Comments on: New York Times: Ehrlich Was Wrong http://www.overpopulation.com/articles/2003/new-york-times-ehrlich-was-wrong/ Tue, 07 Feb 2012 16:23:42 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: luis carlos zardo http://www.overpopulation.com/articles/2003/new-york-times-ehrlich-was-wrong/comment-page-1/#comment-40524 luis carlos zardo Sat, 26 Sep 2009 02:29:58 +0000 http://overpopulation.devilsadvocate.org/?p=471#comment-40524 The percentage of people starving may be lower, but their raw numbers, that are what really matters becomes bigger and bigger, in fact, there´s more than a billion undernourished people around the world, it´s a third of the world population by the time Ehrlich wrote his book. also, the environment is obviously very close to a colapse, I have no proofs, no sciente to back it up but, all I have to do is to fly over our land and see the forests disappearing, rivers getting polluted, houses were used to be trees... sorry, but there ARE too many of us, and, people should have listened to Ehrlich, well, I did, I have no kids and will never have, but, it doesn´t matter... The percentage of people starving may be lower, but their raw numbers, that are what really matters becomes bigger and bigger, in fact, there´s more than a billion undernourished people around the world, it´s a third of the world population by the time Ehrlich wrote his book.

also, the environment is obviously very close to a colapse, I have no proofs, no sciente to back it up but, all I have to do is to fly over our land and see the forests disappearing, rivers getting polluted, houses were used to be trees…

sorry, but there ARE too many of us, and, people should have listened to Ehrlich, well, I did, I have no kids and will never have, but, it doesn´t matter…

]]> By: Debty http://www.overpopulation.com/articles/2003/new-york-times-ehrlich-was-wrong/comment-page-1/#comment-36788 Debty Sun, 26 Jul 2009 18:25:28 +0000 http://overpopulation.devilsadvocate.org/?p=471#comment-36788 Ahaan... I will follow. Ahaan… I will follow.

]]> By: Steve http://www.overpopulation.com/articles/2003/new-york-times-ehrlich-was-wrong/comment-page-1/#comment-30049 Steve Sat, 24 Jan 2009 19:03:21 +0000 http://overpopulation.devilsadvocate.org/?p=471#comment-30049 It is not so much that "Ehrlich was wrong", but that the unexpected "green revolution" has delayed what is likely to be an ineviatable consequence of unabated growth. Even with the decline in birth rates the U.N.'s conservative estimate has the world population doubling by mid-century, putting greater strains on agriculture to keep up. Optimistically they look for it to decline beyond that and level off at some point, which does not seem terribly realistic in a world where those who choose to remain ignorant are demanding higher birth rates, i.e. Phillip Longman and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. It is not so much that “Ehrlich was wrong”, but that the unexpected “green revolution” has delayed what is likely to be an ineviatable consequence of unabated growth. Even with the decline in birth rates the U.N.’s conservative estimate has the world population doubling by mid-century, putting greater strains on agriculture to keep up. Optimistically they look for it to decline beyond that and level off at some point, which does not seem terribly realistic in a world where those who choose to remain ignorant are demanding higher birth rates, i.e. Phillip Longman and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

]]>