Friday, September 18, 2009

[population] any truth in this


What are the implications, if true? Should pro-active measures be taken? Are "They" already doing that?

5 comments:

  1. 1. Not "industrialized countries", just "currently industrialized". "Developing" ditto.

    2. I no longer trust smooth lines. Look at Olduvai theory - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olduvai_theory

    3. I listened to R4's Science Now yesterday. World food production is thought to need to increase by 70% by (is it?) mid-century, but the pundit on the program reckoned it could be done by better farming techniques in the Third World, esp, the use of fertilisers. However, see (2) above.

    4. Meanwhile, some smart money (Bill Bonner) appears to be invested in cattle land in Argentina.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'm always slightly amused at "They" everyone seems to think that "They" are doing something or that "They" are involved without quite knowing who "They" are or even if "They" exist.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Sackers - yes, smooth graphs are a worry.

    QM - "They" certainly exist and this blog names them but it's a pain having to list hundreds of names each time.

    Micro-control 7 shows a few of them plus the Sonus articles in the sidebar.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Easily fixed. There is nothing to worry about at all.

    As they can't feed themselves then when the PC, greenie dream gets rolling they will all starve to death when the US and UK goes back to subsistence farming.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Remind me of the British Army Journal's 1947 advice: "The best defence against the atom bomb is not to be there when it goes off." Another argument for residence in rural Argentina.

    ReplyDelete

Comments need a moniker of your choosing before or after ... no moniker, not posted, sorry.