Don’t get me wrong, I loved your “solution” and the reasons you put it out there. That solution could be taken to many other areas of life where we really like something when someone else is paying for it and we receive the benefits, but it is not so nice when we have to pay for it or take the responsibility for it.

Have I lost my marbles or is this uniquely a “home of the free” USA syndrome, where some idiots who can push keys on a computer, say whatever they please, even shout “fire’ in a crowded theater, if deemed necessary by them, without any sense of responsibility, relevance, reason or rhyme? Yes, some are even free to be ignorant and commit suicide; in fact, many do! Long live freedoms of America…

You’ve not lost your marbles, sir. The comment threads on this particular blog are filled with some of the most varied and colorful opinions and rhetoric that can be found on the internet. Often, they drift completely off-topic into areas of conversation that are sometimes illuminating, sometimes frustrating, and sometimes frightening.

As an editor, I rather enjoy this free-wheeling aspect of the comment section as it gives me the chance to challenge ideas I disagree with. Sometimes, I’ll admit to using colorful implementations of logical arguments like I did earlier in the thread.

With regards to your challenge on taking responsibility, if you want the collected viewpoints of the editors, please feel free to view the archives of this site.

We’re around, but the comment section is generally an area for free-form discussion.

The news supposedly (and subsequent comments) was about the passing away of Norman E Borlaug, an iconoclast of green revolution, and not about overpopulation, or whose point of view is more valid, cockeyed, or not for a possible solution to the perceived problem?

Extending the argument, for instance, will American jurisprudence hold johns accountable for ruining countless lives of young prostitutes, or do drug addicts take any responsibility for their addiction or only the farmers of Colombia or Afghanistan are to be entirely blamed for producing cocaine and heroin? Similarly, do American drivers of fossil fuel (gas) guzzlers take any responsibility for their excesses, or must we blame only the Arabs for their supposed price-gouging or the expansionist Brazilians for depleting “their” rain forests and, thus, supposedly causing global warming?

Finally, are editors of Liberty Papers awake and monitoring all this nonsense and, if so, can we expect this madness to end any time soon?

My solution was more a caustic calling out of those who call for reduced population but expect the pain to be borne by others than themselves. I completely agree that the freedom to innovate and cooperate that the free market brings will be the real solution.

Yeah. It’s funny what happens when you offer these nuts both a solution and the opportunity explain why they’re more special than those “other” people.

It is not his fault that we did not address the problem in the time he gave us. His projects were carried out with the noblest of intentions for humanity.

Now, unfortunately, we find ourselves back at square one, needing another Dr. Borlaug. Over the next fifty years, we may have one last chance to increase food production yet again with genetic modification, and along with those gains, one last chance to get a handle on population growth.

But I do not foresee another chance after that. Food crops can only be pushed so far. We are already seeing dramatic diminishing returns from our biotechnology efforts.

-Jayant “John” Rahmani

Every generation of human technology is imperfect. Improvements to address the most immediate of those are introduced, creating the next generation of technology. In this particular case, Borlaug was the one who came up with a solution that was good enough to save billions of lives. Not a perfect solution, though, as it comes with a new set of problems.

What’s needed is people of this generation looking for solutions to make this level of agriculture sustainable. Not whining, bitching, or recriminating.

On the subject of reducing the world population, I’m a big proponent of leading by example. I believe each and every person calling for a reduced world population has the duty to reduce themselves from the population first.

Wait, what’s that? You’re too valuable a human being to commit suicide? What makes you, o population reduction advocate, more valuable than someone else? Well, if you’re not going to do your moral duty and commit suicide, at least take the paltry measure of not having kids.

Wait, you still want two kids? You need to make sure that there are some educated people in the world? Fine. Then who should be prevented from having children so you can have your kids.

Really, I’m interested in some answers to these from population reductionists. It’s so easy for them to declare that things should be done to other people. Why shouldn’t they apply to you?