Agriculture was mankind's biggest mistake (4th time)

Refutations 1. Population "We (humanity) controlled our own population, which turned out to be mad, we OVERPOPULATED, and eventually reached the population BUBBLE, and once it popped, mass starvation and death was abundant." Where is the evidence? As far as science and I are concerned, overpopulation will not happen. The global rate of population growth has been steadily declining since 1963[1]. As you have said, we have removed ourselves from being dependent on the wild animals and plants. A population "bubble" is not going to burst, because we can control our food supply. We have so much food that we pay people not to produce[2]. This is a good thing. Not only can we support a much larger population, it is much more stable because we can control our food supply. If there is a drought, the biggest problem is that corn prices rise a few cents. Can you name one example of mass starvation right now or in the near past of mass starvation because of a drought? There is no "population bubble". "As you know, because there are more people able to work then work available, which even today, causes issues of unemployment and sometimes poverty. " Right now those who are unemployed are in a much better position than those 10,000 years ago. Though they are poor by our standards, they would be kings in the eyes of hunter gatherers. 2. Technology "This is also true, but it is the same thing as saying, the more people working to get something done, the faster it's finished." False. As I showed in round 2, hunter gatherers couldn't maintain a surplus and support non-food producers[3], while agricultural societies could. That is why hunter gatherers had a very low rate of technological growth, while technology exploded under agriculture. My opponent did not address this contention at all. 3. Which produces more food: agriculture or hunting and gathering? "One square mile of farmland can support so many people, but one square mile of wildlife can support so many people, plus a population of wild game, and the population of wild game can also support so many people." Agriculture can support over 73,000 times the people of hunting and gathering[4][5]. Agriculture can produce a lot more food than hunting and gathering. My opponent says that hunting and gathering can support more wild animals. This is false, however. Because with agriculture, humans are drawing off of 1/73,000 the land, thus they can leave a lot more untouched habitat for animals without killing any of the animals in it, thus supporting more animals. This is shown by parks such as the Yellowstone National Park[6]. Also, you say that "one square mile of wildlife can support so many people, plus a population of wild game, and the population of wild game can also support so many people". Though one square mile of wildlife can support a certain number of people, where did the second population of wild game come from? The wild game population is part of the wildlife. 4. Starving in 3rd world countries "People today still stave, it just may not seem that way to you because we live in a first world country, instead of a third world. " This can only be shown as detrimental to my case if it was caused by agriculture. However, it was not. One of the biggest reasons people are starving in Africa is because so many people are giving food away. Before charity stepped in, Africa was actually a net exporter of food[7]. However, once charity stepped in it no longer made sense to farm, and Africans relied on food imports and charity. Whenever food emergencies and famine stepped in, starvation was the result. Conclusion My opponent has given a few minor negative effects agriculture has had- increases in poverty, crime, etc. However, I am sure we can all agree that it is better to live in modern times than 10,000 years ago. Now we have extremely low infant mortality, unlike the hunter gatherer's 50%. We have many comforts and very good technology that have improved our quality of life. Our food is much more reliable. And all of this is dependant on agriculture. Without agriculture to support non-food producers, inventions and manufacturing would be almost non-existent. There is no way a system that couldn't even support craftsmen could support the workers in the factories that manufacture today's goods and all of of technological growth. This vast increase in quality of life was most definitely not a mistake, and what's more, it was all due to agriculture. Unless my opponent would argue that life 10,000 years ago was preferable to now, agriculture had a vast positive effect. Sources [1] http://en.wikipedia.org... [2] http://www.econlib.org... [3] http://www.angelfire.com... [4] http://www.demographia.com... [5] http://books.google.com... pg 12 [6] http://www.yellowstonenationalpark.com... [7] http://www.alternet.org...