A rebuttal to " Human population reduction is not a quick fix for environmental problems"

[Gregorian]

5. Slowing growth is still the other most important factor.

You may recall that I posted the early version of this, in video form, which showed the scientist actually discussing the phenomenon of population growth versus a one child law.

Here's what Paul Ehrlich has to say this morning:

All scientists should be allocating a significant amount of effort to promoting understanding and action to deal with the major drivers of environmental destruction: population growth, overconsumption by the rich, and socio-economic inequity. The scientific community has understood for decades that Earth is becoming increasingly overpopulated, that biodiversity supplies critical ecosystem services to humanity and is disappearing, that sustainable growth is an oxymoron, that civilization must rapidly transition away from the use of fossil fuels, that toxification of the entire Earth has potentially devastating consequences (Cribb 2014), and on and on.

http://mahb.stanford.edu/blog/conservation-biology-and-the-endarkenment/

Population is one half of the equation at least. "Forget it" is sends a horrible message. Of course it goes without saying that with 7 billion people, and many of them just beginning to use energy and resources.