Technocrat

Chinese Satellite Destroyed in Test Was in Polar Orbit: Junk Ring Spreads

Cassius Rosenthal
Fri Feb 02 12:31:46 -0800 2007
 (in reply to Chinese Satellite Destroyed in Test Was in Polar Orbit: Junk Ring Spreads ) manage
Josh says:
"I think you've presented a disingenuous argument based on unattainable principles."

That's fine, but you are wrong.  Fortunately, it is easier for me to prove you wrong than it is for you to prove whether I'm ingenuous.  (Also, principles aren't really attainable; goals are.)

Josh says:
"Contrary to your assertion, space exploration does compromise a relatively microscopic portion of the budget."

2% is not microscopic.  Have you ever seen a roll of pennies?  2% is one penny.  That's noticeable.  1.68 trillion pennies every year -- that should be very noticeable.  That's more money than even the richest person in the world makes in a given year.  Would you notice if your entire year's paycheck disappeared?  Or would that be microscopic to you?

Josh says:
" 9 billion people consuming energy at the rate we use now enters into the realm of the absurd."

I agree.  Most of the energy now used is wasted.  Your assumption that the only way 9 billion people could be comfortable is if every one of them wasted energy the way a U.S. citizen does  . . . well, that's stupid.  Most U.S. citizens aren't comfortable, even though they do waste several times more energy that people in societies that report much higher levels of personal satisfaction.  You seem to have entirely missed the meaning of the word 'managed.'

Cassius says:
"Wilson and other biologists estimate that Earth has the capacity to support 9 billion people if its resources are managed well."
Josh replies:
"This is either disingenuous or reflects a lack of understanding."

Nope -- neither.  You are just wrong.

In The Creation, E.O.Wilson, Pellegrino Research Professor in Entomology for the Department of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology at Harvard University, Pulitzer Prize-winner and "Darwin's natural heir," states that the planet can support 9 billion people comfortably if the Earth's resources are managed well.

When you have tenure at Harvard and win a Pulitzer for a book on biology, then maybe I'll consider your haphazard pontifications.  Until then, I'm afraid that I'm going to have to take Wilson's evidence over your guesstimates.
Chinese Satellite Destroyed in Test Was in Polar Orbit: Junk Ring Spreads
Josh
Fri Feb 02 13:25:09 -0800 2007
 manage
I purposefully chose energy metrics from nations considered to be extremely frugal and responsible in their energy use. Incidentally, these same countries also hold the least amount of economic disparity. I used metrics from industrialized countries because it's ridiculous to assume that the west will step down to meet your goals.  I believe such an event would be the first in the history of man.

Cassius says:
"When you have tenure at Harvard and win a Pulitzer for a book on biology, then maybe I'll consider your haphazard pontifications.  Until then, I'm afraid that I'm going to have to take Wilson's evidence over your guesstimates."

I see.  Then tenure-track at a substandard public university for trivial contributions in the meaningless science of energy conversion would be not enough for the Cassius Rosenthal? I think Wilson would be wiser than you in choosing his battles. I wonder, with such high standards, why you bother participating in recreational argument to begin with? By the way, you never answered my first question.

I find it wonderful how you manage to treat opponents so poorly in discourse while at the same time manage to chastise them for not advocating global Utopia.
Chinese Satellite Destroyed in Test Was in Polar Orbit: Junk Ring Spreads
Cassius Rosenthal
Fri Feb 02 14:09:12 -0800 2007
 manage
Cassius says:
"When you have tenure at Harvard and win a Pulitzer for a book on biology, then maybe I'll consider your haphazard pontifications.  Until then, I'm afraid that I'm going to have to take Wilson's evidence over your guesstimates."
Josh replies:
"I see.  Then tenure-track at a substandard public university for trivial contributions in the meaningless science of energy conversion would be not enough for the Cassius Rosenthal?"
Pulitzer-prize winning, world-famous biologist, currently on speaking tour addressing the subject of human impact on the biosphere, following a book that he just wrote addressing the human impact on the biosphere.  --- or ----  "Tenure-track substandard public university" scientist in the field of energy conversion.

The question is on the subject of human impact on the biosphere.  Who do you think is more qualified to answer this question?  Hmmm.  Cake or death.  What are the choices again?

Josh says:
"By the way, you never answered my first question."

Which was a personal question, followed by your confession, "After all, I justify my choices on the fact that my principles are purely academic when in fact I really don't care much about anything."  Why should I answer a question that you ask when you simultaneously wave-off the set of possible answers?  Had you seriously asked, I would have been apt to seriously respond.
Chinese Satellite Destroyed in Test Was in Polar Orbit: Junk Ring Spreads
Josh
Fri Feb 02 15:15:14 -0800 2007
 manage
Again, I feel you are being disingenuous (or unbelievably naive) by propping up exaggerated statements with specious evidence. The book is an environmentalist puff peace. Wilson may be a great scientist and a wise man, but this book isn't science. And it is naive to suggest that one man could effectively wrap his arms around the entire issue. There has been legitimate original research that has attempted to place upper bounds on earth's capacity. This book is not found among it.  A few years back some researchers made similar projections at the upper bounds based mainly on the agricultural and distribution limits. I think their work was featured in Nature and I'm sure Wilson has read their results among others. There are other factors to consider that biologists typically are both untrained and unmotivated to address.   Their research certainly does represent a very important step in this regard, but it by no means constitutes the only legitimate estimate. You may have inspired me to reinvest in my earlier investigation, but I am done with this conversation having realized your entire contributions to this thread may have very well come from the back cover of Wilson's essay.
Chinese Satellite Destroyed in Test Was in Polar Orbit: Junk Ring Spreads
Cassius Rosenthal
Sat Feb 03 13:02:50 -0800 2007
 manage
Josh says:
"Again, I feel you are being disingenuous (or unbelievably naive) by propping up exaggerated statements with specious evidence."
E.O.Wilson says [paraphrasing from a talk he gave at Philadelphia's Free Library in October, in answer to this very question]:
9 billion.  9 billion is the population that Earth's biosphere can sustain if we choose to.

I paraphrase based on my notes from his talk.  You may confirm that number in his most recent book, which is not original science only because it is not intended to be original.  It is a compilation of conservative estimates.  Environmentalist puff peace?  You are entitled to your opinion, but you are hardly in a position to dismiss his stance as impossible.  His basis is peer-reviewed science, and he is an acknowledged expert on the subject.  You aren't even in the same field.

Josh says:
" . . . but I am done with this conversation having realized your entire contributions to this thread may have very well come from the back cover of Wilson's essay."

I will gladly offer that I have read every one of Wilson's books published since Consilience, cover-to-cover.

So, again, it is your guesstimate vs Wilson's educated opinion in the field for which Wilson is famous, and has spent the past decades researching.  Hmmm.  I think I'm still going to have to go with Wilson's answer.

Josh's guesstimate  vs   Wilson's expert opinion
Which would you choose?
 

Do you have questions about the site? Write to bruce at perens.com . List of all articles we've ever published. Source Code Developer's Documentation RSS XML Sitemap XML News Sitemap Valid XHTML 1.0 Strict Valid CSS! [Valid RSS]