This guy repeatedly says more food
means more people. That's not true ("The Essence of
Anthropology" 2nd Ed, pg. 106). He says that more food = more
people, and says this is bad for the planet. THEN he advocates much
more productive ways of growing food that require less effort
(methods that I indeed support, and much of his info here is great.
It's his anti-baby bias I resist here) His data on oil production
matching population growth, which he thinks shows that more food
means more people and etc, is bogus. A lot of fertilizer goes on
lawns (earthobservatory.nasa.gov /Features/Lawn/lawn2.php - last
paragraph says there are 3X as much lawn area in the US as there is
irrigated corn!), some oil gets used to make plastics
(www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm ?id=34&t=6), and oil extraction
devastates local food supplies (web search "ogoni food supply"
or better yet "workshop_IPPE_pyagbara. doc" for
starters...) We're making the earth produce LESS, not more. The way
we go about feeding everybody is ridiculous, and the way we
distribute food is unjust (another story on another post, and
pertinent to same "pro-choice" argument). Abortion is NOT
the solution, since babies are not the problem. Corruption and
ignorance in resource management ARE the problem. HOW does reducing
birth-rate solve that problem?. I'll start on how there is enough
food for everyone today, and why people starve anyway another time...
About Me
- Mother Star
- Welcome to my humble abode. Feel free to sit down a while and warm yourself by my fire. I write here mainly to inspire, encourage, perhaps confront, to empower, and to change. If you leave with a lighter step, an answer to a question, really questioning long held ideas that may not be taking you where you need to go, or with a lot of new things to consider, I will have done my job. Please enjoy your stay. With love, ~Mother Star
No comments:
Post a Comment