- Joined
- Apr 30, 2017
- Messages
- 9,972
- Reaction score
- 2
That's what I was trying to explain to you earlier. Any species you want to pick will expand to the limits of its food availability, or in our case our food production ability. If there is enough food to support 30 wolves then you get about 30 wolves, if there is enough food to support 300 wolves, guess what, you get 300 wolves. People are that way as well. Look at this population chart again.
I understand what you are trying to say and I understand your chart also. I don't agree with you or the chart regarding our current situation on the impact of fossil fuel, advance in human civilization, and feeding the masses. You should read this book:
It will show you that advancement of a civilization (theoretically) came through the creation of steel, guns, ability to fight germs, and grow food. Oil plays a part in it too, but only a 'part' of the whole picture. Coincidentally, most of the 'old' wealth in the U.S. came through oil, steel and railroad. Medical advances is another factor that made people live longer, and don't forget food resources that come from the sea. The less time you have to spend on basic stuff like farming (growing harvest and raising animals), the more time you can spend on developing technology (i.e. guns).
We can feed 7 billion people in the planet. Farmers in the U.S. are currently throwing thousands of gallons of milk away and thousands of pound of grain away. First world countries know how to feed their people, third world countries do not. There are many countries in Africa that have gone through starvation due to civil war and the governments being stupid with their people.
We've gotten smart enough over 118 years to figure out how to survive without fossil fuels and still drive cars and grow food. Standard of living will certainly not be dropping for Americans over fossil fuel.
Last edited: