| > The shortage of resource because of over-population is an old theory, but we've seen no evidence to it yet. Malthus only has to be right once for you to see the shortage. E.g. you can always pull water out of the well, until you can't. If you can say that with a straight face and pretend it's an argument, then I can say "you can't predict that it will never be a problem as long as humanity exists" and be just as right. The only argument here is for how we will deal with the shortage - violently or by gradually reducing the birth rates. > Population growth eventually slows down when the mortality rate decreases. Population numbers themselves are meaningless without estimates of resource consumption. Nor is necessarily having a high population at the level of "not starving" level of prosperity something that we should be striving towards. > The population growth rate is expected to begin slowing Yes, it's already slowing, but see above for why it's meaningless that it is. > Colorful animations help people understand a point, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're wrong. It also doesn't necessarily mean they tell the whole picture, the correct picture or contain any relevant information whatsoever. |