DBWI: Population Bomb and Malthusian Theories Wrong

As you well know today the planet Terra is in terrible suffering. Hundreds of millions starve or die of disease every year in India, Africa, China, and of course the nuclear ruins of devestated Russia. To think the Malthus and Ehrlich would be right in their theories! I should have seen that coming when the new genetically improved crops failed. So what if the Malthusian events had not come to pass? What if the world was not the complete starving wreck dying with famines, food riots, and war it is to-day?
 
As you well know today the planet Terra is in terrible suffering. Hundreds of millions starve or die of disease every year in India, Africa, China, and of course the nuclear ruins of devestated Russia. To think the Malthus and Ehrlich would be right in their theories! I should have seen that coming when the new genetically improved crops failed. So what if the Malthusian events had not come to pass? What if the world was not the complete starving wreck dying with famines, food riots, and war it is to-day?

General Beans, I think this is in the wrong forum. Would you like to explain the PoD? Because I think this scenario is pretty much out to lunch.
 
General Beans, I think this is in the wrong forum. Would you like to explain the PoD? Because I think this scenario is pretty much out to lunch.

OOC: The POD basically is that the Green Revolution that allowed much of the Third World to feed itself did not happen along with worse pollution then OTL. Also there was a limited nuclear exchange between the Soviet Union and the US in TTL not enough to cause the collapse completely of either governments but devestating both of them. Although the Soviet government did survive, much of it's fringes broke away and became independent warlords. Also China remained neutral in the abovementioned war and remained a Maoist state having purged Deng Xiaoping.
 
OOC: The POD basically is that the Green Revolution that allowed much of the Third World to feed itself did not happen along with worse pollution then OTL. Also there was a limited nuclear exchange between the Soviet Union and the US in TTL not enough to cause the collapse completely of either governments but devestating both of them. Although the Soviet government did survive, much of it's fringes broke away and became independent warlords. Also China remained neutral in the abovementioned war and remained a Maoist state having purged Deng Xiaoping.

A Nuclear exchange would knock population levels so far down that there would be no mass starvation afterward because it would have already happened.

Nuclear Exchanges, large scale ones, dork up the atmosphere for something like 18 months completely, and up to a decade to a lesser degree. Humanity has already either starved out, or it has adapated by this point.
 
A Nuclear exchange would knock population levels so far down that there would be no mass starvation afterward because it would have already happened.

Nuclear Exchanges, large scale ones, dork up the atmosphere for something like 18 months completely, and up to a decade to a lesser degree. Humanity has already either starved out, or it has adapated by this point.

I said it was a limited nuclear exchange. That is some major cities destroyed on the US side and somewhat worse devestation on the Soviet side. It's enough to affect the climate negatively but not enough to cause mass starvation and co.
 

Stephen

Banned
Nuclear Winter is a load of nonsense. The hundreds of atmospheric nuclear tests during the 50's and 60's did not send us into an ice age. And even a global nuclear war would kick up no more particulates than the 1991 Mount Pinatubo eruption. Its a hypothosis cooked up by people who just want to scare us away from using nuclear weapons when they are obviously the most effective war of dealing with our enemies.

On the other hand any scenario that involve a limited nuclear exchange between USA and USSR without it quickly escalating to a total nuclear exchange seems very unrealistic.
 

Stephen

Banned
ooc No recent research has produce any significant gains on the green revolution of the 60's so I'm betting that over the next few decades Malthus will come back with a vengeance after his century long delay.
 
ASB!!!!

Stupid General Mung Beans, always having stupid ASB scenarios!:D You can't have a POD to disprove the Malthusian theories, because they are factualy correct. Lets say Kennedy doesn't get trigger happy(or you conspiracy theorists who say Khruschev!) and doesn't invade Cuba and start WWIII. Then humanity would advance and expand to a point, that by 2004 or so, the population would outgrow the food production. All that's been done is delay the mass starvation by about fifty years.

OOC:


I don't get the debate. Nuclear war and subsequent nuclear winter would drop the temperature, destroy crops and agriculture, causing mass starvation, food riots, etc. Ozone loss would cause deaths too, but the lack of food would persist for longer, methinks.
 
Come on -- If JFK hadn't taken Cuba there would have been no place for all the refugees from NY and Boston. And Cuba wouldn't have become one of todays 47 states in the Union.

As for the Failure of the Green Crops -- Monasota Had a right to all those obsene profits from Those Sterile Seeds. They had no way of predicting a war that would disrupt the shipment of the next years Seed Supply.

:D :p :rolleyes: :cool: :eek: :D :p :) :rolleyes: :cool: :eek: :D :p :rolleyes: :cool: :eek: :D :p :) :rolleyes: :cool: :eek: :D :p :rolleyes: :cool: :eek: :D :p:) :rolleyes: :cool: :eek: :D :p :rolleyes: :cool: :eek: :D :p:) :rolleyes: :cool: :eek:

Seriously, I expect a backlash against the American seed companies, would have lead to some of countries that see their wealth flowing into the American Seed Companies Banning the import of seed from America or Europe.

As for Cuba It would have collapsed in several years from the Embargo, and the Castros would have been deposed.
 
Top