Lummel Posted October 16, 2010 Share Posted October 16, 2010 Not all that OT but a few things about Malthus:1. Malthus is right, has always been right, and will always be right for certain values of 'right'.This is because the underlining thesis of the Essay on the Principle of Population is merely that human food supply can only increase arithmetically while population increases exponentially. Unless it happens that we develop means of sustaining an infinite population indefinately the dude is right in that sense.2. The rest of his thesis is kinda flimsy.The glaring example being that the Rev TR considers wanking, pulling out, condoms, bestiality, teh Gay and all other methods of birth control to be vice. This means his vision of swarms of scrawny proles eating their way back to famine is conditional on every sperm being sacred.In conclusion: the population problem hasn't been 'solved' but there are plenty of ways to keep it at bay, not least because for the last few decades famine hasn't been a Malthusian product but a political economic one.If Tom Malthus's view was that human population always has the potential to increase exponentially then I'd accept that is correct, but if his arguement was that it always does increase exponentially - then that would appear to be incorrect although it's understandable why he would have assumed that writing at a time when the population of the UK was increasing exponentially. But he was living in a period of rapid population growth that came after close to four centuries of very slow growth that doesn't appear to have been capped by Malthusian crises like famines & epidemics or even particular disrespect for the sacredness of sperm but possibly rather by social/ economic factors like late marriage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Nan Posted October 16, 2010 Share Posted October 16, 2010 the first step is recognize that you're really discussing under-development and maldistribution related thereto.Bravo. I think this is the most succinct explanation for why communists ruined the parts of the world they ruled that I've ever read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Raidne Posted October 16, 2010 Share Posted October 16, 2010 You wrong on nutritional content being lowerNo I'm not. I'm not comparing organic produce to inorganic produce. I'm comparing produce picked before peak ripeness to produce picked at peak ripeness, high yield commercial produce always being the former. And for good freaking reason - perfectly ripe produce goes back real quick, I've learned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueMetis Posted October 16, 2010 Share Posted October 16, 2010 No I'm not. I'm not comparing organic produce to inorganic produce. I'm comparing produce picked before peak ripeness to produce picked at peak ripeness, high yield commercial produce always being the former. And for good freaking reason - perfectly ripe produce goes back real quick, I've learned.Can I get a source for this because the only thing I've found is with bananas and the nutritional difference is minimal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Raidne Posted October 17, 2010 Share Posted October 17, 2010 Can I get a source for this because the only thing I've found is with bananas and the nutritional difference is minimal.Try fresh vs. frozen & nutrition or nutrients or similar keywords and you'll find tons of stuff about how fruits and veggies picked at peak ripeness have more nutritional content, which is incidentally why frozen or canned is generally more nutrient dense, because they're canned or frozen and peak ripeness whereas fresh produce is picked before peak ripeness. Nutritional content will also decrease as food moves past peak ripeness, also. I came up with about half a dozen pages, plus my father is a chemist specializing in food science, so I consider him a reliable source also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MercenaryChef Posted October 17, 2010 Share Posted October 17, 2010 Try fresh vs. frozen & nutrition or nutrients or similar keywords and you'll find tons of stuff about how fruits and veggies picked at peak ripeness have more nutritional content, which is incidentally why frozen or canned is generally more nutrient dense, because they're canned or frozen and peak ripeness whereas fresh produce is picked before peak ripeness. Nutritional content will also decrease as food moves past peak ripeness, also. I came up with about half a dozen pages, plus my father is a chemist specializing in food science, so I consider him a reliable source also.this is precisely why unless it is the very peak of the season and i have the very best of local tomatoes to use in my cooking i will always opt for canned. tomatoes are only actually good about two months a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.