Ok, so I broke my promise, but... this is too much.. And it proves exactly my points. The scarcity theorists are Malenthusiasts at the bone, concerned about nothing so much as the old in and out, who gets to reproduce and who gets cut.
There's nothing good or lucky if "the scare-mongers are correct." For one, you're not going to have anything to eat, unless you happen to have a farm, and the weapons to protect it. Secondly, even if you do, you won't be able to maintain the acreage. Dwindling output is the result of agricultural pseudo self-sufficiency. That is the truth of history. You won't be able to go anywhere-- no conferences, no seminars, no book tours-- petroleum supports 99% of the world's commercial transportation. Shift to coal? That would be the least of it. Every bit of biomass-- trees, bushes, dried grasses would be burnt. It would make Pinatubo look like morning fog. Solve the population pressure? Maybe. Like the plague solves overcrowding. Gee now that's a lucky day, isn't it? But you were both only kidding, right? dms From: "paul phillips" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, April 11, 2004 2:51 PM Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Mark Jones Was Right Yes, Jim, although if as some are suggesting we shift from oil to coal, the problem will get worse, not better. Furthermore, it does nothing to solve the population pressure on other resources, in particular water. Paul Devine, James wrote: >it may be good luck if the scare-mongers are correct that we're going to run out of oil soon, since that would limit the burning of hydrocarbons and moderate the tendency toward global warmng. -- Jim D. > > >
