>>12739982>pollutionI see pollution as a problem in emerging societies, but greatly improved over the last several decades in emerged nations (like USA, which had acid rain, smokestacks with low emission control in the 70's). USA got richer and cleaned itself up. Pretty sure that's the story of western Europe too, at least.
>resource depletionI can't think of a single resource that all this supposed overpopulation has depleted. We aren't even low on oil yet, much less at risk of depletion.
>climate changeI think that may be what's actually driving the doomsayers today. All I observe is that warmer climates are generally more hospitable to humans than colder ones.
>habitat destructionLike pollution. habitat destruction (like deforestation) has slowed on many places and been reversed in others.
It appears to me, when it comes to the environment, that poor emerging nations use it up voraciously, but wealthy emerged nations when they become wealthy enough value it, stop destroying it, and even move to preserve and strengthen it.
I think everyone values their environment. Nations just have to get wealthy enough to eat regularly w/o tearing it down. Once they get there, they don't need to anymore and they preserve it for its own sake.
Which is why the go-back-to-a-simpler-time crowd would actually be bad for the environment. This group:
>>12735482for example, would have to ravage their environment to have any chance of making it.
