Don states "In our own country, the environment is in better shape than it was half a century ago". I find this a little hard to reconcile with.

Ehrlich's forecasts were too early; the green revolution changed all that.

Perhaps those doubting the veracity of his prognostications should re-read the Club of Rome's 'Limits to Growth'

‘Limits to Growth’ was prominently “debunked” by pro-growth business interests. In reality, this “debunking” merely amounted to taking a few numbers in the book completely out of context, citing them as “predictions” (which they explicitly were not), and then claiming that these predictions had failed. The ruse was quickly exposed, but rebuttals often don’t gain nearly as much publicity as accusations, and so today millions of people mistakenly believe that the book was long ago discredited.

In fact, the original Limits to Growth scenarios have held up quite well. A recent study (2008 I think) by the CSIRO concluded, “[Our] analysis shows that 30 years of historical data compares favourably with key features of [the Limits to Growth] business-as-usual scenario...”.

The authors fed in data for world population growth, consumption trends, and the abundance of various important resources, ran their computer program, and concluded that the end of growth would probably arrive between 2010 and 2050. Industrial output and food production would then fall, leading to a decline in population.

The ‘Limits to Growth’ scenario study has been re-run repeatedly in the years since the original publication, using more sophisticated software and updated input data. The results have been similar each time.

We are decimating world fish stocks, losing topsoil at unprecedented levels, depleting aquifers, over using fertilizer, pesticides, and herbicides etc, in general depleting non-renewal resources and we have a global ponzi economy based on consumers and governments all increasing debt in the name of the false god ‘Growth’. Our current economic model does not reconcile with social progress and is broken. It is not based on productivity and equality.

You don't have to be a genius to work out that things cannot keep going this way without some sort of blow-back occurring.

It seems to be important for some people to be constantly reassured that life is dreadful, that doom and gloom are just around the corner, that the world is run by faceless plutocrats who despise us peasants and would like us to just go away, that all the nice fluffy animals are soon going to die out, that nations will go to war over a shortage of water, that our cities are too polluted and crowded for anyone to live in, that the next financial crisis will impoverish everyone so that we have to scratch around for food, that climate change will render the world totally uninhabitable, that these shores will soon be stuffed to the gills with dusky freeloaders intent on subverting our way of life to the misery of religious subjection etc. etc. etc.

And that's just the daily fare here at Online Opinion.

All Mr. Ehrlich has done is to tap into this fear, in order to sell books, and stay on the gravy-train of paid interviews, seminars, lectures and "guest appearances" for the rest of his natural life.

It is much the same in other smoke-and-mirror industries. There are folk out there who rake in massive sums from motivation seminars, how-to-get-rich seminars, how-to-succeed-in-business seminars and the like.

They all tap into our basic insecurities, our sense of inadequacy and our existential angst, in order to line their own pockets with our cash.

As P T Barnum proved on many occasions, there are many people out there who seem to relish being hoodwinked.

Like all socialized intellectual ruling classes (SIRC’s), we view questions such as “why are they so sure they are right” as superfluous and not appreciated. We know we are right.

Mostly you misunderstand because you lack the intelligence. It is clear from your questioning of our orthodoxy that there are not enough SIRC’s and too many of you. It follows that when we SIRC’s postulate that we must limit global populations we do not mean us, we mean you, and that any “peak” something must be responded to by the masses and not us.

The negative doom saying mantra of “peak” anything and everything is not open for debate. We are not required to comply with infantile illusions such as empirical evidence, proof or even establish our own credibility; we are above such modern constructs.

It has been said that SIRC’s are ahead of their time. This is so true and our prognostications should indeed be viewed through the medieval prism of that time;

-the divine right of egotistical elites
-the inferiority of women
-the idea that a wise State knows all
-the idea that the individual is always right
-the bitter-sweet addiction, that transforms an elitist doctrine from a mere model into something sacred and worth killing for.

Regards, P.

Why is Ehrlich so sure? Let's ask his colleague Stephen Schneider...
"We need to get some broadbased support, to capture the public's imagination. That, of course, entails getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. This 'double ethical bind' we frequently find ourselves in cannot be solved by any formula. "

Its not about being sure...its about projecting an air of certitude so as to garner support.

Of course, in Ehrlich's case its also about protecting a reputation. His whole life, his whole career, is based on the failed predictions of the Population Bomb and its successors. Some might simply admit error and move on but people like Ehrlich just double-down and try to brazen through, never admitting error.

Since so many people liked and fell for his failed predictions, they likewise desperately seek reasons as to why they weren't wrong and turn a blind eye to any expose of the errors.

Ehrlich made specific predictions with specific time frames. If he'd said millions were going to die from famine in the next 2 centuries, his book would have sunk without a mention. It was the immediacy that made his name and fortune.

Only after the predictions fail do we suddenly see him and his cheer-squad start to equivocate over timing. I can already see some apologist in the year 2100 saying, "oh well Ehrlich was right and that famine is gunna happen any decade now".

People want to be scared. There is a segment who want to believe we are inches away from disaster. They are rarely right and rarely learn. That's why AGW is so successful.

But Ehrlich did do one good deed for the prediction business. His big error was to make predictions about what'd happen in his lifetime. The doomsayers now have the good sense to make predictions about things that'll happen once they're gone, or at least retired....eg the doomsayers now tell us the worst of AGW will happen post 2050.

Thanks Don, great article again. You continue to prove that not all academics are not egotistical boofheads, although the bulk of the responding posts proves that at least 90% are.

We see the scarcely concealed horror in Paul Ehrlich, & so many of our self elected academic elites, that the despised masses can live as well as they do.

At a recent party I could not help but hear some "B" grade academic bemoaning the fact that his once nice suburb was filling up with riff raff. He managed a real sneer in his voice as he referred to them as "trades type people".

A friend was glancing rather nervously at me, worried about an explosion from my direction. He need not have worried, I can't be bothered with these plastic people, these mere paper cut outs of what a human should be.

From Ehrlich to a junior tutor, the disdain for real people is huge & growing. A Chinese type cultural revolution would do wonders for our gene pool, but meanwhile, let them chatter away, it keeps them off the streets.

Pericles, says
that doom and gloom are just around the corner, that the world is run by faceless plutocrats who despise us peasants and would like us to just go away, that all the nice fluffy animals are soon going to die out, that nations will go to war over a shortage of water, that our cities are too polluted and crowded for anyone to live in, that the next financial crisis will impoverish everyone so that we have to scratch around for food, that climate change will render the world totally uninhabitable, that these shores will soon be stuffed to the gills with dusky freeloaders intent on subverting our way of life to the misery of religious subjection etc.

And you are right.