I find it interesting how the preponderance of readers of this blog want information about climate change. Is the earth going to warm another fraction of a degree in the next century? Will polar bears drown? Will Canada have palm trees? Will we forget how to make insecticides and be overrun by mosquitoes? Will Central Park become Central Sea?
Given the dramatic predictions of doom from those who really just want to push environmental, population control, or energy agendas, it is understandable.However, as I pointed out in the past, a singular focus on one aspect of life has a certainty of sub-optimizing all other important aspects. When push comes to shove, we can only hope that fear is replaced by reason... even if just partially.
Regardless of how romantic the "natural" past may sound, the reality is that today's economies support magnitudes more people in a far healthier manner while improving the environment in which they live. The reality is also that as economies improve, birth rates decline and populations stabilize... which means the larger populations continue to enjoy the better life.Too much of what purports to be "enlightened" positions are really special interests who seek to impose their way on others... while blithely oblivious to the possible negative consequences.
Rather than seeking to limit economic improvement, special interests should be focusing on economic growth for areas that have poor economies and high birth rates. The consequences of that would be an improved environment for more of the planet as the evolution of those economies reduces birth rates and increases the efficiencies of those economies.Rather than disruptively forcing technologies that are not ready for "prime time," a more rational approach is to "nudge" economies toward greater efficiencies... not with incentives for use [or disincentives for not using], but incentives for developing and deploying those more efficient technologies.
..