2007-03-29 07:02:35 · 8 answers · asked by elnoranesbitt@sbcglobal.net 1 in Environment
I don't think that the Earth is at capacity yet, but it is getting close to the capacity that it can support with the current use of resources. Human's are very good at inventing technology to stay alive. Air, food, and water obviously are the most important resources, but energy sources are also important. Sun and wind will probably come into use more to generate energy.
2007-03-29 12:45:12 · answer #1 · answered by duediligencebeforeinvesting 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think so, even as we get by (most of us), there are people starving to death every day..so we obviously are having difficulty. Our non-renewable resources will be gone someday..so unless we can provide substitutes that are renewable we're in for a bit of a crash someday. The use of renewable resources gives us more hope..but even they can be permanently damaged through intensive or reckless use.
These are the ideas of Thomas Malthus (Malthusian). Population would grow until a crash was inevitable. He did not take into account birth control methods which came available later. Hopefully our efforts to control will avoid a global crisis. We can stretch and conserve and make things go a little farther..but only to a point. Also if we must stretch our resources..it might mean a new (lower) standard of living for many, if we fairly distribute the worlds resources needed for survival.
The flip side of the Malthusians are those who believe science can provide all the answers. New strains of more productive crops, fertilizers, ...These things can help..but we have made as many mistakes as we have advances. But what happens if an answer comes too late? What happens if we don't implement it correctly?, Permanant damage to resources and a reduction of the carrying capacity..how much margin of error do we have.
The big problem is that even if we havent' reached it (and who knows..we might have reached it) we are still growing. We may have lowered growth rates..but we're still growing as a world population. I'm an overly cautious person in every aspect...but I say Yes, we have reached it.
2007-03-29 08:45:10 · answer #2 · answered by Jennifer B 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. If it had, there could be no inhabitants growth. The earth's wearing potential for people has been expected at everywhere from 12-20 billion human beings. the form of sustainable technologies to improve crop yields ought to improve this quantity. on the different hand, international climate substitute - from the two organic or anthropogenic motives - ought to reason it to drop severely.
2016-11-24 21:41:23 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No we have not. The current estimates on the maximum human population that the Earth can support is 20 billion, but it is believe that the use of nano technology could increase that to 200 billion. It is all about using resources correctly.
2007-03-29 08:07:49 · answer #4 · answered by Cap10 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Don't worry about it the Moslem's want a holey war . I hate the Idea that is one of the ways to get population growth under control.
2007-03-29 08:07:47 · answer #5 · answered by JOHNNIE B 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If it had, the population would not still be growing.
2007-03-29 07:51:29 · answer #6 · answered by campbelp2002 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Not even close. Why would you think it has?
2007-03-29 10:45:34 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes. Please jump off.
2007-03-29 07:10:49 · answer #8 · answered by TC 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