Difference between revisions of "Talk:Population control"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
BetsyNewson (talk | contribs) (query figures) |
|||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Abortion is nowhere near the most important factor in controlling exponential population expansion. Resisting the natural impulse to have an excessive number of biological children in a family is. --[[User:Mert]] | Abortion is nowhere near the most important factor in controlling exponential population expansion. Resisting the natural impulse to have an excessive number of biological children in a family is. --[[User:Mert]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | ==Overcrowded?== | ||
| + | |||
| + | Not sure who Paul Ehrlich is or was, and there's no citation given for the statistic that humans occupy only 1 or 2% of the earth's surface, but assuming the figures aren't from as biased a source as the CIA, do we know how much of the earth's land surface CAN be occupied by humans? If the area that CAN'T be occupied by humans, because it's too hot/too cold/too dry etc., is say, for sake of arguement, 80% then the 1 or 2% figure takes on a whole new meaning. [[User:BetsyNewson|BetsyNewson]] 10:37, 8 January 2009 (EST) | ||
Revision as of 15:37, January 8, 2009
Problems with bias in this page
Abortion is nowhere near the most important factor in controlling exponential population expansion. Resisting the natural impulse to have an excessive number of biological children in a family is. --User:Mert
Overcrowded?
Not sure who Paul Ehrlich is or was, and there's no citation given for the statistic that humans occupy only 1 or 2% of the earth's surface, but assuming the figures aren't from as biased a source as the CIA, do we know how much of the earth's land surface CAN be occupied by humans? If the area that CAN'T be occupied by humans, because it's too hot/too cold/too dry etc., is say, for sake of arguement, 80% then the 1 or 2% figure takes on a whole new meaning. BetsyNewson 10:37, 8 January 2009 (EST)