely you’re not talking about legislating population growth?

Rotting in hell for “divorcing a sperm from its target” is a very strange notion, I agree…but no stranger than the notion that...  “When the butterfly emerges about twelve days later, he or she looks around. If it is still early enough, his or her mind is on producing another generation”

If we’re not careful we’ll be overrun by butterflies.

>>opulation is at the root of every environmental issue. Cut the population in half, and half the pollutants disappear, without changing the behavior of a single person.<<

….yeah,  except half the people are dead

[Michael Horton]

Remember "deep thoughts" on Saturday Night Live? Here's some. But they're not as deep. Or funny. or even thoughts. More like thoughtlets. Part 1 of 12.

The average age is dropping and overall population is declining in industrialized nations. Some have apparently opted for extinction, as they have achieved a negative birth rate. Population is rapidly rising in the non-industrialized nations. Reaching a certain level of industrialization would likely result in a lower population growth, but high birth rates are a major hindrance to industrialization (Too much money spent on repaying loans that were used to feed the people or more often for military expenses necessary to keep the people from killing the leader and taking his/her food hoards.). Overpopulation is bad for the environment, but if these nations were to reduce their population and industrialize, the resulting level of industry would be bad for the environment (China today is a perfect example). Unless we are suggesting that these nations reduce their population but not industrialize. That would sure make the world a better place for us "haves."

Population, population, population. Been a topic of conversation for a long time, and will likely continue to be so. Until the overpopulation ends all conversation. I cannot imagine living in a world in which the diversity of animals is vastly reduced. Guess I don't have to try imagine it--I may witness it in my lifetime. We'll all experience it. But only for a short time, I'm afraid. Well, things have started here from scratch more than once. I just wish people would quit calling newborns "miracles." How many times a second does this "miracle" occur across the planet? The real miracle would be a solution to the problem. Other than extinction, that is. Perhaps, if Malthus had only been correct in his deductions about population limitations . . .

On a brighter side. Wednesday, I left for Illinois, as my grand-mother-in-law was dying. We were to arrive in Illinois at about 12:30 PM, and by the time we got out of the airport, picked up our pre-ordered rental car and made it to the hospital, it should have been no later than 2:00 PM. We were delayed in Minnesota due to mechanical problems with the aircraft, and we arrived at the airport at roughly 6:00 PM--the same time that grandma died. Missed it by less than 2 hours. Now my wife is busted up over the fact that we didn't take the 3:30 Am flight . . . now re-reading, "To A Mouse" by Robert Burns.

But Mousie, thou are no thy-lane,
In proving foresight may be vain:
The best laid schemes o' Mice an' Men,
Gang aft agley,
An' lea'e us nought but grief an' pain,
For promis'd joy!

Still, thou art blest, compar'd wi' me!
The present only toucheth thee:
But Och! I backward cast my e'e,
On prospects drear!
An' forward, tho' I canna see,
I guess an' fear!


>>>>>The journey south is all the more remarkable because the individuals who are retracing the steps of the northern migrants are not the same ones.

Humans do the same thing. Only it has to do with history not flight patterns. And the results aren't as beautiful, or miraculous.

>>>>>> Something a little lighter- http://www.monarchwatch.org/

Thank you again MachineHead

>>>>>> We need a Marshall Plan style process to improve the lives of people around the world - not a hand-out but a hand-up. I can't remember the exact quote but "All evil needs to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

Thank you Gatobrit

>>>>>>> I was seriously thinking about not ever posting again.
Not what I would like to see. But if the forum gets shut down, it would be sad that many wouldn’t get the benefit of our MJ experience and our amazing worldly wisdom. (I’m not sure about the Cliff’s Notes comment though. Hope that a compliment. Personally, I enjoy [no, enjoy isn’t the right word. What’s a word for value and appreciate combined?] Jimh’s content and style.) But, if it should come to pass, we’ll all find other things to do. I have a fence that I’ve neglected and needs to be finished.

>>>>>>>> Mhorton, I will be forever grateful, that the planet has some intelligence yet.
Me too-It is refreshing to discover so much enlightenment here in this forum. It would be a shame, IQ,  to lose the opportunity to experience it.  

Random notes from the paper this morning (L.A. Times):
Editorial: “Angola’s Jonas Savimbi Was No Freedom Fighter: Despite the U.S. portrayal of him, he was just an opportunist”  Tullio—was that your dialog from a previous thread? Or was it Sererin (sp?)?

