From: owner-eda-thoughts-digest@smoe.org (eda-thoughts-digest) To: eda-thoughts-digest@smoe.org Subject: eda-thoughts-digest V3 #162 Reply-To: eda-thoughts@smoe.org Sender: owner-eda-thoughts-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-eda-thoughts-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk eda-thoughts-digest Tuesday, April 25 2000 Volume 03 : Number 162 * If you ever wish to unsubscribe, send an email to * eda-thoughts-digest-request@smoe.org with ONLY * the word unsubscribe in the body of the email * . * PLEASE :) when you reply to this digest to send a post TO the list, * change the subject to reflect what your post is about. A subject * of Re: eda-thoughts-digest V3 #xxx or the like gives readers no clue * as to what your message is about. Today's Subjects: ----------------- ET: another messy poem [Katherine Alexandra ] Re: ET: Ani, Ani, und Scott ["Scott" ] ET: Re: underpopulation ["rachel" ] ET: that girl from florida [Katherine Alexandra ] Re: ET: creating storieS [DPS8315@aol.com] Re: ET: Re: that pop.org thing of kevs [DPS8315@aol.com] Re: ET: playing god. [DPS8315@aol.com] Re: ET: Re: Re: underpopulation [DPS8315@aol.com] Re: ET: Re: underpopulation [DPS8315@aol.com] ET: Re: [Mango Ara ] ET: another messy poem....college..... [Katherine Alexandra > [Katherine Alexandra Subject: ET: another messy poem I HAVE GROWN...another mess of a "poem" i have grown tierd of weary of my ways. i no longer surprise myself i no longer thrive off of chaos i am growing old, scared and alone. no longer do i run to her and hide in the swingset my feet have gone lazy and my body can no longer push myself off of this gravity. i have grown old, scared, and alone. this family that i once found such a deep meaning in, these people which i once felt comfort with. are no longer with me they have grown old, scared and alone. i am bleeding in with the scenory losing any spark that i had i have become dull worthless numb dramatic nothing but most of all ordinary. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send online invitations with Yahoo! Invites. http://invites.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2000 21:12:04 -0700 (PDT) From: Naomi Subject: ET: dream a little dream, for me wake up & kiss me (remember?), the dream will be over soon (but, why?). so before reality finds us (let's hide) once more, look into my eyes (green for you), remember my face (peering up at you), & hold me in those arms i adore... (i always felt so small) one-last-time. (goodbye) ===== "What is Desire? Desire is... complicated. One person always wants the other person more." -VS __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send online invitations with Yahoo! Invites. http://invites.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2000 00:26:13 -0400 From: "Scott" Subject: Re: ET: Ani, Ani, und Scott <> yes!! they were the support act in raliegh when i saw her too.. they're hilarious!! especially "pussy manifesto," i would've rolled on the floor if i could've moved! oh, and i know what you mean about being able to be knocked over with a feather.. ani, oh god, i was just awesticken by her.. *nobody* could have that effect on me live, ever.. i liken it to a religious experience, i think the best of my life.. there was just a bond there in the crowd and with her.. amazing.. with their nine inch nails little fascist panties tucked inside the heart of every nice girl tori amos // precious things Scott Evans jwfan112@earthlink.net AOL IM - JewelDSL ICQ #63589535 Let Me Fly - A Jewel Fansite http://altern.org/jewellmf ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1999 23:32:45 -0500 From: "rachel" Subject: ET: Re: underpopulation Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2000 20:58:55 -0400 From: Mike Connell Subject: ET: Re: underpopulation Joe wrote: >do you not relalize? the earth isn't >even close to being overpopulated. UN >studies show that the entire world >population could fit quite well >into Texas. and then Mike wrote: > And we'd all be rubbin' our asses together. > My whole family could fit in my bedroom > closet, that does not mean we could survive > in that arrangement. hahahaha.. :o) i must say, i've been quietly lurking throughout this entire debate, but i nominate this as the quote to end all quotes. Brief, reasonable, backed up 'by the facts' (*lol* :)), and LMAO funny. Bravo! might as well just end the debate right now. ;D rachel =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= but i can see that star when she twinkles and she twinkles.. -T.Amos http://blueberry-swirl.org * handmade soaps & gifts =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2000 21:50:13 -0700 (PDT) From: Katherine Alexandra Subject: ET: that girl from florida "that girl from florida" you and i were talking and things got a little messy maybe i said something i shouldn't have but you openned your mouth as well you told me about this girl from florida that you had grown kinda close to she was the sort of girl that made you worry bc her life was a little confusing you said that she pales in comparison to anyone you have ever seen that this girl from florida somehow entered your life and ever since then, things haven't been the same. but you worry bc this girl, she has been changing sometimes she surprises you, you forget that she and sometimes you just don't know why this girl would ever want to be with you. i was quiet. and i then told you about that guy, the one from victoria. all the way in canada, where snow blankets their ground that this guy from b.c., who says eh every so often well he managed to take my heart away when he talked to me about globalization and somehow we have connected, and somehow we have clawed our past stories together, we have tangled up our lives into one, we have started to dream our dreams with each other...and somehow we forgot, in all the late night calls that we never have even met. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send online invitations with Yahoo! Invites. http://invites.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 00:53:19 EDT From: DPS8315@aol.com Subject: Re: ET: creating storieS In a message dated 4/24/00 8:47:30 PM US Eastern Standard Time, tstevens@ican.net writes: > k, but did he start on the sunday or the monday?cuz the jews like resting on > saturday, and i think one of the creation story says it's sunday that we > shouldn't work or whatever, but since genesis is part of the old testament, > is kinda more belonging to the torah and jews than christians (to my limited > knowledge, i think we're more focussed on the new testament, right?), which > day is the truth sabbath? question... how is it that there are so many descrepancies among these inter-related religions? there must not be an omnipotent truth. 'nother question: is there a growing non-denominational-dont-care-to-think-about-god-cause-i-dont-have-time-to-go-t o-church population demo out there? cause I feel like there is... prob cause atheism (as illogical as its extremist predescor) is more acceptable.. just curious ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 00:53:17 EDT From: DPS8315@aol.com Subject: Re: ET: Re: that pop.org thing of kevs In a message dated 4/24/00 9:04:37 AM US Eastern Standard Time, kbpease@hotmail.com writes: > Strangely enough, an > _exact_ copy of what Joe posted appears there; the part he posted _happens_ > > to be word-for-word the same as the "Background" portion of the report, > which is actually the text of a Congressional Briefing prepared & delivered > to a congressional committee. i just wanted to jump out all over this one.. and add my own little story of course there's a guy in one of my..well, in a study hall class who, in another class, tried to pass off a poem about love, directly copied from Corinthians I, save the last 4 lines, and was caught. we all laughed at him, and he laughed at him, and the teacher laughed at him because it was funny&ridiculous and he never told anyone, "I wrote this", even though he presented it that way.. of course, that was an assign in a low level hs eng course, and this is a bona fide list of intelligent discussion, and in my book, not only do you suck, you should be banned. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 00:53:18 EDT From: DPS8315@aol.com Subject: Re: ET: playing god. In a message dated 4/24/00 4:45:48 PM US Eastern Standard Time, cymbaline76@hotmail.com writes: > Science is FUCKED UP!!!! I don't want to be cloned! I don't want to live to > be really OLD! I don't want to go to mars! Why can't we just accept the way > God and nature intended tings, and stop trying to play god?! Because thats > what we're doing in the world. We're playing god with the way the world is > going to be. here is a perfect example of what the christian church did to many thousands, pray millions of minds across europe and beyond for centuries. it is terrible to think that this sort of illogical, impractical, nonsensical thought has not, by evolutionary processes, been wiped off the face of the earth. I suppose that some of us just never made it far enough in school to learn about anything scientific that managed to revolutionize the way we think about our lives and our futures.. in our culture, we look to the future with hope&aspirations and to say, for one second that it isn't a direct result of science&technoligy that we have grown to become the greatest nation in the history of mankind, would not only be inaccurate but ludicrious. science has carried us this far, despite the efforts of the christian (esp r.c.) church to suppress the scientific movements of the last 3 centuries. onward, through the night, through the dark night which suppresses us, into the glorious rising that is our own destiny. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 00:54:47 EDT From: DPS8315@aol.com Subject: Re: ET: Re: Re: underpopulation In a message dated 4/24/00 10:21:48 PM US Eastern Standard Time, kbpease@concentric.net writes: > Interesting argument. Any facts to back it up? What effect does > abortion have on a nation's birth rate? I'd certainly be interested in > seeing any facts you have. For instance, did America's birth rate drop > drastically after the Roe v Wade decision? I'd think it didn't, but I'd > certainly like to hear any factual information you might have on the topic. does anyone else simply love this man? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 01:17:31 EDT From: DPS8315@aol.com Subject: Re: ET: Re: underpopulation In a message dated 4/24/00 8:08:57 PM US Eastern Standard Time, RedWoodenBeads@aol.com writes: > The real problem is abortion. If we're going to kill children while they're > residing in their mother's womb because they are inconveniant, then why not > kill them when they are newborns that keep us amake at night or when they're > mischevous five year old? Or why not wrip them out of their family's home at > night and send them back to opressive countries? Get my point? I would like to chime in here and ask a quick question about everyone's position on condoms. A while back, we passed the 10th Anniversary of Rowe v Wade and 60 minutes did this whole big wonderful update on abortion.. which my father and I sat on the couch watching.. of course, the presentation was hardly "propagandous" as someone's post defined it, it clearly outlined both sides of the argument.. the anti-abortionists seemed a bit extreme, and they prompted the following response from my father, "well I suppose they're going to want to outlaw jimmy wearin caps next, cause you know those are just about chilluns" of course, that argument was a bit illogical, given that the anit-abortionists say it isn't a child until fertilization.. but for anyone who took whatever class they teach you about that stuff... does anyone rem if it's a split second between sperm egg, and sperm&egg=child, or if it's like one one millionth of a second between the two, cause I really don't remember.. 'sides, babies aren't just inconvenient..they're expensive too. well, so, yeah I guess they are inconvenient.. so are 5 yr olds.. maybe joe's right, maybe we should just ship them off.. maybe we should ship all annoying and inconvenient people off to those underpopulated countries where everyone is either killing themselves or killing everyone else.. i'm beginning to like this as an elimination factor.. sort of a sado-utopian-hitler-society..mine would be one of those.. whatever-cracies where the smart people rule how ironic I can't think of the name.. lol wait wait, idiocricy.. no, that cant be it.... theocracy.. i dont think that one is write ether kann ne1 hell-p ne owt? - -James ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2000 22:34:11 -0700 From: Mango Ara Subject: ET: Re: ok, everyone can chill now. i'm sorry. i'm really not intending to kill discussion, it's just that i'm in my peace mode now. because i am really not okay right now. one of my best friends cut herself again. she was my primary motivation for stopping. and now there just isn't any hope anymore. what is there to strive for? she promised, i promised, she cut, i haven't. but now i don't care if i do. anyway. stay safe and sleep well. samara ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 13:00:13 -0700 (PDT) From: Katherine Alexandra Subject: ET: another messy poem....college..... GRACEFULLY LETTING A TERM PAPER DIE eastern time zone falling down prices dropping people running, urgent, fast, afraid no longer typing, waiting citing all the sources worried eyes, angry ego expectations...gone forgotten in the night of truth and reality. panic, fear, boxed up little highlighters with an assortment of colors interviews that gain no insight but make the heart pound with the dial tone. nothing on the screen 2 days. 48 hrs. falling to pieces all your fault, my fault giving up, throwing hands in the air why try? why put in everything to only recieve nothing. wanting to be anywhere but here __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send online invitations with Yahoo! Invites. http://invites.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 13:10:24 -0700 (PDT) From: Katherine Alexandra Subject: ET: another messy poem <> NOT WORTH A TITLE. here it is right infront of me i have been given everything from a that pink bicycle with the basket infront to mother's charm middle class bitch and i am sitting here, complaining that somehow, things are unfair but there is dinner on the table waiting lets all get together, all us anorexics and lets pick at the food, pretend it's not there but that's how i feel loss of control, searching for some meaning through empty beer bottles and european men left empty again searching somehow i think this time i will win driving cross country, drinking slurpees been given all of daddy's love but i wanna go far from here no longer finding solace from the east wanting out....wanting out...wanting out family friends that lie and sisters wrapped up in new identities i want some help. toe nails painted red, perhaps i too can be madonna make his eyebrows rise lost inside of wal-mart rolling back the prices stuck in the toy aisle innocense left me, and you, and him why do you pretend, that we hold something pure? spinning around in circles with things to get done little black books filled with john does planners with good intentions in january but forgotten in april marking off the days, waiting for something this is it: a sore throat a worried mother, mid life crisis father pregnant sister, alcholic brother... this is what we have turned into who would have thought we tried so hard to be perfect. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send online invitations with Yahoo! Invites. http://invites.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 17:27:36 -0500 From: zerocool@sunlink.net (Niki) Subject: ET: abortion... anyone see that pic?? I'm sure you've all seen the new collector's issue of Life on the newsstands... If any of you bought a copy or flipped through it you would have seen the picture of doctors doing surgery on a fetus. While they were doing the surgery the fetus reached through the opening where the doctor was working...the doctor grabbed his hand and put it back inside... In the picture you see the child's arm coming out of the opening.. There was an article in the paper the other day about how this is starting a new battle against abortion... Seeing how a fetus can do things like that...stuff we didn't know they could do... It puts a picture to all the fetuses killed by abortion... Whatcha guys think about that? And you should really go buy that magazine because there are a lot of interesting pics in there...besides this one. Nik ------------------------------ Date: 25 Apr 00 17:53:33 EDT From: genben@usa.net Subject: ET: another overpopulation article Here is my article in retort to Joe's idea of overpopulation. It is an excerpt from "The Population Explosion" by Paul & Anne Ehrlich. A great book, if any of you ever want to read it in its entirety. Also, this and a few other interesting articles on this topic are available at www.disinfo.com if you use 'overpopulation' as a search topic. - -ben Having considered some of the ways that humanity is destroying its inheritance, we can look more closely at the concept of "overpopulation." All too often, overpopulation is thought of simply as crowding: too many people in a given area, too high a population density. For instance, the deputy editor in chief of Forbes magazine pointed out recently, in connection with a plea for more population growth in the United States: "If all the people from China and India lived in the continental U.S. (excluding Alaska), this country would still have a smaller population density than England, Holland, or Belgium." *31 The appropriate response is "So what?" Density is generally irrelevant to questions of overpopulation. For instance, if brute density were the criterion, one would have to conclude that Africa is "underpopulated," because it has only 55 people per square mile, while Europe (excluding the USSR) has 261 and Japan 857. *32 A more sophisticated measure would take into consideration the amount of Africa not covered by desert or "impenetrable" forest. *33 This more habitable portion is just a little over half the continent's area, giving an effective population density of 117 per square mile. That's still only about a fifth of that in the United Kingdom. Even by 2020, Africa's effective density is projected to grow to only about that of France today (266), and few people would consider France excessively crowded or overpopulated. When people think of crowded countries, they usually contemplate places like the Netherlands (1,031 per square mile), Taiwan (1,604), or Hong Kong (14,218). Even those don't necessarily signal overpopulation—after all, the Dutch seem to be thriving, and doesn't Hong Kong have a booming economy and fancy hotels? In short, if density were the standard of overpopulation, few nations (and certainly not Earth itself) would be likely to be considered overpopulated in the near future. The error, we repeat, lies in trying to define overpopulation in terms of density; it has long been recognized that density per se means very little. *34 The key to understanding overpopulation is not population density but the numbers of people in an area relative to its resources and the capacity of the environment to sustain human activities; that is, to the area's carrying capacity. When is an area overpopulated? When its population can't be maintained without rapidly depleting nonrenewable resources (or converting renewable resources into nonrenewable ones) and without degrading the capacity of the environment to support the population. In short, if the long-term carrying capacity of an area is clearly being degraded by its current human occupants, that area is overpopulated. *35 By this standard, the entire planet and virtually every nation is already vastly overpopulated. Africa is overpopulated now because, among other indications, its soils and forests are rapidly being depleted—and that implies that its carrying capacity for human beings will be lower in the future than it is now. The United States is overpopulated because it is depleting its soil and water resources and contributing mightily to the destruction of global environmental systems. Europe, Japan, the Soviet Union, and other rich nations are overpopulated because of their massive contributions to the carbon dioxide buildup in the atmosphere, among many other reasons. Almost all the rich nations are overpopulated because they are rapidly drawing down stocks of resources around the world. They don't