Changes

-Sundance

-Sundance

: Malthus was wrong (prosperity tends to suppress population growth, as does China's one-child policy), and I very much doubt that we ''are'' "quickly approaching our carrying capacity".  So your macabre claim is nonsense.  [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 09:24, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

: Malthus was wrong (prosperity tends to suppress population growth, as does China's one-child policy), and I very much doubt that we ''are'' "quickly approaching our carrying capacity".  So your macabre claim is nonsense.  [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 09:24, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

: you have to realize there are two types of over-population. One is the obvious excessive population growth of humans. The other focuses on over-population pollution wise. The more wealth pepole have, the more they pollute and the more they use up natural resources. Carrying capacity is defined as the number of organisms an ecosystem could sustain and we're using up envionmental resouces at an increasing rate. Therefore, prosperity would lead to the same consequence as overpopulation. And we are quickly approaching our carrying capacity becuase ''we are using up more and more natural resources''. My claim is not nonsense. -Sundance

  you have to realize there are two types of over-population. One is the obvious excessive population growth of humans. The other focuses on over-population pollution wise. The more wealth pepole have, the more they pollute and the more they use up natural resources. Carrying capacity is defined as the number of organisms an ecosystem could sustain and we're using up envionmental resouces at an increasing rate. Therefore, prosperity would lead to the same consequence as overpopulation. And we are quickly approaching our carrying capacity becuase ''we are using up more and more natural resources''. My claim is not nonsense. -Sundance