Entertainment: Russell Crowe wins SAG best actor award for performance in “A Beautiful Mind.”  I’m thinking that he got the award for the same reason he won’t get the Oscar—roughing up that moron who wouldn’t let him quote 4 lines of poetry. Poetry—even bad poetry—beats the endless “thank you’s” that are the norm.

Science File: The U.S. Forest Service is going to stock rivers in the Pacific Northwest with dead salmon to provide a food source for Bald Eagles, heron, otters, raccoons, coyotes, other salmon and other scavenging wildlife. Apparently: 1) there isn’t enough real live Coho salmon to get the job done anymore, and 2) there’s a lot of dead salmon (from fisheries) that was otherwise unusable. Historic salmon runs are endangered from human activities such as dam building, logging, and fisheries (which, apparently, “dilute the genetics of wild stocks”. I don’t even know where to begin on this one. [sorry, had to add-the article says they're dumping tons of dead fish into the natural environment. Not covered in the article, among other things, is" What killed these fish? They were in hatcheries; what pathogens exist in fisherirs that would be introduced in to the wild? Etc.]

I saw on the news the other night that commercial fishermen are in an uproar because of a plan to REDUCE the amount of fishing around the California Channel Islands. It seems that marine biologists believe that the current level of fishing will cause the extinction of certain species of fish, whereas the fishermen claim that reducing the catch will put people out of work. Well there’s a quandary—do we pursue short-term or long-term interests? Heard a similar argument recently over fishing/farming water rights in Oregon—which KingSparta referred to I believe.

Science File: It seems tomatoes and cucumbers are fruit. We all suspected as much, but, it turns out--based upon the definition of fruit--that so is corn grains, acorns and almonds, and other less obvious food-type things. This must present a quardry for Weight Watchers, where fruits are free foods, but grains and fats are moderated (or something along those lines).

[understandable version of "To A Mouse" by Robert Burns:]

***On turning her up in her nest, with the plough, November, 1785***

Small, sleek, cowering, timorous beast,
O, what a panic is in your breast!
You need not start away so hasty
With hurrying scamper!
I would be loath to run and chase you,
With murdering plough-staff.

I'm truly sorry man's dominion
Has broken Nature's social union,
And justifies that ill opinion
Which makes thee startle
At me, thy poor, earth born companion
And fellow mortal!

I doubt not, sometimes, but you may steal;
What then? Poor beast, you must live!
An odd ear in twenty-four sheaves
Is a small request;
I will get a blessing with what is left,
And never miss it.

Your small house, too, in ruin!
It's feeble walls the winds are scattering!
And nothing now, to build a new one,
Of coarse grass green!
And bleak December's winds coming,
Both bitter and keen!

You saw the fields laid bare and wasted,
And weary winter coming fast,
And cozy here, beneath the blast,
You thought to dwell,
Till crash! the cruel plough past
Out through your cell.

That small bit heap of leaves and stubble,
Has cost you many a weary nibble!
Now you are turned out, for all your trouble,
Without house or holding,
To endure the winter's sleety dribble,
And hoar-frost cold.

But Mouse, you are not alone,
In proving foresight may be vain:
The best laid schemes of mice and men
Go often askew,
And leaves us nothing but grief and pain,
For promised joy!

Still you are blest, compared with me!
The present only touches you:
But oh! I backward cast my eye,
On prospects dreary!
And forward, though I cannot see,
I guess and fear!

[Michael Horton]

>>>>>Cut the population in half, and half the pollutants disappear, without changing the behavior of a single person.<<

>>>>>>….yeah, except half the people are dead

If we cut the population in half everyone will be dead, except of course, for those doing the cutting.

Math question: If 10,000 people were hired by the government to cut the population in half, how long would it take to finish the job? How much space would the bodies occupy?

[KingSparta]

even Ray Brent Marsh, 28



would have a problem finding a place to put them.

[Charlemagne 8]

Ray Marsh. That brings up a totally different wonderment. Ray is 28. Some of the corpses have been around for over 20 years. Why is it still just his fault? Did he start stacking at the age of 8?
Incidently, the incinerator was fully functional. Go figure.
Fellow Tennessean/Georgian.
The other issue above is just way too complicated for me to comment on.

CVIII

[KingSparta]

Tommy Ray Marsh, his wife Clara Marsh and their daughter, Rhames Marsh, have each been issued an arrest warrant, suspected of making false statements on a death certificate, Walker County Deputy District Attorney Chris Arnt told reporters.

Marsh's parents Tommy Ray Marsh and Clara Marsh and his sister Rhames were arrested Friday on charges of making false statements on a death certificate

[tullio]

I'm not sure precisely what it was in this thread that triggered this association.

Heaven

Fish (fly-replete, in depth of June,
Dawdling away their wat'ry noon)
Ponder deep wisdom, dark or clear,
Each secret fishy hope or fear.
Fish say, they have their Stream and Pond;
But is there anything Beyond?
This life cannot be All, they swear,
For how unpleasant, if it were!
One may not doubt that, somehow, Good
Shall come of Water and of Mud;
And, sure, the reverent eye must see
A Purpose in Liquidity.
We darkly know, by Faith we cry,
The future is not Wholly Dry.
Mud unto mud!--Death eddies near--
Not here the appointed End, not here!
But somewhere, beyond Space and Time,
Is wetter water, slimier slime!
And there (they trust) there swimmeth One
Who swam ere rivers were begun,
Immense, of fishy form and mind,
Squamous, omnipotent, and kind;
And under that Almighty Fin,
The littlest fish may enter in.
Oh! never fly conceals a hook,
Fish say, in the Eternal Brook,
But more than mundane weeds are there,
And mud, celestially fair;
Fat caterpillars drift around,
And Paradisal grubs are found;
Unfading moths, immortal flies,
And the worm that never dies.
And in that Heaven of all their wish,
There shall be no more land, say fish.

[Callithumpian]

"The planet groans every time it registers another birth...."  Paul Simon.

Without doubt the most toxic thing that you can introduce into our biosphere is another human being.

However all of our economic comfort relies on the maxim "expand or die".
Each year consumption must increase, sales, dividends, turnover and profits MUST increase.
That's why the lifespan of manufactured goods gets shorter and shorter.
That's why most humans increasingly respond only to incentive that takes the form of material enrichment.
That's the way our chosen, deeply revered and blindly defended, fiscal system works, shallow and callow as it is.

Since the invention of private wealth our respect for individual rights has burgeoned and has corresponded with increasing disregard of community expectations.  If I want to have six kids then, I can afford it, so screw you Jack, I'm allright.

Check out http://www.lovearth.net/worldcounters.htm and
http://www.overpopulation.net

[Scronch]

A bunch of those Monarch Butterflies spend part of their trek sitting on my gravel driveway, soaking up the sun.  I always feel bad when my pollution-spewing SUV smashes some of them each time I drive 5 miles for a gallon of milk.  Half kidding, of course.

I think all of you are missing the point.  Overpopulation is not the core problem.  Just fly around in an airliner for a while and look out the window--open space abounds.  The core problem has been revealed in numerous sci fi story lines, including Star Trek.  It is: the lack of extremely cheap, non-polluting energy.

The "small area of Mexico" could easily be protected if the local humans were not struggling to survive.  Free clean energy solves this.  I could go on and on, but the whole concept has been beat to death in magazines and movies.  Now, if I knew what this source of energy was, then things would already be different.  We don't have it yet, but given my background in physics, I am confident that it is coming.  There really will be a free lunch.  Just probably not in my lifetime.

Come to think of it, maybe I'll try burning the little bodies of crushed Monarchs.  Hmmmmm.

Scronch

[Ilmar]

Hi

Reminds me of when I was at University some 20|PLS| years ago. I was taking A degree in Geology, and thought that a first year course in Geography would be a soft option. Unfortunately, being science orientated, I was completely unaware of the radical difference between science and social science subjects were, and for some reason Geography was classified as the latter.

Anyway, I digress... We were honoured to have as one of our lecturers the professor holding the Chair in some grandiose fluff subject in the social sciences and he gave a series of lectures in world problems, notably population and the ability to feed the rapidly expanding global numbers.

His argument went like this (remember this is social science so logic, rational and commensense fly like pigs):

We need more food to feed the population.
Available food is a function of the abundance of plantlife.
When we eat animals it is an inefficient step in the food chain.
Animals that eat plants waste food for humans.
We should not raise animals for food as the plant mass (hey science) they consume in their lifetime would provide many more meals for humans than the slaughtered animal ever will.
We should only raise crops than can feed humans and the world can be fed.

and so on.. get the point. Now this guy was serious, thats what was frightening.

In the final exam paper, this very topic came up, and well I kind of blew it..
I said that the food problem was due to man's inability to control the population, not the other way round.
If man doesn't control his population growth then the shortage of food will control it.
Slaughtering herds and planting rice in their place could only be a short term solution as at some point even all the rice fields you can squeeze between people's feet wont feed them.

Hey! I failed.

Alas, it seems inevitable that world population will only be controlled by:
Famine
Pestilence
War

On the religious note. The current Pope, when he ascended to office, had the opportunity to relax the RC Church's views on contraception and spearhead a more enlightened approach to population control. Alas the brave new Pope turned out to be a great disappointment and by tightening the church's line has done immeasurable damage, and condemned thousands or millions to die, as population pressure gives rise to, yep, famine, pestilence and war.

Ilmar

[Michael Horton]

Alas, it seems inevitable that world population will only be controlled by:
Famine
Pestilence
War

Malthus, is that you?

No, can't be--he was a social scientist

http://www.victorianweb.org/victorian/economics/malthus.html
http://www.uwmc.uwc.edu/geography/Demotrans/malbox.htm

was the problem with the lecture that the geographer thought that less starvation was a good thing, even if a temporary solution? Does one solution preclude the other? You know, just because we raise less cows and more edible plants now, does that mean we can't also work on the population problem at the same time? Just wondering.

Was it social scientists or scientists that credited the depleting ozone to an overproduction of cow flatulance (which contains methane gas)?

Then there's the whole starvation-overpopulation connection. There's enough food produced now to feed everyone, AND we already pay farmers NOT to produce more. Overpopulation isn't resulting in starvation--social policies are. Overpopulation is resulting in environmental degredation, and that could lead to mass starvation, among other things.

I think that I was in H.S. when I noticed that geography and economics were quite different disciplines than biology and chemistry. I still haven't figured out whether history is a social science or part of the humanities though. In colleges and universities across the country, history is split rather evenly between those two departments. Difference is that most social science departments won't claim it, and most humanities departments embrace it. I say go where you're welcomed.

[Michael Horton]

tullio

I added "Heaven" to my favorite poems folder. It joined works by Octavio Paz, Dylan Thomas, and Robert Burns, among others. Do you happen to know who may have been its author?

Michael

[tullio]

MHorton

Whoops!  One should never omit the author.  It's by Rupert Brooke, who is one of my favorites.  Glad you enjoyed it.

[Michael Horton]

for those who were unsure of the origin of the phrase
"the best laid plans of mice and men often go astray"

[understandable version of "To A Mouse" by Robert Burns:]

***On turning her up in her nest, with the plough, November, 1785***

Small, sleek, cowering, timorous beast,
O, what a panic is in your breast!
You need not start away so hasty
With hurrying scamper!
I would be loath to run and chase you,
With murdering plough-staff.

I'm truly sorry man's dominion
Has broken Nature's social union,
And justifies that ill opinion
Which makes thee startle
At me, thy poor, earth born companion
And fellow mortal!

I doubt not, sometimes, but you may steal;
What then? Poor beast, you must live!
An odd ear in twenty-four sheaves
Is a small request;
I will get a blessing with what is left,
And never miss it.

Your small house, too, in ruin!
It's feeble walls the winds are scattering!
And nothing now, to build a new one,
Of coarse grass green!
And bleak December's winds coming,
Both bitter and keen!

You saw the fields laid bare and wasted,
And weary winter coming fast,
And cozy here, beneath the blast,
You thought to dwell,
Till crash! the cruel plough past
Out through your cell.

That small bit heap of leaves and stubble,
Has cost you many a weary nibble!
Now you are turned out, for all your trouble,
Without house or holding,
To endure the winter's sleety dribble,
And hoar-frost cold.

But Mouse, you are not alone,
In proving foresight may be vain:
The best laid schemes of mice and men
Go often askew,
And leaves us nothing but grief and pain,
For promised joy!

Still you are blest, compared with me!
The present only touches you:
But oh! I backward cast my eye,
On prospects dreary!
And forward, though I cannot see,
I guess and fear!

Listening to Pink Floyd - Take It Back

[zevele1]

A laique interpretation of Malthus can be a very confortable refuge

[Michael Horton]

laique? Sorry, but is that French? You remember, don't you, how poorly I did in French?

[zevele1]

Sorry-
secular i mean-pest,war,famine having nothing to do with god

[zevele1]

Sorry-
secular i mean-pest,war,famine having nothing to do with god

[Michael Horton]

Zevele10

No need to repeat yourself--I'm ignorant, not stupid.

I think that I understand you, but could you elaborate.

Ordered 3 CDs by Autour de Lucie.

Can't find testII thread anymore.

[sekim]

Scronch

First you have to get rid of over-compensated executives of oil companies. Next you have to get rid of share holders. Then you will have to....

Nobody rides for free.

[zevele1]

Well.on a VERY GENERAL level.Not thinking who is starving,sick and so on
I fell some confort to see that we cannot control all.And that beside our great achievements,weather,sickness,wars are part of the regulation
Secular if you do not see it as a god message,punishment.
Beside this,i cannot say i am a malthusien.His theorie about poor classes are the roots of eugenisme.Eugenisme is a very big  root of nazisme

[Ilmar]

Hi

was the problem with the lecture that the geographer thought that less starvation was a good thing, even if a temporary solution? Does one solution preclude the other? You know, just because we raise less cows and more edible plants now, does that mean we can't also work on the population problem at the same time? Just wondering.

I don't think the professor could see much past the end of his nose, this was his total answer to feeding the billions. He had no strategy for dealing with the increasing population.. maybe he thought that the feel good factor that everyone would enjoy if we all became good veggies, would lower our drive to reproduce. If I had to go vegetarian, I reckon I would lose interest in a lot of things , but never MJ8!!

Forgive me if I am wrong, but at the moment, on a global basis, there is enough food, but not in the right places. We have a legacy in Europe of destroying food to support prices? => maybe he wasn't much of an economist either.

My comment on the religious contribution to the problem, was not that contraception should be enforced, but people should be granted the freedom to choose, without decrees from religious leaders of whatever faith promulgating harmful doctrine as the absolute Word of God, which I appreciate they have been doing for centuries... so why change now>.?

And when religious will is converted into, or works hand in glove with political will, trouble always ensues...

Ilmar

[zevele1]

Your professor means no milk,cheese,egs as well?
A point he may not had see.No more meat=millions dollars saving to cure cholesterol.heart malady.
Most of Europe has negative grow rates.And there is problem with pension funds
In france they have since few years 'jachere" back
I do not know the english name.Before ,you let a field rest for one year every ?years.To give earth a break to regenerate.Now it is compulsory and gouvernement gives money for it
Not out of care for the earth.Just there is to much production,much to much.
On a technical level we can product food to anyone.The problem is that food is to sell

[Scronch]

The food problem is prevention of spoilage, affordable transportation, and handling all the poop that's produced.  Free, clean energy solves these and virtually all other population-related problems.  Efficiency becomes meaningless.  A good analogy is programming: we used to spend weeks optimizing a subroutine to efficiently handle memory tasks; now we just throw more RAM at it, and the coding emphasis is on portability or maintainability.

It's coming.  Just not soon.

Scronch

[JohnT]

Scronch, do you advocate that we make no attempt at limiting human population growth? Given that the earth's surface area is finite, and assuming that a certain "quality of life" has some importance to us, this position seems illogical.

I think you probably mean that we can let it grow to some much larger number (say 100 billion, 500 billion?) and let technology keep everyone healthy and well fed. But this begs the question "why?". As far as quality of life goes, take a look at your own neighborhood as a microcosm. If you take the population of the 10 acre area that surrounds you personally, would you be happy to see that population grow 10 times or 100 times larger? Would your quality of life not suffer?

[Gatobrit]

zevele10 - in English the word is "fallow".

In years gone by fallow fields were planted with clover because it "fixes" nitrogen in the soil so when the field is replanted with crops next year they will have a better start etc. Hence the term "in the clover".

The EC also has "set-aside" to leave fields fallow to prevent over-production.

[zevele1]

I think Schronch has a point
Also,after food,give education,houses,electricity,tv and so on.The populations who have the most children will start to have less.Tell me after a day of work,super market,tv,movie or computer,you may f### less  than in a place with nothing to do,no electricity,no this,no that
In China ,if you have more than one child you have to pay taxes.Very big ones.But people want a boy.Thousands and thousands of baby girls are killed just after born
Is it a solution?If yes a very chilling one.What about killing anyone of more than x years old?

fallow,look like i will remember this word.thank you

[Badger]

I think any attempt at limiting Global population growth is futile.  We, in the US seem to be spending quite a bit of time and money to effect the opposite.  I don't know the numbers, but what is contributing more to population expansion....curing disease, or putting the kibosh on birth control?  I think I read somewhere that the fastest growing age group is the US is 70 and over (I can't back this up...someone correct me).