live solely on the land in their own nations. Like the profligate son of our earlier analogy, they are spending their capital with no thought for the future. It is especially ironic that Forbes considered the Netherlands not to be overpopulated. This is such a common error that it has been known for two decades as the "Netherlands Fallacy." *36 The Netherlands can support 1,031 people per square mile only because the rest of the world does not. In 1984-86, the Netherlands imported almost 4 million tons of cereals, 130,000 tons of oils, and 480,000 tons of pulses (peas, beans, lentils). It took some of these relatively inexpensive imports and used them to boost their production of expensive exports—330,000 tons of milk and 1.2 million tons of meat. The-Netherlands also extracted about a half-million tons of fishes from the sea during this period, and imported more in the form of fish meal. *37 The Netherlands is also a major importer of minerals, bringing in virtually all the iron, antimony, bauxite, copper, tin, etc., that it requires. Most of its fresh water is "imported" from upstream nations via the Rhine River. The Dutch built their wealth using imported energy. Then, in the 1970s, the discovery of a large gas field in the northern part of the nation allowed the Netherlands temporarily to export as gas roughly the equivalent in energy of the petroleum it continued to import. But when the gas fields (which represent about twenty years' worth of Dutch energy consumption at current rates) are exhausted, Holland will once again depend heavily on the rest of the world for fossil fuels or uranium. *38 In short, the people of the Netherlands didn't build their prosperity on the bounty of the Netherlands, and are not living on it now. Before World War II, they drew raw materials from their colonies; today they still depend on the resources of much of the world. Saying that the Netherlands is thriving with a density of 1,031 people per square mile simply ignores that those 1,031 Dutch people far exceed the carrying capacity of that square mile. This "carrying-capacity" definition of overpopulation is the one used in this book. *39 It is important to understand that under this definition a condition of overpopulation might be corrected with no change in the number of people. For instance, the impact of today's 665 million Africans on their resources and environment theoretically might be reduced to the point where the continent would no longer be overpopulated. To see whether this would be possible, population growth would have to be stopped, appropriate assistance given to peasant farmers, and certain other important reforms instituted. Similarly, dramatic changes in American lifestyle might suffice to end overpopulation in the United States without a large population reduction. But, for now and the foreseeable future, Africa and the United States will remain overpopulated—and will probably become even more so. To say they are not because, if people changed their ways, overpopulation might be eliminated is simply wrong—overpopulation is defined by the animals that occupy the turf, behaving as they naturally behave, not by a hypothetical group that might be substituted for them. [p.p. 37-40, Paul and Anne Ehrlich, THE POPULATION EXPLOSION; Simon and Schuster, 1990. Having considered some of the ways that humanity is destroying its inheritance, we can look more closely at the concept of "overpopulation." All too often, overpopulation is thought of simply as crowding: too many people in a given area, too high a population density. For instance, the deputy editor in chief of Forbes magazine pointed out recently, in connection with a plea for more population growth in the United States: "If all the people from China and India lived in the continental U.S. (excluding Alaska), this country would still have a smaller population density than England, Holland, or Belgium." *31 The appropriate response is "So what?" Density is generally irrelevant to questions of overpopulation. For instance, if brute density were the criterion, one would have to conclude that Africa is "underpopulated," because it has only 55 people per square mile, while Europe (excluding the USSR) has 261 and Japan 857. *32 A more sophisticated measure would take into consideration the amount of Africa not covered by desert or "impenetrable" forest. *33 This more habitable portion is just a little over half the continent's area, giving an effective population density of 117 per square mile. That's still only about a fifth of that in the United Kingdom. Even by 2020, Africa's effective density is projected to grow to only about that of France today (266), and few people would consider France excessively crowded or overpopulated. When people think of crowded countries, they usually contemplate places like the Netherlands (1,031 per square mile), Taiwan (1,604), or Hong Kong (14,218). Even those don't necessarily signal overpopulation—after all, the Dutch seem to be thriving, and doesn't Hong Kong have a booming economy and fancy hotels? In short, if density were the standard of overpopulation, few nations (and certainly not Earth itself) would be