Once again a great discussion, I've been interested in the topics that you cover for more than 3 decades now and have spoken my family and friends for as long but few are interested in these ideas and even fewer are interested in acting on the information.
Paul is such a wise thinker . The planet ignores him at our peril. The sad part is we can't even discuss population or overconsumpion let alone come together for solutions
To the point : 1 million seconds of TIME is the equivalent of about 11.5 DAYS. 1 Billion seconds of time is equal to 31.7 YEARS and a Trillion seconds of time is equal to 31,700 YEARS!
At this point in time the only truly noble hope that you CAN have is that Humanity will not simultaneously destroy the viability of the planet itself! The hope that Earth might regenerate itself long after we homo sapiens have disappeared is the only unselfish sentiment left available. We have truly proven that we do not deserve the nurturing habitat we have been fortuitously provided with. I feel ashamed and embarrassed over our naive arrogance and unquenchable, narrow-minded greed.
The true culprit is Human Exceptionalism. We homo sapiens see ourselves as the penultimate creation with a GOD-GIVEN dispensation to do whatever we want. Not as one participant in a 4.5 billion-year-old, multi-faceted, symbiotic expression of life itself. We have been assured by our prophets, philosophers and priests that life is all about us! I think we are finally understanding that it is not.
Catch the precursor to Nate's work here: th-cam.com/video/oVdGqKMBcHw/w-d-xo.html I'm a student since 2016 and his Earth Day talks and Reality101 course turned my head inside out (for the much-better!).
Most people don't believe these issues not because they are ignorant or unintelligent but because they don't want to believe them. Most people are stressed, overwhelmed and uncertain - they want answers or a destination and most of all a tribe of people to connect with -this story (the Great Simplification) is almost the perfect storm for the human brain to ignore/deny because its: complex, unpleasant, in the future, threatening, no easy answers etc. And yet we do need 'designated drivers' to discuss/plan/change the landscape - not only with their thoughts/actions but their hearts -the goal of our work is to inform on whats possible and whats unlikely and for others to connect and discuss - because that's when emergent things might happen. For Earth Day I'm working on a 1 size fits all map/what to do that might be shareable with many different demographics. Stay tuned.
I’ve considered going to the local Unitarian Church to find fellow travelers. But outreach, that’s difficult even with an educated audience, I.e. my family. 🤦♀️🥰
@@thegreatsimplification Yesss! Our people want a quick easy fix! All the time; whether it’s pain fix or gas Prices, etc. We the people have become spoiled. We want an immediate fix. So sad because this issue is not a quick and no pain fix. Seems like today, people will suffer and just Me cannot fix it. I watched the kids movie Wall-I Always worried me, it could come true. The elite can be on that ship. But not me, or us. The 1% can get there but we as a normal person, knows I will not get there, lol
LOL! This is all just the friendly face of Fascism, or just another far more clever way of marketing mass genocide... And speaking about "deniers" or "non-believes" in this particular context, is also quite disturbing. This is clearly a cult, which you're being inducted into... Good luck!
we need an updated or revised edition of The Population Bomb - alternatively, an anthology of truthful writings by top scientists could follow up on this ghastly landmark work ?
Please ask Paul Ehrlich if he has ever looked at the Canary ISLANDS original populations numbers, as they had NO BOATS. In the smallest islands, based on animals and almost no agriculture, they had not passed the concentration numbers preventing planning, even for population. The eldest would sacrifice for the youngest but they would also sacrifice babies, to not reach overshoot. The difference with the bigger islands is very interesting.
Nate, your conversations are the most complete lines of thought. Thank you for your generosity. Paul's ideas are amazing. If Pluvicopia works, we can get by.
Incredibly, I always find in your videos something I had concluded, like about aboriginal people, why they are more egalitarian, and also our difficulty with big numbers!
