Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Environment & Energy

BlancheSplanchnik

(20,219 posts)

34. I think that if you're right, you should take it up with the OP poster.

Reply to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #33)

Sun Mar 24, 2013, 09:39 PM

Mar 2013

I'm just not statistics literate enough to respond.

I did interpret an upper level class in Tropical Ecology, though, and the research presented by the professor clearly showed that human overpopulation is the critical factor driving habitat destruction and extinctions.

I left that class holding back tears twice a week for a quarter.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

38 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

How overpopulated is the planet, really? [View all] GliderGuider Mar 2013 OP

I thought our population was 6,000 times too big. wtmusic Mar 2013 #1

G'day, mate! I wonder how many ways there are to say, GliderGuider Mar 2013 #2

What is the percentage of people across the globe LWolf Mar 2013 #3

Pretty much. GliderGuider Mar 2013 #4

To summarize: LWolf Mar 2013 #11

Pithy and succinct. I like it. GliderGuider Mar 2013 #13

No it isn't. AtheistCrusader Mar 2013 #36

Well, now... chervilant Mar 2013 #21

Yes. LWolf Mar 2013 #25

Need to start eating bugs. Neoma Mar 2013 #5

That's why they're called meal-worms, isn't it? GliderGuider Mar 2013 #6

I was being serious. Neoma Mar 2013 #9

I know, just trying to lighten up an other wise deadly-serious topic. nt GliderGuider Mar 2013 #10

Best I can do is recycle and be vegetarian. Neoma Mar 2013 #15

Recycle, Freecycle, and chervilant Mar 2013 #22

I live in a condo, no room for that stuff. Neoma Mar 2013 #23

Have you finalized which 50 million get to continue breathing? FBaggins Mar 2013 #7

Nope. GliderGuider Mar 2013 #12

I've been saying this for decades BlancheSplanchnik Mar 2013 #8

Could I advise you to save your breath, energy and friendships? GliderGuider Mar 2013 #14

I know too. BlancheSplanchnik Mar 2013 #16

Hey!!! chervilant Mar 2013 #24

"can't hear you. They will resent you for saying it. " stuntcat Mar 2013 #17

This morning I did a little thought experiment on involuntary population decline GliderGuider Mar 2013 #20

hmm... chervilant Mar 2013 #26

I wonder if your students.. stuntcat Mar 2013 #29

Can I just point out there's no 'data' in the OP at all muriel_volestrangler Mar 2013 #33

I think that if you're right, you should take it up with the OP poster. BlancheSplanchnik Mar 2013 #34

Why is your upper limit "a non-energy-assisted society of hunter-forager-gardeners"? Jim Lane Mar 2013 #18

Because my definition of "sustainability" is too strict to allow for technological renewables GliderGuider Mar 2013 #19

Thanks for the clarification, but I disagree -- there should be some room for technology. Jim Lane Mar 2013 #31

If that turns you on, by all means go for it. GliderGuider Mar 2013 #32

I think your numbers are low, but the gist is right. napoleon_in_rags Mar 2013 #27

I'm not trying to present this as some kind of "population target". GliderGuider Mar 2013 #28

So, even the Georgia Guidestones figure of "500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature", is high. NYC_SKP Mar 2013 #30

My assumption about the number that represents sustainability is just that - an assumption GliderGuider Mar 2013 #35

"1500% into overshoot" ... should be 14900%. nt eppur_se_muova Mar 2013 #37

Yeah, I realized that later. My web article has it corrected. GliderGuider Mar 2013 #38