Norm Leonard wrote:

> Population growth is the inevitable result of human behavior when it
> remains unchecked. This is as true for us as it is for any other animal.
> Yet it is also true that it is impossible to consume more energy than is
> available to us. Thus, our population WILL be checked eventually, it is
> only a matter of how.
>
>

This bit doesn't sound right. The population growth in most of the developed world
is fairly static or even declining (replacement rate of around 1.9 in parts or
europe I believe). This is due to modern lifestyles providing more choice of
career etc and people opting to have children later if at all. Population
increases in places such as the US are due mainly to immigration rather than birth
rate.

This would suggest that in fact population growth is self limiting as populations
evolve. I guess the question is will they limit at a low enough level to be
sustainable.

On another note, one of the mailings I've just read (there have been so many
recently I've lost track) said something about evolution being progress from lower
to higher lifeforms. This is nonesense. Evolution is about being 'fit for
purpose'. An aimal evolves to a point where it fits it's ecological niche and is
not necessarily even idealy suited to that niche, it just happens to work. Humans
have gone beyond this limit because they are able to modify their environment to
meet their needs. Whether this is a 'higher' function is debateable.

Duncan

--
Duncan East
Engineering Laboratory
x3064

http://office.havant.xyratex.com/groups/ecodesign/index.htm




%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%