I am glad you make the brain stem better known. May I add beyond status, it's about SECURITY? And also social engagement, as the brain stem is related to the vagus nerve and other cranial nerves, modifying our feelings and even our thoughts. That's why it's difficult to talk about over-population: it threatens our security. We want to be part of those who SURVIVE. The predicament is that those who create more environmental issues are also the more SECURE because they are richer. It also allows to live longer, which hurts children (it happened during those last 2 years of pandemics). We want to reduce population on the side of children, which is why we hate Nigeria! We are a too long lived species for this to be the solution, so the worse taboo is not to have less children but to live less long. That's the main reason why poor countries are more sustainable and consume less. People live less long, which we stigmatise. We are obsessed with our lifespan. You actually talk about the medical system, it's a big issue, because we are wired to save our life! Autonomic Nervous System again... Ethics is the obligation to what we cannot oblige. It only happens in small groups, thus the interest of confederations instead of pyramids. Democracy doesn't stay democratic with bigger groups. Confederations keep more equalities and allows relations at large scales while respecting our genetic behaviour: we need to live in a group where we know we're going to see those people all our lives, with close bonds.
Paul is an incontrovertible expert on the human population's global ecological impacts. However, his suggestion that Americans might lower their birth rate to allow room for more immigration is pie in the sky in today's hostile partisan divide. In America poor families & poor single women often feel forced to use children as a welfare ticket, thus becoming an even more non-productive drain on the system. Mao 's draconian 1-child strategy led to much human suffering & distortion of the male:female ratio but it was a major success story in controlling total numbers. Surely it makes more sense for social equilibrium to reward (with financial incentives/housing) women & families to encourage them to voluntarily have only 1 or 2 children to get them out of the poverty-breeding cycle/trap? Some who decades ago foresaw our global predicament chose to have nil children to add to the sum total of human suffering yet population control may be too late now. Overwhelming current planetary overshoot, chemical pollution plus the climatic consequences of ecological destruction, intense drought/famine & wars are all gonna decimate populations on a catastrophic scale (sooner than we bear think). Julian Cribb writes extensively on the foregoing.
The US is a war-based economy/society and war needs lots of soldiers. Hence, a woman can "farm" kids and live off of just having kids. The idea is if those kids are kept from having any other options, they'll join the US military.
@@christinearmington your not throwing your life away, the military teaches often wayward 18 year olds structure and stability. I went into Army as a rebellious young punk. They gave me the structure I had never had. I loved my 10 years. I always knew I was gonna be safe and sound unless defending my country. Some are made for it. I was. And needed it. 🇺🇸
@@christinearmington This guy released the population bomb in 1968 and then the Rockefeller foundation did a population study for congress in 1973. Norman Borlaug worked for the Rockefeller foundation and helped more than double grain output by the 70s making grains more easy to grow in high altitude deserts. They wanted the POPULATION BOMB to force humanity into a refugee crisis!
Excellent discussion. It's always a pleasure to listen to Paul Ehrlich but I am grateful to find more wise scientists. Thank you for the interview. I love your comment on choosing not to have a child but adopted dogs!
Great discussion. Thank you. One (perhaps obvious) point that came up while listening is that selling eco-limiting lifestyles in today’s socio-economic environment often doesn’t not pay-both in terms of popular and government institutions. At least on the scale of an individual human life, there are still long-term economic benefits in being ecologically short-sighted (if only through one’s pension program). And if somebody doesn’t like that you’re draining the lake for your bottled elixir, you simply outspend them with your profits in the agencies, courts, communities, and boardrooms -- and you often win. Almost by their very nature, degrowthers are dwarves and big-business interests are behemoths. How do you grow degrowth? Thanks again for the discussion.
I love Paul Ehrlich. When I was 8 years old, my mother and I watched a PBS special "The Population Bomb" in a hotel room. I was scared that when I grew up, I'd die of starvation but I never forgot watching the documentary. I was profoundly impacted by it along with learning at the same time about "greenhouse gases" in school. Ironically, my Mom had 9 children (1 died) and she chose to watch the documentary with me in silence. I personally never had a baby because I thought a baby would disturb my sleep patterns. My husband has two children whom I adore.
This used to be commonly tough in Highschool. Urbanization and the industrial revolution led to life extension and smaller families. Also agricultural revolution had a similar effects which contributed to urbanization.
Born in 1942 i was obvious to me we were losing numbers of insects, birds, land & sea creatures by 1968 so I don't know what was up with Paul in not picking this up.
Awesome again Nate. Another great discussion What's the best way to promote your series, I've never done podcasts but is there a place that you prefer to give a rating and review ?
This video has about 8k views. A video about "depopulation" arguing for more people to keep expanding the economy by the Hoover Institution has over 4 million.
People as impressive as Paul Ehrlich need to now, end of 2023, reign in his extreme supporters who think they have all the answers and are willing to deny everyone their rights to freedom and privacy in the name of saving the planet. 🙏
I'll tell you why no one, not even the ecologist are doing a low energy lifestyle: it's because it's ILLEGAL! If you try to build a low energy house, off-grid, you'd have your house confiscated or red tagged. Also, there's no such thing as land or house ownership. the list of laws that prevent low energy lifestyles is endless.
Great interview! As I listen to many discussions on the problem of overpopulation, I wonder why no one is talking specifically about the right (esp. women's right) to not have intercourse. It's not just birth control that we need.
For meaningful change to take place, one of two situations must be created: (1) individuals must have viable options to live differently, (2) a ruling class must force a larger group of people to live differently. At one time, China had a one-child policy. It was policed and enforced physically. Not my first choice, but large-scale behavior change did occur. When Tesla started creating all-electric cars, it gave any individual with a large bank account the choice to use less oil (to drive the car, sort-of, except a large portion of electricity comes from fossil fuels - it’s a start). All the consciousness raising in the world won’t make any difference unless changes are forced on us or we have truly workable options AND motivation (so, education can help, but only in this context. In western culture, more of us need to be creating workable options; the education part can ramp-up later.
The one-child policy was an unmitigated disaster for China. Their demographic collapse is in progress, and they will lose half of their population in the next half-century. A lot of Chinese people will live in abject poverty in their old age, and it's not just the communists who deserve it that will suffer.
Ancient Hawaiians had a Physical Science Ecology economic system. They did not have metals or a written language. They had a culture that valued all living things as divine brethren. They talked about the fish people, bird people, tree people. This way they balanced needs and resources for a thousand years. This is the basis of Aloha.
They also had the most elaborate "kapu" system of the Pacific Island groups, with tons of different excuses to kill each other, because the islands were at about their Malthusian limit. They were also out of new islands to go to - generally the way it was done on Pacific islands was when the population got too high, they'd fight and the losers could leave on canoes or stay and be killed and eaten. Life in ancient Hawaiian society was actually rather horrific if you weren't a "royal".
modern Westerners tend to superficially treat, romanticize or wax nostalgic about ancient cultures with little or no knowledge or thought about what those cultures actually were about.
To say that the concept of races is nonsensical is very silly. We can a knowledge that we vary in all sorts of ways without going down the path of eugenics
Hi. I'm writing a book that's strongly opposed to de-growth. But I'm still open to ideas and exploring stuff like this. Other than The Population Bomb, anyone have any good de-growth books I can consider? Maybe more up-to-date?
The first step toward a sustainable measure is to go from GDP to GDP/capita. One you start talking about that, then a shrinking population where individuals get richer looks better than a huge population of serfs. It’s good as a first step because economists recognize it.
If we could double arable land, and if education and wealth development peaks, the population at 11 billion then declines, can we survive? We only cultivate 11% of the land, and cattle on the open range might be manageable. If we reduce meat consumption and concentrate populations to reduce fuel requirements, we should be able to give land back to nature. Pluvicopia shows how we can double arable land and make the hot deserts into gardens.
"We can't rapidly change the population size humanely, but we can rapidly change consumption" This has to be the basic gameplan, right? Implement better long-term measures for humanely decreasing population, but focus most urgently on significantly reducing consumption.
today’s world into the 50% richest people in the 50% poorest, house is expected to decrease in population by 20%. While the poor is expected to increase by 75% carbon output is likely to be almost 100% correlated with the richer half, because comparatively, the poirer half emit no carbon at all.
If we lowered the population to 1% off what it is today, we could live like the 1%. So it all depends on what lifestyle you want. If you wanted to live like the median American, we could have 800 million. Like an italian: 1 billion.
