On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 19:38:06 -0800, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:


"Scott Gardner" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 10:43:04 -0800, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:


Anyway, I didn't say the resources were limited, I said they were
finite. Whatever the maximum occupancy of this planet is, we're
approaching it at an exponential rate.


How do you know?

I'm not even sure how to answer this. It should be plainly obvious
both that the planet cannot support an infinite number of people,

Not what I asked. I asked how you "knew" we were approaching the limit of
what can be sustained.

Well, I believe there is a non-infinite number of people the Earth can
support, and our population is growing quite quickly. Therefore,
whatever the limit is, we're approaching it. I used "approaching" to
mean moving towards the limit, not to imply that we were on the
threshold of the limit. I never said we were there, or that it would
even be a problem in the near future - but it's out there.


and
that our current population growth is exponential. If you look at a
graph of population versus time, not only is it exponential, it looks
damned near asymptotic. The same mathematical principles that gave us
"the miracle of compound interest" have given us a population growth
plot that's gone almost vertical in the last 200 years.


Agree the population is increasing, but I see no reason to assume it's reach
the earth's ability to sustain it.

Like I said, I didn't say we were already there, but with an
additional billion people every dozen years (a rate which is only
increasing), I'm not talking about the distant future, either.


Capitalism and education are means to an end, but my original
assertion still stands - barring interplanetary emigration, the world
is looking at an overpopulation problem in the future unless it
becomes a world-wide practice to limit your number of offsping to
slightly more than what it takes to replace you when you die.

Scott Gardner

I think the limit is far off and that when we are near it, there won't be
any doubt.

Depends on what you mean by "far off". The world's population has
tripled just during my parents' lifetime, and the growth rate is only
increasing.

Scott

"Scott Gardner" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 19:38:06 -0800, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:


"Scott Gardner" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 10:43:04 -0800, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:


Anyway, I didn't say the resources were limited, I said they were
finite. Whatever the maximum occupancy of this planet is, we're
approaching it at an exponential rate.


How do you know?

I'm not even sure how to answer this. It should be plainly obvious
both that the planet cannot support an infinite number of people,

Not what I asked. I asked how you "knew" we were approaching the limit
of
what can be sustained.

Well, I believe there is a non-infinite number of people the Earth can
support, and our population is growing quite quickly. Therefore,
whatever the limit is, we're approaching it. I used "approaching" to
mean moving towards the limit, not to imply that we were on the
threshold of the limit. I never said we were there, or that it would
even be a problem in the near future - but it's out there.


and
that our current population growth is exponential. If you look at a
graph of population versus time, not only is it exponential, it looks
damned near asymptotic. The same mathematical principles that gave us
"the miracle of compound interest" have given us a population growth
plot that's gone almost vertical in the last 200 years.


Agree the population is increasing, but I see no reason to assume it's
reach
the earth's ability to sustain it.

Like I said, I didn't say we were already there, but with an
additional billion people every dozen years (a rate which is only
increasing), I'm not talking about the distant future, either.


Capitalism and education are means to an end, but my original
assertion still stands - barring interplanetary emigration, the world
is looking at an overpopulation problem in the future unless it
becomes a world-wide practice to limit your number of offsping to
slightly more than what it takes to replace you when you die.

Scott Gardner

I think the limit is far off and that when we are near it, there won't be
any doubt.

Depends on what you mean by "far off". The world's population has
tripled just during my parents' lifetime, and the growth rate is only
increasing.

Scott


Though we may yet reach that point, as technology progresses,
and we become more productive, using less, that point will
be pushed further into the future. By then, we may have
already colonized other worlds. Or even better, maybe a
superior and more nasty alien race than us may have colonized
our world!

BTW. The SETI people amaze me. They are like the indigenous
Carribbean Indian natives, on the shore,
waving at Columbus' boat, inviting him to come on over
and 'discover' them.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Sockpuppet Yustabe said:

Though we may yet reach that point, as technology progresses,
and we become more productive, using less, that point will
be pushed further into the future. By then, we may have
already colonized other worlds. Or even better, maybe a
superior and more nasty alien race than us may have colonized
our world!

How are you going to get there? Remember, the disappearance of general
relativity is fiction, not fact.


BTW. The SETI people amaze me. They are like the indigenous
Carribbean Indian natives, on the shore,
waving at Columbus' boat, inviting him to come on over
and 'discover' them.

It's the evidence of things not seen.

When we achieve at least a space-flight program that can traverse our
solar system, your first assignment will be to saddle up and lasso
that old Voyager. Giddy-up!

"George M. Middius" wrote in message
...


Sockpuppet Yustabe said:

Though we may yet reach that point, as technology progresses,
and we become more productive, using less, that point will
be pushed further into the future. By then, we may have
already colonized other worlds. Or even better, maybe a
superior and more nasty alien race than us may have colonized
our world!

How are you going to get there? Remember, the disappearance of general
relativity is fiction, not fact.


BTW. The SETI people amaze me. They are like the indigenous
Carribbean Indian natives, on the shore,
waving at Columbus' boat, inviting him to come on over
and 'discover' them.

It's the evidence of things not seen.

When we achieve at least a space-flight program that can traverse our
solar system, your first assignment will be to saddle up and lasso
that old Voyager. Giddy-up!



Well, there is a Chuck Berry LP embedded on it.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

"Scott Gardner" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 19:38:06 -0800, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:


"Scott Gardner" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 10:43:04 -0800, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:


Anyway, I didn't say the resources were limited, I said they were
finite. Whatever the maximum occupancy of this planet is, we're
approaching it at an exponential rate.


How do you know?

I'm not even sure how to answer this. It should be plainly obvious
both that the planet cannot support an infinite number of people,

Not what I asked. I asked how you "knew" we were approaching the limit
of
what can be sustained.

Well, I believe there is a non-infinite number of people the Earth can
support, and our population is growing quite quickly. Therefore,
whatever the limit is, we're approaching it. I used "approaching" to
mean moving towards the limit, not to imply that we were on the
threshold of the limit. I never said we were there, or that it would
even be a problem in the near future - but it's out there.


and
that our current population growth is exponential. If you look at a
graph of population versus time, not only is it exponential, it looks
damned near asymptotic. The same mathematical principles that gave us
"the miracle of compound interest" have given us a population growth
plot that's gone almost vertical in the last 200 years.


Agree the population is increasing, but I see no reason to assume it's
reach
the earth's ability to sustain it.

Like I said, I didn't say we were already there, but with an
additional billion people every dozen years (a rate which is only
increasing), I'm not talking about the distant future, either.


Capitalism and education are means to an end,

No, they are ends in themselves.

but my original
assertion still stands - barring interplanetary emigration, the world
is looking at an overpopulation problem in the future unless it
becomes a world-wide practice to limit your number of offsping to
slightly more than what it takes to replace you when you die.

Scott Gardner

Not if we can get enough of the world to realize the benefits of capitalism
and create the wealth they need to educate themselves. Educated, prosperous
people have less children.

I think the limit is far off and that when we are near it, there won't be
any doubt.

Depends on what you mean by "far off". The world's population has
tripled just during my parents' lifetime, and the growth rate is only
increasing.

Scott

Compared to the available resources, it's a very long way off.

On Thu, 8 Jan 2004 16:20:28 -0800, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:

Not if we can get enough of the world to realize the benefits of capitalism
and create the wealth they need to educate themselves. Educated, prosperous
people have less children.

Yes, look at the Kennedys.