Yes Robert Spoley - and I would like to see world population plotted vs Time wherever we show CO2 Concentration or Oil Production vs Time. The taboo of even mentioning population reduction is very strong, not only is it politically incorrect but fiercely anti-religious.

I have said this so often that some might already be groaning: I believe no combination of proposed solutions can save our civilization without population reduction. I was born into a world of about 1.8 billion. Today we are 6.7 billion and growing at a rate of about 0.1 billion a year. The Romans lived in a world of 0.3 billion, and world population had never been greater.

When the Kyoto Protocol was signed simple arithmetic told me it was a fraud. None would say so. Why? Today, even Denmark with its favorable situation, and often extolled as a green leader, is not on track to meet its Kyoto contract.

We appear, in my view, to be looking at only a small part of the problem, and that poorly. Resources of every kind, fish, clean fresh water, wood, grains, industrial products, and a long list of others, are at high levels that are all pointing to near term collapse due to over utilization. Thus pollution of every kind increases, life quality reaches tipping points, extinction of large numbers of species is assured and “life as we know it” will be seriously degraded shortly. Quick fix schemes of every kind (re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic) are a dime a dozen. The real problem is that there too many of us at this rate of usage. To maintain this life quality there just plain has to be fewer of us. If we don’t change, Mother Nature will do it for us — and she is brutal, absolutely!
In order to change this outcome, the global birthrate has to fall fast now, not later, not someone else, all people, everywhere now. I never see this talked about, just “chair shuffling”. Who do we see about that?
Bob