PALEOFOOD Archives

Paleolithic Eating Support List

PALEOFOOD@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Don and Rachel Matesz <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Paleolithic Eating Support List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 6 Aug 1999 06:14:30 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (84 lines)
---
Don Matesz <[log in to unmask]>
On Wed, 4 Aug 1999 13:57:03 -0600, Richard Keene <[log in to unmask]>
responded ot my Various Posts.  I'd like to respond.

>1.) People are not "dust in the wind".  They are children of God.

If you want it that way, so are the bison and the orynx and monkeys and all
other species; they all are "children of god".   Man is not favored.
>

2.) The overpopulation problem in the world is not due to too many
>people,
>     It is due to too little democracy and free-enterprise.

What?  This is too much!  Overpopulation is not due to too many people?  Do
you understand the concept of self-contradiction?  No matter what political
system you like, the Earth has a limited carrying capacity.  You can't make
the Earth larger by route of democracy; the size of the planet is not
adjustable by free-enterprise.  The laws of nature are not alterable by
popular demand!
>
>3.) The high productivity rates are due to people choosing to
>     have lots of children, not the diet.  Now we all know exactly
>     how to regulate the number of children we have through
>     various means.  The falling birth rates in Germany that you
>     cited are due to choosing not to have children, not the diet.

Here you go, a perfect example of the resistance to accepting that man is
governed by biolgical laws just as any other living thing.    Please explain
why people in germany are choosing not to have children, in spite of
abundance, while people in Africa are choosing to have many children, in
spite of poverty.  The difference can't be explained by education or any of
the usual crap--HG women aren't literate, they don't have PhDs, they don't
have careers outside the home, and they don't have modern contraception.
Nevertheless, they have lower fertility than agricultural women.
>
>4.) The population of the Earth will soon be greatly reduced due
>      to come up-coming wars.  I estimate that in 100 years the
>      Earth's population will be 1% of what it is now.

OK Nostradamus.
>
>5.) The Earth with 20 Billion nice people would be a nice
>      place to live.  The problem is that the Earth has too many not-nice
>      people in it.  Greed and Evil (now there's an old idea) make
>      for pollution, crime, inefficiency, and poor decisions.

Here is that BS about not-nice people.  First of all, what is "nice"?  In
Britain, the Protestants think that Protestants are "nice" and Catholics are
"not-nice" and vice versa.   Probably we all will agree that crime is
"not-nice".  Question is, how did crime come to be?  Did your God make it
that way?  (Those criminals are children of God also, are they not?)  I have
a better explanation.  Just like other animals, humans who are malnourished
and crowded--i.e. under biological stress--become unhealthy and "not-nice."
  It has been shown many many times, the psychology textbooks are full of
reports of such experiments--under crowding stress, nice animals are very
likely to become "not nice."     In other words, I can guarantee you that it
is impossible to have 20 billion "nice" people on Earth.    Why don't we
just work with the fact that people need space, instead of wishing that
people would "be nice" no matter what?

>7.) Overpopulation is a symptom, not a cause, of problems.
>     Individual freedom and accountability is the cause.  I
>     hate cities with their scarry people and crowding.
>     A city with nice poeple would be a very nice place to live.

That is a bunch of grits.  Overpopulation is a cause of problems, and if you
don't believe it then I can only say you have your head in the sand.   I am
most disturbed by your claim that "Individual freedom and accountability is
the cause" (of what is not clear).  If that is so, is the solution to
curtail freedom?  Interesting, above you said that the world's problems are
caused by "lack of democracy and free enterprise" but here you contradict
yourself and say that the problems are caused by freedom.   Let me just
note, the more crowded the world becomes, the more freedoms are taken away
by the central authorities.    They will say: "The problem is that people
have too much freedom.  If we put them under constant surveillance, we will
be able to stop any crime.   If we take all weapons from them, everything
will be OK."  Etc, etc. Brave New World, populated by only humans and rice.

"Life in all its fullness is Mother Nature obeyed."  Weston Price

Don

ATOM RSS1 RSS2