|
This is what naturalist, scholar, and media-celebrity Sir David Attenborough said of mankind and its nature of unsustainable over consumption of resources in his latest interview.
We are a plague on the Earth. It’s coming home to roost over the next 50 years or so. It’s not just climate change; it’s sheer space, places to grow food for this enormous horde. Either we limit our population growth or the natural world will do it for us, and the natural world is doing it for us right now,” “We keep putting on programmes about famine in Ethiopia; that’s what’s happening. Too many people there. They can’t support themselves — and it’s not an inhuman thing to say. It’s the case. Until humanity manages to sort itself out and get a coordinated view about the planet it’s going to get worse and worse.” (The full interview is available only in print, but you can read the report here and here
He may actually be quite right. At 86, Sir David has no ulterior motives or hidden agenda behind this proclamation, and his body of work attests to this. He is among the strongest voices on population control and sustainable development, but he has always emphasized that the problem is not merely overpopulation or mankind's inability to find sustainable means to reproduce.
Of course there those who say he is wrong. Critics claim that he has such a grim outlook in life and is ironically out of touch of the nature of ecosystems. Indeed, others claim that as long as a balance is struck, nature will always find equilibrium, regardless of how many people there are in the world. The critics point the problem not in population control or agriculture, but in the economic model we have.
What is you opinion on this matter?
+ Show Spoiler +By the way, is any other part of northern hemisphere this bloody fucking cold? If I didn't know any better, I'd think we are experiencing Ice Age! Bloody hell!
|
My opinion? He watched too much of The Matrix.
Edit: From -5 to -10 C, so pretty OK. What's the temperature in the UK?
|
What does he expect us to do once we realize this? Start killing ourselves? What solutions does he propose to "cure" this "plague" that apparently is us?
but he has always emphasized that the problem is not merely overpopulation or mankind's inability to find sustainable means to reproduce.
So... what is the problem?
We're a plague. Okay, that's cool. I had a tuna sandwich and an apple for lunch yesterday.
And about the spoiler, yeah, it's blistering cold in Montreal. It's so cold it hurts my face when I walk outside.
|
The entire point of technology is doing stuff that nature won't. Even now, we're developing higher yield crops, and utilizing urban planning to smash even more people into smaller spaces. Having less people is certainly an easier way to deal with the issue, but saying that this is an insurmountable obstacle in the course of human history is shortsighted.
|
Nature will find an equilibrium with humanity. However it will come at the cost of a lot of lives.
Nature has always balanced through numbers. We are making some improvements though. The Amazon is shrinking slower than it has in years because of control of deforestation.
|
It's pretty fucking cold here too, -10 C in the mornings ATM.
|
South Korea had its coldest winter in at least 25 years whilst Sydney recorded its hottest day ever last week. Definitely not your average year weather-wise.
edit: as for the plague thing, it's a bit sensationalist but I agree there needs to be a more global initiative on population control and sustainability.
|
People are having fewer and fewer children, so eventually this will all balance out.
-32 C Here, so a little cold. Typical Canadian weather.
|
Better start colonizing soon!!
Edit: Other planets... that is.
|
Ultimately as countries get to the first world level population growth will level off, and it is so hard to predict what the maximum sustainable level of population is for the world. It all depends on technologies that haven't been invented yet, ie will we find an effective way to harvest a more sustainable form of energy, and will we develop more drought resistant crops.
It was -3F this morning here in Michigan, i believe that's somewhere around -20C, so yah pretty cold. Add on 16 inches of lake effect snow in the last couple days, crazy driving 20 minutes you go from 16 inches of snow to 3 or 4.
|
Well hes wrong about not having enough food, we just don't have it in the necessary places all the time yet (combination of cost, logistics and war). But on a historical level famines are near all time lows and food security is near all time highs. We can support billions more. But we don't need to, since population levels are naturally peaking with growing wealth and are predicted to actually begin declining before the end of the century. The richer the citizenry gets, the less desirable having children is.
And you know, we are of this earth, we are nature. Our rate of technological progress is growing _exponentially_, our current problems aren't likely to last forever, and even if they do, we are on balance the most damned impressive thing that we know of. Humans might be animals, but we are fucking impressive animals.
|
The winter is slightly colder than usual, doesnt seem like a big deal to me, just because we (in Denmark atleast where it's -16 C atm) have had very mild winters.
While what the guy said that the planet might regulate too dominant species, may or may not be true, it sounds like a self fulfilling prophecy that more humans without acquiring same amount of means is gonna mean more deaths.
|
I don't see how people separate humanity from nature. Is humanity not a progression of nature? To call us a "plague" or an objectively bad force in the world seems illogical.
And yeah it's been damn cold here. -5 F during the daytime yesterday. that comes out to -20 C in case anyone is wondering.
|
I also thought too much Matrix.
How would we survive or prevent an ice age? I never thought about this. We must be able to with our technology today.
|
He is right about the plague part. I mean, this is kind of a no-brainer, isn't it? If we were not here, the Earth would be much better off healthwise than it is right now. I don't think anyone can deny that, no matter how many organisations and campaigns to preserve nature we might start. Limiting population growth would be a good first step to the only relevant thing that we as a species could ultimately achieve: our own extinction. Of course, that will never happen of our own volition. But I am confident that, in time, we will either destroy this planet and go down with it or it will destroy us.
I just hope space travel won't make progress fast enough for us to infest other worlds as well. That would be a shame.
|
The population growth rate is decreasing, which is unknown to a lot of people it seems. That combined with advances in technology makes it unlikely that there won't be food enough to sustain the population. Carbon dioxide emissions on the other hand, that's a real threat.
|
Austria24417 Posts
Like it's something new, lol. The human species has been damaging earth for centuries. And it's not getting better with all the nuclear nonsense we got going on.
|
On January 25 2013 00:02 DarkLordOlli wrote:
Like it's something new, lol. The human species has been damaging earth for centuries. And it's not getting better with all the nuclear nonsense we got going on.
Ironically, nuclear clean energy is the way forward.
|
On January 25 2013 00:00 KNICK wrote:
He is right about the plague part. I mean, this is kind of a no-brainer, isn't it? If we were not here, the Earth would be much better off healthwise than it is right now. I don't think anyone can deny that, no matter how many organisations and campaigns to preserve nature we might start. Limiting population growth would be a good first step to the only relevant thing that we as a species could ultimately achieve: our own extinction. Of course, that will never happen of our own volition. But I am confident that, in time, we will either destroy this planet and go down with it or it will destroy us.
I just hope space travel won't make progress fast enough for us to infest other worlds as well. That would be a shame.
That's equivalent to saying Earth would be better off without lions because they kill zebras. Are humans a disaster for a lot of specific ecosystems? Yes. In the end it will balance itself out though. Earth as a planet or a global ecosystem doesn't care much for humans unless we literally blow the entire planet to pieces. Life always finds a way.
|
I did notice this winter is ridiculously cold compared to the previous ones.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
