Dude, we practically have a whole country of that up here.

Believe me, I know. Oregon is like... little Canada.

There is no population crisis. No need to panic and start a run to Oregon or Canada.

We will adapt and find our way. It is the American way. There are Jeffersonian movements all over the place as people start to move off the grid and become self-sufficient.

Personally, I love the idea of living off the land (as long as I can still have my internets!). I am organic farming on a small scale in the middle of Orange County using nothing but my wits, the internet and the library as my resources and the good folks at Home Depot. I have a 4 x 5 corn patch and a 6 x 4 raised vegetable garden that I built myself - all on the cheap. I also have a compost pile going. No pesticides, no herbicides. I used ladybugs to fight off a pest invasion. I'm planting marigolds to fight off other bugs. God I love nature!

Can't wait for the first harvest.

Oh yeah. China will never ever ever nuke the US so please, let's not get hysterical here. By the way, Oregon is well within range of their strategic weapons.

We can start another thread for this interesting discussion.

That nuke thing was a joke, dude.

Relax buddy, just engaging in conversation! C'mon now, I've been gone for six months and this is how you greet me? Where is the love baby? Where's the "Welcome back Jorgelito!", slap on the back and a cold beer coming my way? :)

*sigh* I guess you can't go home again *sniff*

Anyways, joke or not, I think it's interesting nonetheless.

Well, total fertility rates (TFR--more indicative than just plain birth rates) ARE going down in a lot of places, since the end of the last century... not just the West, either. Take a look at Thailand, for a great example of a country going through the demographic transition very quickly (demographic transition means the change from high birth and death rates, to low birth and death rates)... in the 1960's, the TFR was around 6, and today it's significantly below-replacement at 1.64. I think that cultures can and will change, with time and education (especially for women, regarding birth control), but a LOT of time will have to pass for some cultures. I'm optimistic, though.

It would also help (as Baraka said) if we all became vegetarians and ate locally... but I'm not ready to take either of those steps yet. Try eating only local vegetables in ICELAND!!! :lol: Yeah, that would control the population real fast... we'd all be dead, here. It's happened a few times in Iceland's history, up until the 1940s when they actually became prosperous (as a result of the American occupation during WWII, in fact--they hate that).

We should start eating the Irish.

Yes, but we're not close to any strategic targets. There is little military presence in Oregon beyond the various national guard and reserve branches. The closest strategic target to Oregon is the Bangor Submarine Base that's part of Naval Station Kitsap in the Puget Sound. Unless someone decided they wanted to bomb the hell out of Intel Corp., we're pretty safe.

That said, I'm learning to identify edible native plants, such as camas. I'm also going to plant a "Victory Garden" this summer--I'll have to use nursery plants because I'm moving so late in the season, but next year I'm going to grow from seed. I'd recommend that anyone who can do so do the same.

Oh, um, I started early.

it seems that situations like the AIDS epidemic in Africa is controlling population a bit

AIDS is population control by eliminating the poorest places. That kinda thing makes me sick to my stomach.

I'd think that if we as a species decided that we needed to reduce population, would could just have people volunteer to have 1 child per couple, and promote adoption more.

So is obesity worldwide...through infertility and premature mortality, among other things.

Disease and warfare have the biggest impact on populations.

Isn't this just evolution, or Darwinism in action? In other words, removing all empathy and emotions aside, is this not just the natural order of things. The life cycle if you will. Famines happen, natural disasters occur, living things move around. On a human level, yes there are other inputs and stimuli that may contribute to disaster etc too. War, politics, economics etc..

Whether AIDS, cancer, small pox, bubonic plague, influenza, whatever, there will always be something that "culls" the human herds just like diseases that affect the flora and fauna of our planet.

Hm.... The largest expansion of population in the history of history was accompanied by the largest expansion of the quality of life, life expectancy, innovation, and economic progress in the history of history.

EVERYONE PANIC!

Ancient Greece?

No stupid, it's Manbearpig.

No Will, I think he means the Baby Boomers, LOL.

I mean the 20th Century.

Confusing cause and effect is a fallacy. The population boom didn't cause the "largest expansion of the quality of life, life expectancy, innovation, and economic progress". Those things made a population boom possible.

This is a good point, but let's not leave out one significant aspect of evolutionary theory: the survival of the fittest. In our case, the fitness we will require is our ability to adapt to a changing environment within the backdrop of our sometimes disruptive activities. Human innovation as far back as the advent of agriculture is something without which we would not be where we are today. There are other innovations coming down the pipeline that will increase our evolutionary fitness—that is if we can overcome the bad things within nature and within ourselves.

Will's right; this is a fallacy. But you bring up an interesting point, nonetheless. As I've mentioned above, human innovation is a factor that is crucial to this issue. Human expansion should be coupled with innovation that allows us to program sustainability into our existence. In order for us to thrive (I would argue that we aren't exactly thriving at the moment), we will need to live in such a way that avoids compromising our "evolutionary fitness" within the world.