Overpopulation Is Not The Cause Of World Hunger: The Green Revolution

The Green Revolution a period of time that genetically modified crops were engineered, pesticides and fertilizer were created starting in the 1940s ending in the 1960s. This period caused a lot of debate on the Green Revolution some stating it positively affected the world and some stating that it negatively affected the world. The positives of the Green Revolution include increasing yields, increasing profit for farmers, lowering prices for foods which then allows the poor afford the food, and crops can be genetically modified to contain specific vitamin. The Green revolution is negative because it caused an increase in global pollution, chemical pollution, and health risks due to the exposure to the chemical produced during the Green Revolution.

Dr. Forsyth implements plenty of evidence as well as proven statistics to back up his outlook on these issues. The growth of human population is happening at an exponential rate, implying that in a short period of time population growth will double. “We find it difficult to comprehend exponential growth, but it may prove to be our fatal blind spot” [3]. When analysing the world’s population over a long period of time, it took roughly 19,000 years for the world’s population to go from 5million people to 500 million people in 1500 A.D. [4] With an estimated population of 7.5 billion people [5], for a period less than 1000 years, population increased more than 1500 times its size than it was in the 1500’s. In addition, on a more minute scale of time, in 1950 the world’s population was roughly 2.5 billion people [6] in merely 50 years the world’s population has tripled. With these statics, it is evident that the world’s population is increasing at an incomprehensive rate. With populations at their peak, overconsumption is another problem this world faces, as Dr. Forsyth affirms “humans consume far more than their fair share of the Earth’s natural productivity.”[7] Due to this over consumption of resources, there is a vast demand for cheap food which results in the clear cutting of large forest to generate room for new plantations of food. When doing so, humans destroy habitats that

The Green Revolution had a positive, negative, or possibly both consequences on the way human beings have evolutionized through out the years. Each of these documents specifically proves that whether good or bad the different societies have been able to incorporate a little from what the Green Revolution has left them into their daily lives. The Green Revolution on one-side has ignited the revolution for new ideas and traditions. On the other side the Green Revolution has become a form of destructing the true and only roots for most farmers.

There are more than seven billion people on Earth now, and about one in eight of us don’t have enough food to eat. So, with a projected nine billion people by the year 2050, how many people can the Earth support while maintaining a healthy population? Population changes are due to the relationship between births and deaths. If the number of births equals the number of deaths then the world’s population will remain the same, but if births exceed deaths, population growth will occur. Early in history, population was slowly growing because of high death rates related to wars, famines, and poor medical services. With advances in

Earth has not yet, reached its carrying capacity. Many people believe that Earth’s resources are running out due to the human population exponential growth, and the linear growth of food supply. The document, “Has Earth Reached its Carrying Capacity?” by Julia Layton, points out the fact that if the human population does more to extend the amount of resources available to us, we can increase Earth’s carrying capacity. For example, On page one, Paragraph four, Layton writes, “...technological advancement... they(scientist) have argued that this human ability allows food production to grow exponentially, as well.” Many advances in technology have giving us a wide range of information. Some of which could help us, now or in the future, to create

Within the early history of the human race, the earth was titanic and appeared boundless. Its resources seemed limitless. Then as the humans traveled away from home, the world got smaller and most of the world was recorded onto maps. Soon, the numbers of people were growing and the world and its natural resources looked as if it was shrinking. The overpopulation of an creature is dangerous to any environment, but with humans its deadly for the whole world.

All around the world, people are consuming more resources, than what can be replenished in the same amount of time. The United States has one of the largest ecological footprints around the world; we are depleting resources very

Each year the number of human beings increases, but the amount of natural resources which to sustain these populations,

The population of Earth is estimated to be seven and a half billion, and the current growth rate per year is around eighty million. Since the world’s population is constantly growing at such a high rate, some people believe that it will lead to the downfall of the human race, while others think it is beneficial to continue on this path. The ongoing debate on world overpopulation allows many different people to offer their unique opinions, such as Erle C. Ellis, Joel Kotkin, Robert Walker, and Alon Tal. These writers offer perspectives that support and conflict the different aspects of the overpopulation issue. Both Ellis and Kotkin believe that overpopulation is not an issue, while Walker and Tal strongly believe that it is. Ellis

The human population has continued to exceed seven billion people as of 2012. This large increase in population has created substantial alterations to earth’s environment and created heavy reliance on nonrenewable resources it provides us. Currently the human population consumes nonrenewable resources at an unsustainable rate. If this consumption continues to be unsustainable it will lead to the depletion or loss of the resources that we currently rely largely on. The use of natural resources generates waste products (Faure, 1998), and as nonrenewable resources continue to be of high demand they will create increased amounts of

One of the problems that the world will deal with in the future is the inadequate food, water, and energy resources. CSIS identified how these resources are managed as Revolution 2. How they are handled today will significantly determine their availability in the future. Therefore, it calls for sustainable use if we are going to have enough supply to meet the needs of growing human population. Currently, the global human population stands at 6.33 billion (Lambin, Eric and Meyfroidt 3465). It is projected to reach 7.8 billion by 2025 and further, close to 9 billion by the middle of the century. This growth is expected to have social, economic, and political consequences.

Overpopulation: when the number of existing humans exceeds the Earth 's carrying capacity resulting in resource depletion, poverty, lack in biodiversity, global warming, starvation, unemployment, the spread of disease, water contamination, desertification, CO2 emissions, climate change, and rising conflict between territories among many others. Although unrealized by most, these issues, as a result of overpopulation, are a major problem facing the world today due to the recent substantial increases in global population over the past century (Gavenus). Our planet is beginning to run out of available resources for the world 's more than 7 billion inhabitants. Overpopulation is causing both our renewable and nonrenewable resources such as

It stands to reason that the planet we live on has a finite limit of resources: water, air, and land. More people mean more industry, which means an increase in the resources we consume and the more emissions we produce. There is also evidence to support theories regarding human contribution to global warming and climate change.

Hartmann states, " Affluence has more to do with the depletion of natural resources than does population size" because similarly to the issue of food distribution, too few people consume too much of the world 's energy, metals and wood (Hartmann 1995: 23). For this reason, " on a global level, it simply does not make sense to blame environmental degradation on population growth" (Hartmann 1995: 23); consumption patterns illustrate that one group of people are obviously creating the damage, and that group is not the "overpopulated" nations of the Global South. Hartmann explains that the goal of achieving a Western lifestyle, which necessitates environmental exploitation, cannot become a reality for a global population of this size but that the globe does have the ability to support every life on the plant. She is effectively calling into question the notion that a Western existence is inherently desirable and better, forcing people to examine if they cry "overpopulation" as a way of protecting their extravagant and environmentally harmful existences. This connects to the final overpopulation myth, analyzed here, which paints the developing world 's inability to reach Western levels of economic growth on their growing population size.

Nowadays humanity accepts its more than huge population as normal, assuming that the overwhelming amount of people, with all their life processes and results of their activities do not harm the ecosystem of our planet. The majority of contemporary people falsely believe that we can continue to increase in our numbers, and that this practice does not affect the environment, flora, fauna and the life of humanity itself. Despite everything seems normal, humanity has already crossed all the borders and limits, presented by our planet. The Earth is not able to sustain such large population of people.