reply to post by kadugen
It would also result in a similar surge in predators eating those animals.
You see, there are three major population checks in nature. First is food and water supply. You'll notice that even humans tend to not live in places
where there is little food and water, such as the Gobi Desert, or the seafloor - There's lots of real estate, but most of it is too expensive four
our wallet, so to speak. A population that grows beyond the means of its environment will eventually crash down to a much smaller population through
starvation, if through no other means.
Second is disease. A large population creates lots of vectors for disease, and allows for incubation of new ones. The larger and denser a population
is, the greater the outbreaks will be. This is the logic behind introducing the myxomatosis to alien rabbit populations - It doesn't exterminate
them, but it does make a lot of gaps and steadies the population size to a manageable level.
Third is predation. A prosperous year for prey animals results in a prosperous year for predators. The following year the predator's young will do
their part in reducing the levels of the booming prey animals. When predators are removed from the picture, a prey species will almost always grow
beyond the bounds of its environment, and will become more susceptible to disease both due to larger, denser populations, and the fact sick
individuals are not eaten before they can spread their disease.
We have treatments against the most common human diseases. We have no predators (Are there tigers in your
neighborhood?) . So we end up
restricted by the first one, environmental support ability. We're already crowding on the best land for human habitation. Expanding past that results
in exponentially poorer territory for humans. Our technology can only stretch so far, for so many people, and in many cases actually worsens our
potential environments - even "green" technologies rely on other technologies that aren't even close.
if we were to get every nation on earth to use sustainable agricultural and water management processes, we could likely squeeze in another four or
five billion people and still have a little room to breathe comfortably. But... That's not going to happen. There's a lot of waste. A lot
Because it saves money in the short run. When the wast is taken into consideration with everything else, what we have is an environment that is
shrinking while hte population is growing.
It's going to crash eventually. I can't predict when, just that it will happen. We're not above natural laws, no matter how much we like to