To: Maurice Winn who wrote (185042 ) 4/12/2006 5:15:34 PM From: neolib Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500 Until the invention of contraception, unrelenting over-population did lead to genocidal war and misery in poverty. Ah, so you do like population control. There is hope yet.Humans are the only ones who choose how many children to have. AFAIK, quite a few of them don't choose. They just reproduce. IIRC, you were lamenting the link between welfare and reproduction a little while ago. You might also be aware that certain social institutions such as the biggest Christian church brings some pressure to bear against family planning, although in the USA many of their members don't pay too much attention.But note that with humans, the number who could live has constantly increased due to amazing technological improvements as well as social, legal, and conceptual redesigns. Humans have also enjoyed a steady improvement in intellect as the dull were filtered out of the gene pool. We are no longer chimps. Over 100,000 years, we have gone from borderline chimps to supersonic geniuses who can learn how to drive cars and change channels using a remote [though working a VCR is still beyond many]. That brainpower improvement process is continuing. The single most important reason is that life became more miserable for the other species on the planet. A fact you utterly don't comprehend. The 6-billion humans have expanded into a virtual vacuum as a result of our intelligence over other species. Life is generally pleasant enough as long as one's group is expanding. Reminds me of the Trek Boers and the Bantus in S. Africa. Both were expanding into a vacuum, until they met. We tend to not pay much attention when the perceived vacuum is inhabited by things different from ourselves. Just a 150 years ago, that difference could be achieved by skin color, or religion, or ethnicity. Still true for many today (ME comes to mind) but now it is more species related.Already human life has increased right up to 80 years or so, because brains are so valuable that they need to last that long and longer to get value out of them. Nature has rewarded brains and longevity because they go hand in hand. It takes decades to learn things and to then have the brain die of old age at 30, when it's still learning flat out, would be really stupid. Nature, not being stupid, figured that out and has been trying to increase human lifespans. So why does Sir Clive's tortoise come to my mind? It would be interesting to plot longevity vs. body mass, and longevity vs. intelligence. Wonder which would correlate better? Nature isn't very bright though, so humans have taken over where nature got to and we are doing the improvements ourselves. Yes, like global warming. If the USA and most of Central & S. America had happen to them what happened to N. Africa coming out of the last major ice age, you might find it a net negative. I find it rather incredible that half the right wing in the USA denies that global warming is happening, and the other half leaps to the conclusion that it will be beneficial. LOL It is a law of nature than increasing numbers increases happiness. I had not heard of that law. I recall various social studies using mice and crowding, which leads to increased rape, cannibalism, and stuff like that. Crime tends to be higher is denser populations, so cities have worse crime than rural areas. So as population increases, per capita crime also increases. So does pollution and many other ills. People with IQ 130 are happier than those with IQ 70. You have a link for that? I'd guess most people with 70 would be happy, they don't know much else. Certainly my dogs are happy creatures, and I doubt they hit 100.Life is just too tough at the dull end. It's more a constant battle. Most crime is at the low end and crime is not a result of a happy state. Most crime happens in high density situations. It must therefore be a result of human happiness, or am I missing something?