[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Ecological Economics and Entropy
masonc@ix.netcom.com (Mason A. Clark) wrote for all to see:
>On 15 Nov 1996 14:38:27 GMT, yuku@io.org (Yuri Kuchinsky) wrote:
>
>> Would you like to explain why your suspicion should be valid? It seems to
>> me that for many thousands of years when the global population was stable,
>> the ecological impact was also stable.
>>
>Over what chosen time interval was the human population ever "stable"?
>
>During recorded history there were ecological impacts of population expansion,
>over-grazing, natural disasters (such as floods), and militaristic expansions led
>by demagogues (Attilla?) Humanity and stability don't go together.
>
>The more it changes the more it stays the same.
I am not sure what you mean. Much as I dislike agreeing with Yuri (he
says so much I guess he must be right occasionally, like a busted
analog clock), but, taking world population as a whole the human
population was very stable up until about 6000 BC. Introduction of
agriculture, you know.
It grew slowly but steadily until about 1400, when it started to
increase drastically. There was another spurt at 1800 - 1900.
Interestingly enough though, and contrary to popluar mythology, the
majority of humans who have ever lived are dead. Estimates are from
77 to 80 billion people have lived on Earth, including today's
population. See "Popultaion Studies", edited by K. Kammeyer, CHicago,
Rand Mcnalley, 1975. which contains an article entitled "How Many
People Have Ever Lived on Earth?", by Anabelle Desmond.
Regards, Harold
----
"In other words, a democratic government is the only one in which those
who vote for a tax can escape the obligation to pay it."
---Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, vol. 1, pt. 2,
ch. 5 (1840).
Follow-Ups:
References: