The good news is that this site was featured at Andy Revkin’s Dot Earth site.
The bad news of course is that this unleashed some hate mail. I am particularly disgruntled that a “trusted commenter” has essentially accused me of being a genocidal maniac, and that lacking “trusted commenter” status myself I can’t reply until Revkin next wakes up and looks at his incoming mail.
I am quoted as saying
“The only way to simplify ourselves out of the present mess is by cutting our population 80%, unfortunately.”
and the “trusted correspondent” is happy to interpret this as meaning I propose an 80% cull of human population.
This of course is typical of toxic political argumentation. There is another interpretation of what I said.
In fact I was arguing against “simplification”, meaning an abandonment of modern technology. It seems that an abandonment of modern technology would reduce the carrying capacity of the planet to its premodern population, roughly a fifth of the present day population.
But what can you do? People wrapped up in what passes for politics these days just seem to enjoy making the worst of things.
Update: Andy Revkin writes: I went in and rejected manually. many apologies that it slipped through.
Thanks!
Glad to hear it was straightened out. I was too afraid and pessimistic to check out the site myself. All the best, keep up the great work!
Re Revkin’s post, I was a little surprised that the P3 post he chose to link to (namely, the extended Urban Q&A) was, IMO, not one that’s aimed at his (more general) readership; which is why I suggested the “Main Difference Between Science and Politics” post, in the comments.