X-Message-Number: 22708
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 19:37:40 +1000
From: Philip Rhoades <>
Subject: Re: population . . still . .
References: <>

> Message #22707
> Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 18:10:11 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Charles Platt <>
> Subject: population
> I hate to have to repeat myself, but those who are concerned
> about overpopulation in the USA seem to be ignoring the list
> of population densisites which I posted previously, showing
> that many other countries (where people live seemingly happy,
> reasonably prosperous lives) have more than ten times as many
> inhabitants per square mile.
> In this country I simply cannot see that overpopulation is a
> rational issue. Of course, it remains an emotional issue, but
> that's a different matter.

It is not just an emotional issue.

When an increasing population has the effect of:

- substantial loss of biodiversity (on which we all depend for  
maintaining biological systems and therefore human existence)

- decreasing the quality of life for the existing population

it is a significant issue.

These two issues of course don't (directly) address the issue of the  
innate natural beauty of wild areas - do we _really_ want to add every  
last bit of wild land into a sprawlling suburbia?

People banking on future technology to produce more food and other  
technologies to move people to space/Mars to solve population problems  
are dreaming if they think these are short-term solutions.

It is true that some populations are declining but that fact does not  
seem to be preventing the global problems.


Philip Rhoades

Pricom Pty Limited  (ACN 003 252 275  ABN 91 003 252 275)
GPO Box 3411
Sydney NSW	2001
Mobile:  +61:0411-185-652
Fax:  +61:2:8923-5363

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=22708