fossilesque @ fossilesque @mander.xyz


---

Read more

Posts

10,794

Comments

4,582

Joined

3 yr. ago

Moderating

---

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9315181/

Abstract:

As anthropogenic climate change threatens human existence on Earth, historians have begun to explore the scientific antecedents of environmental Malthusianism, the idea that human population growth is a major driver of ecosystem degradation and that environmental protection requires a reduction in human numbers. These accounts, however, neglect the antagonistic relationship between environmental Malthusianism and demography, thereby creating an illusion of scientific consensus. This article details the entwined histories of environmental Malthusianism and demography, revealing points of disagreement – initially over methods of analyzing and predicting population growth and later over the role of population growth in ecosystem degradation – and moments of strategic collaboration that benefited both groups of scientists. It contends that the image of scientific consensus in existing histories has lent support to ongoing calls for population control, detracting attention from more proximate causes of environmental devastation, such as polluting modes of production, extractive business practices and government subsidies for fossil fuel development.

Abridged conclusion:

Since the end of World War II, environmental Malthusians have pointed to ecosystem degradation as supposedly obvious evidence that the Earth is already overpopulated and have called for population control as an alternative to environmental regulation and economic redistribution. Despite their scientific opposition, demographers collaborated with environmental Malthusians just long enough in the 1950s and 1960s to create a global population movement that advanced the agendas of both groups. The harms caused by that movement – both by governments that explicitly limited childbearing, such as China, and by supposedly voluntary programs that nonetheless imposed contraception where it was not desired – have been well documented (Connelly, 2008; Greenhalgh, 2008; Hartmann, 1995). However, even the most critical histories of the population control movement largely fail to recognize the illusory nature of the scientific consensus that claimed to undergird it.

https://cora.ucc.ie/server/api/core/bitstreams/dc72e910-2a89-440e-a643-cbb94d323766/content

I've also worked at a lot of museums. Some things are not quite so simple.

I think he should have been aggressively bullied more.

Ya got it. :)

I prefer this version. Also, as someone quite close to the field, there's an awful lot of misinformation in this thread. Tread carefully, readers.

https://www.colorado.edu/today/2024/10/09/curiosity-why-does-playing-dirt-feel-so-good

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

The correct answer is, could I get you something else instead? Homies don't let homies dehydrate.

Vasa (previously Wasa) (Swedish pronunciation: [²vɑːsa] ⓘ) is a Swedish warship built between 1626 and 1628. The ship sank after sailing roughly 1,300 m (1,400 yd) into her maiden voyage on 10 August 1628.

[...]

The ship was built on the orders of the King of Sweden Gustavus Adolphus as part of the military expansion he initiated in a war with Poland-Lithuania (1621–1629). It was constructed at the navy yard in Stockholm under a contract with private entrepreneurs in 1626–1627 and armed primarily with bronze cannons cast in Stockholm specifically for the ship. Richly decorated as a symbol of the king's ambitions for Sweden and himself, upon completion she was one of the most powerfully armed vessels in the world. However, Vasa was dangerously unstable, with too much weight in the upper structure of the hull. Despite this lack of stability, she was ordered to sea and sank only a few minutes after encountering a wind stronger than a breeze.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasa_(ship)

fuktig mejmej

This is all I can think about.

Back to LinkedIn with you!

Use a vpn.

2026 needs more wizard posting

mfw I look at human impacts on the environment

You can't sit with us.

Yeah! We use Morrison's delivery too which is different from Deliveroo (EU Doordash). I try to prioritise that. :)

🧙‍♂️

Once or twice per week, give or take, mostly for small supplemental grocery orders. I have a shop that's close but sometimes I just can't.

Two semi disabled folks here, the services are a godsend but I always tip. People don't tip here, our last rider said we were the first tip in 3 days. :(

3! This is my default garlic.

Follow your leader. :)