Penduduk: Perbedaan antara revisi
Konten dihapus Konten ditambahkan
k Bot: Perubahan kosmetika |
k →Ledakan penduduk: Perubahan kosmetika |
||
Baris 44:
(where I=Impact, PAT = Population x Affluence x Technology)
Hence, Ehrlich argues, affluent technological nations have a greater ''[[per capita]]'' impact than poorer nations.
A "population bomb," as defined in the book, requires three things: a rapid rate of change; a limit of some sort; and delays in perceiving the limit. The book's specific [[prediction]] that "in the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death" did not come to pass, however, due for the most part to the efforts of [[Norman Borlaug]]'s "[[Green Revolution]]" of the 1960s.
It was later shown by [[Keith Greiner]] (1994) that Ehrlich's projections could not possibly have held the scrutiny of time, because Ehrlich applied the financial [[compound interest]] formula to population growth. Using two sets of assumptions based on Ehrlich's hypothesis, it was shown that the theorized wild growth in population and subsequent scarcity of resources could not have occurred on Ehrlich's time schedule.
| |||