likely to be considered overpopulated in the near future. The error, we repeat, lies in trying to define overpopulation in terms of density; it has long been recognized that density per se means very little. *34 The key to understanding overpopulation is not population density but the numbers of people in an area relative to its resources and the capacity of the environment to sustain human activities; that is, to the area's carrying capacity. When is an area overpopulated? When its population can't be maintained without rapidly depleting nonrenewable resources (or converting renewable resources into nonrenewable ones) and without degrading the capacity of the environment to support the population. In short, if the long-term carrying capacity of an area is clearly being degraded by its current human occupants, that area is overpopulated. *35 By this standard, the entire planet and virtually every nation is already vastly overpopulated. Africa is overpopulated now because, among other indications, its soils and forests are rapidly being depleted—and that implies that its carrying capacity for human beings will be lower in the future than it is now. The United States is overpopulated because it is depleting its soil and water resources and contributing mightily to the destruction of global environmental systems. Europe, Japan, the Soviet Union, and other rich nations are overpopulated because of their massive contributions to the carbon dioxide buildup in the atmosphere, among many other reasons. Almost all the rich nations are overpopulated because they are rapidly drawing down stocks of resources around the world. They don't live solely on the land in their own nations. Like the profligate son of our earlier analogy, they are spending their capital with no thought for the future. It is especially ironic that Forbes considered the Netherlands not to be overpopulated. This is such a common error that it has been known for two decades as the "Netherlands Fallacy." *36 The Netherlands can support 1,031 people per square mile only because the rest of the world does not. In 1984-86, the Netherlands imported almost 4 million tons of cereals, 130,000 tons of oils, and 480,000 tons of pulses (peas, beans, lentils). It took some of these relatively inexpensive imports and used them to boost their production of expensive exports—330,000 tons of milk and 1.2 million tons of meat. The-Netherlands also extracted about a half-million tons of fishes from the sea during this period, and imported more in the form of fish meal. *37 The Netherlands is also a major importer of minerals, bringing in virtually all the iron, antimony, bauxite, copper, tin, etc., that it requires. Most of its fresh water is "imported" from upstream nations via the Rhine River. The Dutch built their wealth using imported energy. Then, in the 1970s, the discovery of a large gas field in the northern part of the nation allowed the Netherlands temporarily to export as gas roughly the equivalent in energy of the petroleum it continued to import. But when the gas fields (which represent about twenty years' worth of Dutch energy consumption at current rates) are exhausted, Holland will once again depend heavily on the rest of the world for fossil fuels or uranium. *38 In short, the people of the Netherlands didn't build their prosperity on the bounty of the Netherlands, and are not living on it now. Before World War II, they drew raw materials from their colonies; today they still depend on the resources of much of the world. Saying that the Netherlands is thriving with a density of 1,031 people per square mile simply ignores that those 1,031 Dutch people far exceed the carrying capacity of that square mile. This "carrying-capacity" definition of overpopulation is the one used in this book. *39 It is important to understand that under this definition a condition of overpopulation might be corrected with no change in the number of people. For instance, the impact of today's 665 million Africans on their resources and environment theoretically might be reduced to the point where the continent would no longer be overpopulated. To see whether this would be possible, population growth would have to be stopped, appropriate assistance given to peasant farmers, and certain other important reforms instituted. Similarly, dramatic changes in American lifestyle might suffice to end overpopulation in the United States without a large population reduction. But, for now and the foreseeable future, Africa and the United States will remain overpopulated—and will probably become even more so. To say they are not because, if people changed their ways, overpopulation might be eliminated is simply wrong—overpopulation is defined by the animals that occupy the turf, behaving as they naturally behave, not by a hypothetical group that might be substituted for them. [p.p. 37-40, Paul and Anne Ehrlich, THE POPULATION EXPLOSION; Simon and Schuster, 1990.] ____________________________________________________________________ Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1 ------------------------------ End of eda-thoughts-digest V3 #162 **********************************