EARTH'S SHORT FUTURE- Objection #1

(Confused? Wondering what is this all about? Click here to get the gist of it.)

The Natural Hazards criticism-


This criticism points at natural hazards in our environment, such as bears, hurricanes or hail, and concludes that mankind has a hard enough time facing these hazards as we are. How much harder would it be if we were half our present size? They claim that to a bear we would be snack-size, and hurricanes would blow us around like tumbleweed. Large hail could knock us unconscious. I answer this criticism in two ways.

Firstly, the number of dwarfed individuals that may or may not fall victim to natural hazards seems trivial compared to the alternative, which is the famine, drought, and pestilence which would inevitably come with an overpopulation crisis.

Secondly, mankind’s survival has never been contingent on our size or strength. It appears to me that if that was all man had going for him we would have long since gone extinct. It is our intellect which sets us apart, and which is our greatest asset against the often hostile world in which we live. Also, one should never underestimate the ability of a market economy driven by profit motive to overcome these problems.