(December 12, 2023 at 12:44 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: Right, and it appears neither of us share that @Ahriman's worries regarding abortion leading to extinction. It's just the way you worded yourself at first that pretty much gave the wrong impression.Would that I could hear how other people hear what I say before I say it. It’s always clear to me! :-)
(December 12, 2023 at 12:44 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:I would find it hard to separate the impact on the environment due solely to numbers, et al, from the impact on the environment due to the behavior of those numbers. It seems to me to be both. Yet I would say that we do a lot more damage to our environment by the things we do just because we don’t give a damn. Five people with machinery could destroy a region of forest and 50 people, say, could live in the same area and it still be beautiful and filled with life. I know it’s imaginary, but I think of the Elves at Rivendell compared to the Orcs of Isengard.(December 11, 2023 at 9:38 pm)SimpleCaveman Wrote: My point is that the population levels are not out of control. The fearmongering was that we would run out of resources and even space (I think of a Star Trek episode).I strongly disagree with this. Overpopulation is at the root of several problems that individually threaten us -- the most obvious being accelerated global warming, but there are other. We also threaten the biodiversity of the Earth, which indirectly harms us too. Yes, I've read that the Earth could support several billion more humans, but the ecological cost would be enormous.