Population, Sustainability, and Malthus: Crash Course World History 215
video description
Date: 2022-04-04
Related videos
Comments and reviews: 10
Best
I think the reason that Malthus is popular is that it reduces poor individuals to a concept. The poor and the sick are always frightening because if we recognize them as people then we have to admit that we are only one mishap away from being in their shoes. If instead we can say that the Irish are just part of a wave of misery that should not be ameliorated then we are off the hook.
reply
I think the reason that Malthus is popular is that it reduces poor individuals to a concept. The poor and the sick are always frightening because if we recognize them as people then we have to admit that we are only one mishap away from being in their shoes. If instead we can say that the Irish are just part of a wave of misery that should not be ameliorated then we are off the hook.
reply
by
humans will die off due to disease and pollution based illnesses before they starve.
it's amazing to me that no one talks about the amount of toxic waste left behind by 7 billion people every day.
it shouldn't be about how many humans can fit on earth's surface, it should be about how much total human destruction earth can put up with.
reply
humans will die off due to disease and pollution based illnesses before they starve.
it's amazing to me that no one talks about the amount of toxic waste left behind by 7 billion people every day.
it shouldn't be about how many humans can fit on earth's surface, it should be about how much total human destruction earth can put up with.
reply
wmdbassplayer
A little disappointed hearing you use -theory- as a synonym for hypothesis. It only adds to the confusion of people who don't understand the difference between a scientific theory and a hypothesis, or lend some implied legitimacy to those who deny proven science by saying -it's just a theory. -
reply
A little disappointed hearing you use -theory- as a synonym for hypothesis. It only adds to the confusion of people who don't understand the difference between a scientific theory and a hypothesis, or lend some implied legitimacy to those who deny proven science by saying -it's just a theory. -
reply
life42theuniverse
I think that what he was trying to say is that with whatever innovation may arise that it can only have a scaling effect on the amount of food available for consumption while population can increase as a function of its size. The social and ethical issues is a whole other bag of worms.
reply
I think that what he was trying to say is that with whatever innovation may arise that it can only have a scaling effect on the amount of food available for consumption while population can increase as a function of its size. The social and ethical issues is a whole other bag of worms.
reply
Matthew
Its a simple solution really. The Universe is Finite and its resources are finite. kill half the population, its a small price to pay for salvation, the children will have full bellies and see nothing but clear skies.
P. S. Before i saw this i was watching Infinity war soooooooooo ITS A SIGN
reply
Its a simple solution really. The Universe is Finite and its resources are finite. kill half the population, its a small price to pay for salvation, the children will have full bellies and see nothing but clear skies.
P. S. Before i saw this i was watching Infinity war soooooooooo ITS A SIGN
reply
raqFarha
check out jevons paradox and the role of the haber bosch process in enabling the population boom. Also, see ecological overshoot and the forecasts for how long this increased production can be sustained in light of the resulting soil degradation.
reply
check out jevons paradox and the role of the haber bosch process in enabling the population boom. Also, see ecological overshoot and the forecasts for how long this increased production can be sustained in light of the resulting soil degradation.
reply
---
Malthus is more like a mathematical theory. Given 1. Population grows exp 2. Resources grow linear, Then People must die. Therefore Malthus is totally correct. It's just that the prerequisites of his theory are not satisfied yet.
reply
Malthus is more like a mathematical theory. Given 1. Population grows exp 2. Resources grow linear, Then People must die. Therefore Malthus is totally correct. It's just that the prerequisites of his theory are not satisfied yet.
reply
aoi
the future holds a quarter of the human population declining due to a virus out-break
i sence violence hunger and pain(not actully hunger i just said that to make it seem frightning)
reply
the future holds a quarter of the human population declining due to a virus out-break
i sence violence hunger and pain(not actully hunger i just said that to make it seem frightning)
reply
gonzalo
the problem is: our ability to grow food only improves linearly, while the population is growing exponentialy, if you know maths you'll see that a big starving is inevitable
reply
the problem is: our ability to grow food only improves linearly, while the population is growing exponentialy, if you know maths you'll see that a big starving is inevitable
reply
Edmondo
Mr. Malthus was wrong underestimating tech and everything, but he also didn't know that Bill Gates & friends come into the equation to mitigate the gap of his mistakes.
reply
Mr. Malthus was wrong underestimating tech and everything, but he also didn't know that Bill Gates & friends come into the equation to mitigate the gap of his mistakes.
reply
Add a review, comment
Other channel videos