The perverse thing is that in that situation people living like the 1% do now wouldn't be "rich" any more, just "average". Study game theory. There are lots of people who don't measure "success" by how high their personal score is. A great many people measure success based on how many *more* points they have than the other players. For those folks, maximizing inequality is the entire point of the exercise. Players with that approach to life don't want 6,000,000 points if they only "win" by 6. They'll settle for 60,000 points if they get to win by 59,000.
Changing our evulotion based activities and ways sounds like genetic engineering which is a high end field. So this suggests we fund only a select few scientific fields while all others are mothballed for now. You wouldn't want to set off a star trek style eugenics war though
Nature will set the limit of how many people can survive in the end After Nature Has Created A New Equilibrium. and not to forget Nature is Dying all over the planet so when the new equilibrium is here, how mutch nature is stil alive.
Avi Loeb says the aliens are are on their way. OMG. We better burn the rest of the fossil fuels burrowing underground or we'll never survive. Let's come together for one last bonfire.
27:56 why is he trying to imagine society without developing markets? Why can't that mechanism be the solution, rather than the problem, after all he's hoping to propagandize his perspective so that it out competes what he's railing against
This man is the classic example of a boomer who has barely updated his ideas since the 1970's, and still repeats the same stuff that was once avant gard but today is literally the default culture and he isn't even aware of it. The blindspots and unforseen consequences of his way of dealing with ecology have long been noticed and discussed and he shows no awareness. pretty meh.
Oh no, now that men are having babies it's going to get worse! Stop them now! And anyone saying others have to get off earth must show them how it's done. Hurry.
Fantastic talk, it has helped me to listen previously to Enrigue Ganem ( @ElExplicadorSitioOficial ), Bill Rees, Arthur Berman, Dennis Meadows, Antonio Turiel, Carlos Taibo, Nate Hagens and to top it all, Paul Ehrlich. Greetings from Mexico City!
![F.HERO Ft. JSPKK x ลำไย ไหทองคำ x M-PEE - ไม่สนิทบิดหมด (Thai Riders Anthem) [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kPJZ0UihBfk/mqdefault.jpg)
Listening to this episode following the overturning of Roe v. Wade in the United States is positively haunting.
If we don't bring the Christofascists to heel, Merka will go from Redneckland to full-on Nazism.
😂 keep at it.
Once again a great discussion, I've been interested in the topics that you cover for more than 3 decades now and have spoken my family and friends for as long but few are interested in these ideas and even fewer are interested in acting on the information.
That's why I am pessimistic. Most people just don't care.
Paul is such a wise thinker . The planet ignores him at our peril. The sad part is we can't even discuss population or overconsumpion let alone come together for solutions
To the point : 1 million seconds of TIME is the equivalent of about 11.5 DAYS. 1 Billion seconds of time is equal to 31.7 YEARS and a Trillion seconds of time is equal to 31,700 YEARS!
I hope to be that progressive and open minded as professor Ehrlich, when I am in his age.
GREAT TALK, thanx Nate &
greetings from Europe,
Gernot
Thanks for having Paul Ehrlich and to answer the question (YESSSSSSS) Paul was right all along
At this point in time the only truly noble hope that you CAN have is that Humanity will not simultaneously destroy the viability of the planet itself! The hope that Earth might regenerate itself long after we homo sapiens have disappeared is the only unselfish sentiment left available. We have truly proven that we do not deserve the nurturing habitat we have been fortuitously provided with. I feel ashamed and embarrassed over our naive arrogance and unquenchable, narrow-minded greed.
5 mass extinctions that we know of, the Permian Triassic was probably a 90% rate. So some species will likely survive despite human impacts.
cold comfort !@@rd264
Thanks for having on Dr. Ehrlich! Great conversation.
The true culprit is Human Exceptionalism. We homo sapiens see ourselves as the penultimate creation with a GOD-GIVEN dispensation to do whatever we want. Not as one participant in a 4.5 billion-year-old, multi-faceted, symbiotic expression of life itself. We have been assured by our prophets, philosophers and priests that life is all about us! I think we are finally understanding that it is not.
exactly
One of the best conversations I’ve heard online! Thanks 🤩❤️✅👍💐
Great episode! Thanks so much for interviewing Dr. Ehrlich.
