Re: [asa] A Sustainable Future and Exponential growth

David Opderbeck wrote:
> Ken, it seems to me that the Smail article just rehashes the
> Malthusian fallacy that technology must remain static while population
> grows. For example, Smail says this: /"Clearly, assertions that the
> Earth might be able to support a population of 10 to 15 billion people
> for an indefinite period of time at a standard of living superior to
> the present are not only cruelly misleading but almost certainly
> false." / Why is this so clear and certain? Smail doesn't say.
> (Rhetorically, whenever someone uses the words "clearly" and
> "certainly" in the same sentence, it's likely that the actual evidence
> is neither clear nor certain).
>
> It's quite possible that agricultural biotechnology will indeed enable
> us to feed 10 to 15 billion people indefinitely; it's also quite
> possible that communications technology will facilitate a global
> economy in which that many people; and it's also quite possible that
> new technology will substantially change the "peak energy" curve. The
> market demand for all this will continue to grow (with population
> growth), and market demand tends to drive technological progress. At
> the very least, it seems impossible to say what is "clear" or
> "certain" to be the case 50, 100 or 150 years from now
> technologically. Moreover, technological progress and diffusion tends
> to result in a reduction in average birth rates, as people move from
> traditional agricultural societies into more advanced technological ones.
David
I think your dismissal of population growth is too facile. Sure
technology may enable us to feed 10 to 15 billion people on the earth
but lets consider the scenario that the earths population continues to
grow by a very modest amount of 1% a year and that the eschaton is
delayed for a billion years into the future. I think it is clear that
the earth could not sustain the population sometime during that period.
Certainly companies can not grow their profit by 10% for an indefinite
period, lots have tried and failed. In a physical world exponential
growth or die off is not containable after suitable periods of time.
If you disagree maybe you could give me 1 cent on the first square of a
chess board, 2 on the 2nd, 4 on the 3rd, 8 on the 4th and so on.

Seriously if the return of Christ is delayed then Christians would need
to consider how to control population either from a total die off or
from an explosion. I suggest this is a topic worthy of consideration on
this list.

Dave W

(I have changed my email address for this mailing list as I was
regularly missing email from David O, Rich, PVM... but others were
coming through just fine. My old email addresses work fine as far as I
can tell for other mail, just not for the asa list, certainly Rich can
through fine when he sent me mail offlist. The support staff at hotmail
ignore pleas for help and do not even answer my emails. For some reason
now I do not seem to get a copy of posts that I make but I can see them
on the archieve so I assume they are getting through.)

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sat May 17 19:14:19 2008