Here's another oddity.  I know several people who actually enjoy working (and some living) in Manhattan.  How many people are there during the day?   10,000,000?....on very few square miles of land.

[Scronch]

>Scronch, do you advocate that we make no attempt at limiting human population growth?
>Given that the earth's surface area is finite, and assuming that a certain "quality of
>life" has some importance to us, this position seems illogical.

No, this thread is starting to meander.  Jim's original proposition was "Population is at the root of every environmental issue."  I am disagreeing: "Overpopulation is not the core problem.  It is: the lack of extremely cheap, non-polluting energy."  That does not imply that I condone unlimited population growth.

>I think you probably mean that we can let it grow to some much larger number (say 100 billion,
>500 billion?) and let technology keep everyone healthy and well fed.

With free, clean energy, the only cost left is labor.  Inhabiting other planets becomes very plausible.  But that is beyond my intention in this discussion.

>But this begs the question "why?".

Because you and I are not God.  This is not your call.

>If you take the population of the 10 acre area that surrounds
>you personally, would you be happy to see that population grow
>10 times or 100 times larger? Would your quality of life not suffer?

This does not follow.  Increased population does not imply increased population density.  Fly around this country for a while, and you will see that almost all of the land is uninhabited.  With free clean energy, almost all of it becomes inhabitable.

To see my point, you need to stand back and take an entirely different perspective.

Scronch

[Michael Horton]

Most of the land that's uninhabited is uninhabited for a reason. Where are these huge open spaces available? The huge expances of desert in the west? Places that are inhabited, like the Palm Springs area (Coachella Valley), have to import water from elsewhere. Recently, there was a lawsuit between Los Angeles/San Diego/Coachella Valley involving this imported water, and this is just going to get worse. The aquifer below Palm Springs, which allowed this beautiful oasis to thrive initially, is being tapped faster that it is replunished, so that the ground sinks a measurable amount every year. The debate here is much longer before the valley caves in. They want to charge us to pump water in to the aquifer to keep a constant level. But my water bill for a two-person household/small single family home is already $120.00 per month (higher in the summer), and is already slated to go up because so many people move here fleeing the overcrowding of Los Angeles, Orange and San Bernardino counties. The outlying areas around here (areas like Morongo Valley, Joshua Tree)have experienced no growth for over a decade because the cost of purchasing a water meter in order to build a new house isn't justified by the price that the developer would get for the house. Phoenix--don't they get water from the Flagstaff area. I remember a contoversy about that years ago--maybe someone can elaborate. Las Vegas? What, water from that dam, right? Controversy over environmental damage there too. The Colorado River still trickles along down this way I hear. We can't just say, wow! Look at all that open space just waiting to be developed. Oh, but I forgot about all that available land just waiting to be developed in Northern and Central Africa, Mongolia, Siberia, Alaska, The Yucon, Tibet, Central Australia . . . But we do have all those unnecessary national parks. Could build a number of homes in Yellowstone or Yosemite. Or, we could get rid of all those big farms in the mid-west that produce the food we eat and build homes on the land. Oh, and undersea and outerspace colonies don't forget them. Because it's god's wish that we keep growing .. . and growing . . . and growing, without a second of rational thought over its implications.


[delete point warning]
________________________________________

Of course, we're talking about a god that would punish an entire planet for the acts of two individuals, punish a community for a thousand generations for the acts of an individual, and allows the unimaginable suffering and destruction of his creatures (the poor "soul-less," non-human animals) on a daily basis for no apparent purpose, so I place no value whatsoever on what this monster (perhaps the least rational, moral creature in the universe)wants from us.

[zevele1]

this monster do not wants more than we want
cause we invented,created this monster

Listening to Gospel Zombie - abnormal throught patterns-low-fi Israel

[Michael Horton]

not listening to music

eating lunch and re-reading Mark Twain - Letters from the Earth

http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/twainlfe.htm

[zevele1]

Thank you.Put it in bookmarks.Not yet a clean head
Tell me ,i see prices that,by french or israelien standarts are quitte big
$120 a month for water,$250 for the festival where they burn "the Man".I do not remember US as an expensive country.All is like this,or they are special exemples?I saw also that you keep your cars for a long time.is that also expensive?I have friends from US.They always say that after few months in Europe,back home they fell "all is for nothing".So i do not understand

listening to Mutant John -headless stoic figure- rock Israel

[Michael Horton]

I doubt that people living outside of this "open space ready to be inhabited" known as the desert pay that much for water. What is rare is expensive, and in the desert, water is rare. So is electricity, I guess. In the summer, with my thermostat set to 78 degrees F., my electric bill runs about $300.00 per month. My house is small (only 2 of us), well-insulated, covered in vines and surrounded by massive shade trees. My shade trees are tapping the aquifer, and may cause the ground under my house to cave in. In the desert, the "summer" usually lasts from May to December (sometimes starts as late as june, sometimes ends as early as November). Outside of summer, my electric bill is about the same as my water bill. Summer temperature here must be similar to that at the Dead Sea, because the elevation is the same. daily at 115 degrees f., 120 not uncommon, 125 on occassion, 128 the highest I've ever seen it. That's low though--because they don't take the temperature at ground level, with the sun radiating off the asphalt or cement. In the summer, the temperature doesn't drop to below 100 degrees until about 4:00 AM. And it climbs right back up there as soon as the sun rises again.

The gas bill is much, much lower--$20.00 or less a month. I haven't turned my heater on in 13 years. Telephone and trash are probably the same as everyone else.

[zevele1]

let's say around $500 a month in summer!My flat,80-90 meter-square in the most exclusive part of Tel-Aviv must cost $600/700 a month if you rent it.To buy in an other way is not cheap
Electricity is cheap,even water is cheap-a problem because people waste it.But 100% taxes on cars,75% on stereo,dvd,fridge.And 50% taxes on income at low level of income.Taxes on flat,houses
My car tender Uzuzu 4x4=more than $20 000..............My flat $270 000.
$10 000 for the car and around$70 000 for the flat=taxes
And DO NOT tell me the money is for the army.Much much more is going to this f#### religious

[Badger]

Z10,
so a $20,000(US) car will cost you 40,000?  Is that if you import the car (and pay a tarif), or is that for any car?  Just curious.

[Michael Horton]

edited for clarity

[zevele1]

badger
We do not have cars here.Small country,with until 10 years ago,around 3 millions people.Since the russian emigration,we are around 6 millions.So no Israeli cars

We have "regular taxes'.I mean taxes like allmost all countrys,like VAT.On the top of it,we have a 98% 'special taxes" on carsAny car cost double than in his country of origine.For other products it can be 75 ,45 % special taxes

[zevele1]

Tourtise? tortoise?I may have to show this post to the idiots here who say America is cheap,'you work 1 day,you have money for a week'.Anyway this kind of idiots are not allowed in my palace.My only pet is myself.First i am now in town.And i travel few times a year.To have pets is a problem in such a case.But i have many many cactus,and some gr##s

The flat is mine.I gave you his price to rent against the money you spend on water/electricity
I can buy 2 flats in Paris for the price of this one.It is true that i can buy a hudge house here,and 2 or 3 flats for the same  price here, but not in  and around Tel-aviv
Mind you my building is 30 years old..In very good condition ,but...

[Michael Horton]

edited for clarity

[zevele1]

I am leaving internet now.My father is back from Jerusalem.For once i will take a sleeping pill.Tomorow is the dreadfull day,need to be ok

56 "attacks' in more or less 12 hours.All on ports 137.Who is close,by the way.But still"visible"I do not know how to set ZoneAlarm on pppoe /virtual private network adsl connection

[Michael Horton]

http://www.lovearth.net/earth_lights.jpg

Hey, it looks like that guy in northern Nevada left his light on again . . .

I was looking at this time-lapsed photograph of the planet, and discovered that you're right--look at all that undeveloped land. Fill in those South American swamps, cut down those irritating tropical rain forests, finally fill in that Empty Quarter (Rub Al Khali) and convince people that a little trypanosomiasis won't hurt and we have plenty of space for billions upon billions more people. And those sily, silly Egyptians (he said, shaking his head slowly from side to side), why have they been jammed together along the Nile for all these millenia, whith all of that space available? Now renting--multi-story mud flats in Patagonia and the Gobi . . . water nearly within a week's walking distance, free water purification tablets and antibiotics with all long-term leases . . .