It is imperative that all people work and live together for our future lives. 😊
I am new to Nate and a total fan over here in NC. So much valuable information.
Catch the precursor to Nate's work here: th-cam.com/video/oVdGqKMBcHw/w-d-xo.html I'm a student since 2016 and his Earth Day talks and Reality101 course turned my head inside out (for the much-better!).
@@northforkenvironmentalcoun8207 very awesome!
@@Rosemountainfarm Hi Ann Rose 🌹! I’m in Old Fort sharing your response!
Me too! Just now learned of hi
Hello from Sanford. 😊
I need a class on how to talk to the non believers (deniers). How to enlighten those who have so much more than neccessary.
Most people don't believe these issues not because they are ignorant or unintelligent but because they don't want to believe them. Most people are stressed, overwhelmed and uncertain - they want answers or a destination and most of all a tribe of people to connect with -this story (the Great Simplification) is almost the perfect storm for the human brain to ignore/deny because its: complex, unpleasant, in the future, threatening, no easy answers etc. And yet we do need 'designated drivers' to discuss/plan/change the landscape - not only with their thoughts/actions but their hearts -the goal of our work is to inform on whats possible and whats unlikely and for others to connect and discuss - because that's when emergent things might happen. For Earth Day I'm working on a 1 size fits all map/what to do that might be shareable with many different demographics. Stay tuned.
Thank you, anxiously awaiting the map!
I’ve considered going to the local Unitarian Church to find fellow travelers. But outreach, that’s difficult even with an educated audience, I.e. my family. 🤦♀️🥰
@@thegreatsimplification Yesss! Our people want a quick easy fix! All the time; whether it’s pain fix or gas Prices, etc. We the people have become spoiled. We want an immediate fix. So sad because this issue is not a quick and no pain fix. Seems like today, people will suffer and just Me cannot fix it. I watched the kids movie Wall-I Always worried me, it could come true. The elite can be on that ship. But not me, or us. The 1% can get there but we as a normal person, knows I will not get there, lol
LOL! This is all just the friendly face of Fascism, or just another far more clever way of marketing mass genocide... And speaking about "deniers" or "non-believes" in this particular context, is also quite disturbing. This is clearly a cult, which you're being inducted into... Good luck!
we need an updated or revised edition of The Population Bomb - alternatively, an anthology of truthful writings by top scientists could follow up on this ghastly landmark work ?
Please ask Paul Ehrlich if he has ever looked at the Canary ISLANDS original populations numbers, as they had NO BOATS.
In the smallest islands, based on animals and almost no agriculture, they had not passed the concentration numbers preventing planning, even for population. The eldest would sacrifice for the youngest but they would also sacrifice babies, to not reach overshoot.
The difference with the bigger islands is very interesting.
Interesting! Smart people indeed!
Love the show and insights. Been following Nate since the oil drum days. Wow - what a journey!!
Same!
Paul Ehrlich is one of my absolute heroes
Nate, your conversations are the most complete lines of thought. Thank you for your generosity. Paul's ideas are amazing. If Pluvicopia works, we can get by.
Incredibly, I always find in your videos something I had concluded, like about aboriginal people, why they are more egalitarian, and also our difficulty with big numbers!
I am glad you make the brain stem better known. May I add beyond status, it's about SECURITY? And also social engagement, as the brain stem is related to the vagus nerve and other cranial nerves, modifying our feelings and even our thoughts.
That's why it's difficult to talk about over-population: it threatens our security. We want to be part of those who SURVIVE.
The predicament is that those who create more environmental issues are also the more SECURE because they are richer.
It also allows to live longer, which hurts children (it happened during those last 2 years of pandemics).
We want to reduce population on the side of children, which is why we hate Nigeria!
We are a too long lived species for this to be the solution, so the worse taboo is not to have less children but to live less long.
That's the main reason why poor countries are more sustainable and consume less. People live less long, which we stigmatise. We are obsessed with our lifespan.
You actually talk about the medical system, it's a big issue, because we are wired to save our life! Autonomic Nervous System again...
Ethics is the obligation to what we cannot oblige. It only happens in small groups, thus the interest of confederations instead of pyramids. Democracy doesn't stay democratic with bigger groups. Confederations keep more equalities and allows relations at large scales while respecting our genetic behaviour: we need to live in a group where we know we're going to see those people all our lives, with close bonds.
Really enjoying your show and the insights of you and your guests. So glad you started a podcast Nate. May you have every success.
This is so depressing. Either you survive what's coming and live a very hard life or you just choose to leave before it happens. What does one do?
Paul is an incontrovertible expert on the human population's global ecological impacts. However, his suggestion that Americans might lower their birth rate to allow room for more immigration is pie in the sky in today's hostile partisan divide. In America poor families & poor single women often feel forced to use children as a welfare ticket, thus becoming an even more non-productive drain on the system.
Mao 's draconian 1-child strategy led to much human suffering & distortion of the male:female ratio but it was a major success story in controlling total numbers. Surely it makes more sense for social equilibrium to reward (with financial incentives/housing) women & families to encourage them to voluntarily have only 1 or 2 children to get them out of the poverty-breeding cycle/trap?
Some who decades ago foresaw our global predicament chose to have nil children to add to the sum total of human suffering yet population control may be too late now. Overwhelming current planetary overshoot, chemical pollution plus the climatic consequences of ecological destruction, intense drought/famine & wars are all gonna decimate populations on a catastrophic scale (sooner than we bear think). Julian Cribb writes extensively on the foregoing.
The US is a war-based economy/society and war needs lots of soldiers. Hence, a woman can "farm" kids and live off of just having kids. The idea is if those kids are kept from having any other options, they'll join the US military.
@@alexcarter8807 Our as one right winger says, they can throw their lives away by joining the military. 🤦♀️🤬🤷♀️🤬
@@christinearmington your not throwing your life away, the military teaches often wayward 18 year olds structure and stability. I went into Army as a rebellious young punk. They gave me the structure I had never had. I loved my 10 years. I always knew I was gonna be safe and sound unless defending my country. Some are made for it. I was. And needed it. 🇺🇸
@@tarable7778 My reply was sarcastic. Marjorie Taylor Greene said that. I don’t believe it. Not at all. My father served in WWII.
@@christinearmington This guy released the population bomb in 1968 and then the Rockefeller foundation did a population study for congress in 1973. Norman Borlaug worked for the Rockefeller foundation and helped more than double grain output by the 70s making grains more easy to grow in high altitude deserts. They wanted the POPULATION BOMB to force humanity into a refugee crisis!
Excellent discussion. It's always a pleasure to listen to Paul Ehrlich but I am grateful to find more wise scientists. Thank you for the interview. I love your comment on choosing not to have a child but adopted dogs!
Great discussion. Thank you. One (perhaps obvious) point that came up while listening is that selling eco-limiting lifestyles in today’s socio-economic environment often doesn’t not pay-both in terms of popular and government institutions. At least on the scale of an individual human life, there are still long-term economic benefits in being ecologically short-sighted (if only through one’s pension program). And if somebody doesn’t like that you’re draining the lake for your bottled elixir, you simply outspend them with your profits in the agencies, courts, communities, and boardrooms -- and you often win. Almost by their very nature, degrowthers are dwarves and big-business interests are behemoths. How do you grow degrowth? Thanks again for the discussion.
Fantastic interview with my hero....
I love Paul Ehrlich. When I was 8 years old, my mother and I watched a PBS special "The Population Bomb" in a hotel room. I was scared that when I grew up, I'd die of starvation but I never forgot watching the documentary. I was profoundly impacted by it along with learning at the same time about "greenhouse gases" in school. Ironically, my Mom had 9 children (1 died) and she chose to watch the documentary with me in silence. I personally never had a baby because I thought a baby would disturb my sleep patterns. My husband has two children whom I adore.
More people, more problems.
This used to be commonly tough in Highschool. Urbanization and the industrial revolution led to life extension and smaller families. Also agricultural revolution had a similar effects which contributed to urbanization.
Billionaires aren't self-made either, they have banker friends.
anti-semite!
Born in 1942 i was obvious to me we were losing numbers of insects, birds, land & sea creatures by 1968 so I don't know what was up with Paul in not picking this up.
Thanks y'all!
absolutely amazing talk
49:00 "If it were my choice I would lower our population further so we can be humane..." ??? How would you lower our population?
Awesome again Nate. Another great discussion
What's the best way to promote your series, I've never done podcasts but is there a place that you prefer to give a rating and review ?
Because this shit really needs to get listened to by a wider audience and now
I am increasingly doubting Elon Musk's sanity. Making reusable rockets are okay. But he's telling the entire world that population is not a problem.
Cos he's a capitalist idiot who wants more people to buy his shit. Elon is a god damn fool.
This video has about 8k views. A video about "depopulation" arguing for more people to keep expanding the economy by the Hoover Institution has over 4 million.
People as impressive as Paul Ehrlich need to now, end of 2023, reign in his extreme supporters who think they have all the answers and are willing to deny everyone their rights to freedom and privacy in the name of saving the planet. 🙏
I'll tell you why no one, not even the ecologist are doing a low energy lifestyle: it's because it's ILLEGAL! If you try to build a low energy house, off-grid, you'd have your house confiscated or red tagged. Also, there's no such thing as land or house ownership. the list of laws that prevent low energy lifestyles is endless.
Schottky was a genius. No electronics without him.
Great interview! As I listen to many discussions on the problem of overpopulation, I wonder why no one is talking specifically about the right (esp. women's right) to not have intercourse. It's not just birth control that we need.
For meaningful change to take place, one of two situations must be created: (1) individuals must have viable options to live differently, (2) a ruling class must force a larger group of people to live differently. At one time, China had a one-child policy. It was policed and enforced physically. Not my first choice, but large-scale behavior change did occur. When Tesla started creating all-electric cars, it gave any individual with a large bank account the choice to use less oil (to drive the car, sort-of, except a large portion of electricity comes from fossil fuels - it’s a start). All the consciousness raising in the world won’t make any difference unless changes are forced on us or we have truly workable options AND motivation (so, education can help, but only in this context. In western culture, more of us need to be creating workable options; the education part can ramp-up later.
The one-child policy was an unmitigated disaster for China. Their demographic collapse is in progress, and they will lose half of their population in the next half-century. A lot of Chinese people will live in abject poverty in their old age, and it's not just the communists who deserve it that will suffer.
Ancient Hawaiians had a Physical Science Ecology economic system. They did not have metals or a written language. They had a culture that valued all living things as divine brethren. They talked about the fish people, bird people, tree people. This way they balanced needs and resources for a thousand years. This is the basis of Aloha.
They also had the most elaborate "kapu" system of the Pacific Island groups, with tons of different excuses to kill each other, because the islands were at about their Malthusian limit. They were also out of new islands to go to - generally the way it was done on Pacific islands was when the population got too high, they'd fight and the losers could leave on canoes or stay and be killed and eaten. Life in ancient Hawaiian society was actually rather horrific if you weren't a "royal".
@@alexcarter8807 The cheerful contrarian
modern Westerners tend to superficially treat, romanticize or wax nostalgic about ancient cultures with little or no knowledge or thought about what those cultures actually were about.
To say that the concept of races is nonsensical is very silly. We can a knowledge that we vary in all sorts of ways without going down the path of eugenics
Much love ❤️ thanks
Thank you, interesting episode😢🥀🌏🌍🌎🌹🤯
Hi. I'm writing a book that's strongly opposed to de-growth. But I'm still open to ideas and exploring stuff like this. Other than The Population Bomb, anyone have any good de-growth books I can consider? Maybe more up-to-date?
The first step toward a sustainable measure is to go from GDP to GDP/capita. One you start talking about that, then a shrinking population where individuals get richer looks better than a huge population of serfs. It’s good as a first step because economists recognize it.
34:08 but Bill Gates says all we need is to buy an air conditioner. if we live in a Temperate Country. is he lying?
