Debate 2 – Motion: There are too many people on the planet
Speaking for the motion: Rebecca Hendrix
-There are 6.6 million people currently, and expected to be 9.3 million.
-It was previously believed that increasing the number of people was a positive thing because
productivity also increased.
-Malthus showed that was wrong because eventually food and other resources run out
-Many people use this argument and show a 4.3 fertility rate is too high because 2.1 is stable
-More people take up more room and the land is quickly being covered by human use, such as the
80% of rainforests that have been cleared
-monoculture farming decreases biodiversity and depletes the soil
-as population increased by 80%, land use increased by 300%
-as population increases, pollution also increases
-Water supply will become a huge issue (Hoover Dam will be dry by 2021)
-by 2025 half of the pop will have water shortage
-Energy is finite, it cannot increase with population
-With 104% increase in population there is a 400% increase in energy use
-with a 25 percent increase in population, there is a 60% increase in CO2 emissions
Comments on proposed solutions:
-China’s 1 child idea is too extreme
-increase in fertility corresponds to a decrease in education in females
-Contraception should be made available and encouraged to all people
-small families should get government benefits
-research on sustainable living technologies should continue
Speaking against the motion: Corey Evans
-Limiting factors: water, food, and energy
-we have the technology to provide these to our current population
-the rate of increase is actually decreasing, so it should be sustainable
-inefficient farming causes water shortage, not just a lack of water
-in china and India they must fix their methods (suggestion to use hydroponics)
-suggestion to use desalination of sea water for drinking
-Food
-not an issue of volume, but distribution
-caloric intake per person has increased
-with proper management, population can be fed!
-energy
-hydrologic power will become more effective
-solar and tidal energy sources will be harnessed
-nuclear fission technologies perhaps
Speaking for the motion: Christine Mollineaux
-history proves the point, too much of an increase in population with limited resources has a
negative outcome
-Anasazi people in Chaco Canyon in the pre-Columbian North America
-they were a well developed, complex society with a quickly increasing population
-as they needed to grow more crops they cut more trees down
-but they needed more crops than the rain could provide for, so wars broke out
-now that land is barren and abandon
-Arizona is a parallel in our current situation (because of limited water)
-people can’t just move off the land because there are no places left in the world for them to move
to
-we cant import goods to them because there is no excess in other areas, other people need them for
consumption
-proposed solutions:
-sex ed in undeveloped countries (and contraceptive availability)
-government incentives for small families
-conclusion: population is too high, we should learn from history, and there are programs we can
install to solve this problem
Speaking against the motion: Casey Gosnell
-defined overpopulation as a number of individuals an ecosystem cannot support on it
-as long as we can provide for people we are not overpopulated
-if we ignore higher standards of living (we cant all be millionaires) then everyone can be taken
care of (communism?)
-there are natural regulations that keep our population in check, such as fertility rates and disease
-fertility rates depend on weather the country is developing or not, they are lower in developed ones
-disease is very high in sub-Saharan areas, and it increases with growing populations
-we cannot extrapolate a small scale history (Anasazi) to a global problem today because our
technology is different
-Malthus used incorrect paramaters
-distribution is a problem, not supply—there are more obsess people than malnourished!
-food is available, political will to mobilize it is not there
-new technologies answer food and water demands
-breeder reactor for uranium power can supply humans until sun blows up
-large scale poverty is caused by bad management, not overpopulation
-zimbabwe famine is due to bad farming
-North and South Korea are very similar in landscape, but better management in the south allows
for higher fertility and standard of living
-we should shift our focus from higher standards of living to equalizing everyone on a lower
standard (communism?)
-“The earth is a big place and I don’t think there are too many of us right now” – Casey
Question Session:
Q: Todd, the moderator for the for side: since the fertility rate is decreasing, why not wait and see if
it decreases to a stable rate?
A: Christine: we still need to worry about babies coming into low standards of living now
Q: Todd, for the against side: How should we redistribute the resources to the poor?
A: Casey: put waste in outer space, and increase education to decrease fertility
Corey: population growth is decreasing even in poor areas
Q: Katherine, for the against side: please address thermal pollution
A: Casey: there are systems (cogeneration) to use excess heat to power other processes, and
hopefully nuclear power methods will improve
Q: Stephanie for the for side: contraceptives are not morally ok for all people
A: Rebecca: other methods will work for those people, such as family planning and incentives for
smaller families
Q: Shannon for the for side: is it barren where the Anasazi lived? (I have been there and it wasn’t)
A: Christine: Yes, it is a credible source from a book published by an expert
Q: for the for side: is a small difference enough of an effect to bother with in reducing family size?
A: Yes, we hope so, but we will have to wait and see!
Q: for the against side: if a developing country is sustaining itself, what incentives could exist for
small families?
A: Casey: if they can sustain extra people, go ahead and make them
Q: Brandon for both sides: why should the government provide money to decrease the population
when that would decrease the number of people paying taxes, and decrease revenue?
A: Casey: governments are corrupt, not a scientific question but a political one
Summary
Rebecca: Population is increasing so it absolutely requires action
Corey: problems are a result of bad practice, not overpopulation. The birth rate will slow and
technology will improve
Christing: will technology save us? Why risk it?
Casey: we are not to the point of overpopulation YET, that is the point! We have the technology,
we just need to find the will to change.