Re: How China is Dumping the Dollar

<hal@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:47504354.75511609@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 11:33:32 -0500, "David L. Burkhead"
<dburkhead@xxxxxxx> wrote:



<hal@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:47503062.70661015@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

http://www.dieoff.com/

Yeah, yeah, these folks and their ilk have been making their claims
of
gloom and doom--often with redictions of imminent disaster, for literally
decades now.

never studied any ecology now have you? So take an exponentially
growing population of anything you want and put it in a constrained
environment, and guess what happens?

False assumption one: Populations continue to grow exponentially.

Historically this has not been true. That is why imminent doom that
they keep predicting _consistently_ fails to materialize.

If you'd actually studied ecology as a science, instead of as a
political position, you'd know that.

Touble is their "models" are based on so many hidden and outright
false
assumptions as to be nothing more than fantasy that says nothing more
than
the biases of the people presenting them.

yea, like putting an exponentially growing population of anything you
want in a constrained environment and being concerned about what
happens when the population exceeds the carrying capacity of the
environment. Really f'in complicate rocket science that is.

Since the "science" is based on contrary to fact assumptions, it is
actually fantasy.

You might try getting hold of a copy of Dr. Jerry Pournelle's article
"Survival with Style" and related.

already got that part covered.

Put simply, I don't believe you.

The assumptions of folk like the Club of
Rome, Erliche (author of "The Population Bomb") and others are pretty
thoroughly ripped apart.

yea right. Things like "carrying capacity" gets dismissed with
unrealistic assumptions like technology will always save us because it
has a few times in the past.

Case in point: you either didn't read it or didn't understand it.

What's _your_ reason why these guys are consistently wrong when they
make a prediction which can actually be checked?

Just because they present some graphs and make some impassioned
arguments doesn't mean that they know what they're talking about.

so forget biological organisms since you seem to have trouble grasping
ecology, what happens when your exponential growth curve bypasses your
Y axis constraint?

Since reality has a remarkable dearth of exponential growth curves
continuing for extended period, the question is irrelevant.

--
David L. Burkhead "Dum Vivimus Vivamus"
mailto:dburkhead@xxxxxxx "While we live, let us live."
My webcomic Cold Servings
http://www.coldservings.com -- Back from hiatus!
Updates Wednesdays



.