Yes
If we could double arable land, and if education and wealth development peaks, the population at 11 billion then declines, can we survive? We only cultivate 11% of the land, and cattle on the open range might be manageable. If we reduce meat consumption and concentrate populations to reduce fuel requirements, we should be able to give land back to nature. Pluvicopia shows how we can double arable land and make the hot deserts into gardens.
Read "The Dictator's Playbook" by Bruce Bueno de Mesquita and Alastair Smith. That book explains a lot of what we see here.
"We can't rapidly change the population size humanely, but we can rapidly change consumption"
This has to be the basic gameplan, right? Implement better long-term measures for humanely decreasing population, but focus most urgently on significantly reducing consumption.
we need to talk...an article is out on science org on climate and aerosol aka pollution...daily mail repeated it badly also search for "paradox"
I have no respect for a man who can't admit he was wrong!!! He couldn't be more wrong
today’s world into the 50% richest people in the 50% poorest, house is expected to decrease in population by 20%. While the poor is expected to increase by 75% carbon output is likely to be almost 100% correlated with the richer half, because comparatively, the poirer half emit no carbon at all.
The shameful man, Paul Ehrlich, should be punished for the damage he has done to the middle class and America. Shame.
If we lowered the population to 1% off what it is today, we could live like the 1%. So it all depends on what lifestyle you want. If you wanted to live like the median American, we could have 800 million. Like an italian: 1 billion.
The perverse thing is that in that situation people living like the 1% do now wouldn't be "rich" any more, just "average".
Study game theory. There are lots of people who don't measure "success" by how high their personal score is. A great many people measure success based on how many *more* points they have than the other players. For those folks, maximizing inequality is the entire point of the exercise.
Players with that approach to life don't want 6,000,000 points if they only "win" by 6. They'll settle for 60,000 points if they get to win by 59,000.
Not like we didn't warn "Them". ShakeUp XR
Wow. This guy is pure evil.
Changing our evulotion based activities and ways sounds like genetic engineering which is a high end field. So this suggests we fund only a select few scientific fields while all others are mothballed for now. You wouldn't want to set off a star trek style eugenics war though
Nature will set the limit of how many people can survive in the end After Nature Has Created A New Equilibrium.
and not to forget Nature is Dying all over the planet so when the new equilibrium is here, how mutch nature is stil alive.
Avi Loeb says the aliens are are on their way. OMG. We better burn the rest of the fossil fuels burrowing underground or we'll never survive. Let's come together for one last bonfire.
Folder of time
27:56 why is he trying to imagine society without developing markets? Why can't that mechanism be the solution, rather than the problem, after all he's hoping to propagandize his perspective so that it out competes what he's railing against
28:31 sounds like he's got an misanthropic assumption in the background
28:36 Veblen, a distinction in markets, business versus industry
29:45 Yes, if you can understand it, what are the barriers to others doing so as well?
30:04 sounds like an inopportune time to publish!
You gave an outlet to an an apocaliptic clown discussing his BS which has been proven wrong over decades!
REWILD
This man is the classic example of a boomer who has barely updated his ideas since the 1970's, and still repeats the same stuff that was once avant gard but today is literally the default culture and he isn't even aware of it. The blindspots and unforseen consequences of his way of dealing with ecology have long been noticed and discussed and he shows no awareness. pretty meh.
But we are not all on the planet at the same times, 6 to 10 people are on our two space stations :D
Fauchi talk
Please reply to my comment if you live in or near Yakima Wa.
Ehrlich is the patron saint of terrible predictions. Do better.
Sad that the guy is so political.
He's Rockefeller Population Council type trash.
Oh no, now that men are having babies it's going to get worse! Stop them now! And anyone saying others have to get off earth must show them how it's done. Hurry.
This guy is a wasted genius. Wish he focused on something better for humanity than trying to be a doomsayer,
Fantastic talk, it has helped me to listen previously to Enrigue Ganem ( @ElExplicadorSitioOficial ), Bill Rees, Arthur Berman, Dennis Meadows, Antonio Turiel, Carlos Taibo, Nate Hagens and to top it all, Paul Ehrlich. Greetings from Mexico City!