From: dgraham@bmers30.bnr.ca (Douglas Graham)
Subject: Re: Overpopulation
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Ottawa, Canada
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 92 22:42:24 GMT

In article <pkkn#pp.barry@netcom.com> barry@netcom.com (Kenn Barry) writes:
>In article <1992Sep02.064420.9689@bmerh85.bnr.ca> dgraham@bmers30.bnr.ca (Douglas Graham) writes:
>>In article <l=knl5=.barry@netcom.com> barry@netcom.com (Kenn Barry) writes:
>>>
>>>	This really isn't worth my time, but...
>>
>>So sorry to bother you old chap.  I know it's much easier to scream and
>>yell rather than to provide some cold hard reasoning, but the former
>>leaves quite a bad taste in my mouth.
>
>	Get over it. Yer damn straight it's easier to be sarcastic; also
>more appropriate, when maybe 6 people from an audience of thousands are
>the only ones who actually need the point explained.

You weren't being sarcastic.  You were just being a jerk.

>>>	Eric quoted a figure from ZPG about there being "enough" food to
>>>feed something like 3.2 gigafolk. Does it really take much thought to
>>>see this is a meaningless statement, a pseudo-statistic?
>>
>>Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but it's my impression that there is only
>>a finite amount of arable land on which to grow crops.
>
>	OK, I'll correct you: you're wrong. Not only is "arable land"
>another variable, the yield from land is variable, and even the _need_
>for land to grow food is pragmatic rather than theoretical. There is no
>theoretical limit to how much food the world can produce, only practical
>limits, which vary with time.

I think that until you can come up with a practical suggestion for
increasing food production, I'll just dismiss this as so much hot air.
I know you're pining away for a wonderful source of cheap energy, but
until that materializes, a bit of caution may be in order.  Besides,
I think there are limits to the amount of energy that can be safely
dissipated on this planet.

>>Eric pointed out
>>that the amount of this land is decreasing due to soil erosion, and the
>>yield of the remaining land is decreasing because of the reduced use of
>>fertilizer.  I don't think it does take a great deal of thought to see
>>that our ability to produce food is decreasing.  Perhaps you disagree
>>with one or more of the premises, but if so, I wish you'd say so rather
>>than just ranting and raving.
>
>	Pay attention. The stuff mentioned from ZPG was _stupid_. That's
>what I said, that's what I meant, that's my objection, and I've even
>explained why.

No, you haven't.  Unless you call hurling insults an explanation.  Oh, there
was your pithy "Food supply is not a constant", but that seems to me to be
quite a useless statement by itself.  It's probably enough to keep a tiny
brain happy though.

>What is your problem? Perhaps you'd like to defend the
>statement that the world can only feed 3.2 billion, when the present
>population is ~5 billion, and growing all the time? What do you think
>they all eat, sand?

I think they don't eat enough.  Obviously, they eat enough to stay
alive for awhile, but is that all we're aiming for?

Having said that, I'd like to point out that there was one thing in
Eric's article that didn't sound quite right to me.  He said that there
was enough food to feed everybody if we all went on a grain diet.  He
also said that there is enough to feed 3.2 billion the diet of an
average American.  That means that there is only a factor of about
two improvement from eating grain to feeding the grain to cows and
then eating hamburgers.  That sounds quite low to me.

>	There's a difference between having a point, and having an axe
>to grind. Go grind yours elsewhere.

What do you think my motives are?

>	I have a suggestion where you and the rest of the elitists can
>start...

You're loonier that the Xians.  Sometimes it amazes the hell out of me
that we've managed to survive for so long.  There are so many nutcases
around that by all rights, we should've killed ourselves a long time ago.
--
Doug Graham         dgraham@bnr.ca         My opinions are my own.
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,sci.anthropology