RE: Why Europe is so Contrary

From: joedees@bellsouth.net
Date: Tue 10 Dec 2002 - 00:06:19 GMT

  • Next message: Steve Drew: "Re: Toward a new US-World dialogue"

    > > Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 12:45:52 -0600
    > > From: joedees@bellsouth.net
    > > Subject: RE: Why Europe is so Contrary
    > >
    > >> Joe said:
    > >>> Yep, pollution (including ozone layer depletion and global
    > >>> warming), natural resource depletion (including deforestation) and
    > >>> species diversity loss all have as their common denominator human
    > >>> overpopulation. Until this root cause is responsibly addressed,
    > >>> we will be stuck with its disastrous effects.
    > >>>>
    > >> I disagree Joe. The so-called developed nations are not too badly
    > >> overpopulated but they are the most harmful. IMO it is greed that
    > >> is the cause of depletion and pollution. Jeremy
    > >>
    > > No, our pushing the environment to make so much more food and allow
    > > populations to increase beyond their land's natural
    > > starvation/famine limit, and our ability to thwart disease epidemics
    > > (the animal equivalents of periodic forest fires), has caused many
    > > areas to be overpopulated to levels many times their human load in
    > > all of recorded history, and still the breeding continues. When the
    > > new, greater limits are themselves breached (as Malthus assures us
    > > they always will be), the results appear even more disastrous,
    > > because there are many more living to die.
    >
    > I agree. Today's Guardian (UK paper) illustrated a story about
    > Bangladesh. Well meaning folk drilled millions (their figure) of wells
    > to alleviate the fact that their was not enough potable water for
    > people or crops in this over populated land (if it was not
    > overpopulated there would be enough) The net result is that: A) they
    > are draining non renewable aquifers and that B) they were tainted by
    > arsenic anyway due to the geology of the region and so caused an even
    > bigger problem.
    >
    > We are increasingly living on techno fix to sort our problems, but
    > they only work if you have the cash and the technology. I am not
    > saying, however, that technology is not the answer (or at least one of
    > them) but the reality to me is that there are too many people, finite
    > resources, and an expanding population.
    >
    > We have nearly reached the limits of our present ecological niche and
    > must expand it (techno) change it (space etc) or live within it, and a
    > few diseases that are becoming anti biotic resistant may help us.
    >
    > Regards, on a not too cheery note,
    >
    > Steve
    >
    I like agreement; I am only regretful that we agree upon such a negative prognosis.
    >
    > ===============================================================
    > This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    > Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    > For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    > see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
    >

    =============================================================== This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing) see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue 10 Dec 2002 - 00:07:47 GMT