Discussion»Questions»Food and Drink» Does GMO not enhance but compensate struggling ecologies and without it could the Earth sustain its current population?
Anybody who wants to discuss this subject needs to get some research of his own to compare to those pictures. So far, not one person has responded to my challenge.
GMO actually affects natural crops and so making poorer countries dependent on wealthier nations for GMO products. Instead of being able to grow their crops naturally every year, they then have to plant GMO crops that do not give seed. I don't think unnatural anything is good for the environment or the overall health of humanity.
Here is Bill Gates concerns of population growth, yes it is and has always been a big concern of the elites. Even Darwin didn't like the idea of "uncivilized" people overpopulating the planet, such as the Irish who he said bred like rabbits. However, he was slightly comforted by the idea that war, disease and poverty controlled the population growth especially in the lower classes, and it's no different today, those who live in areas of poverty are more likely to have a lower life expectancy.
Bill Gates states that healing people is more likely to slow the population growth as people will have less children, this is nonsense. Many cultures have more children because it is their culture and has nothing to do with the health of their children. Secondly, those in third world countries have more children because their children are more likely to die of poverty and disease, so again it makes no sense.
As to how much of the world's land is populated, then you have to take into consideration how habitable the land is.
