Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Originally Posted by MICoastieMomI'm not talking about an opinion, I'm talking about facts. How else would you explain the increase of the world population, but with surplus food (which is only possible with modern agriculture)?
If we have no surplus food the world population simply could not increase, but since the population keeps increasing, our food production will increase with it which in turn guarantees a food surplus (so the population can keep growing, etc).
So if the world population keeps growing (which it is) modern agriculture can only be the cause of that.
Or to say it in other words: knowledge is a 2-edged sword; the more knowledge we possess the more responsible we have to act.
So the most significant event in human history would be to freeze or even reduce the human population.
1. If skytrekker feels that "the ability for humans to change from hunter gathers to developing agriculture" is the most important event, that is his opinion, not a fact. He is entitled to that opinion regardless of what anyone else thinks.
2. No one is disputing your facts.
3. A significant event can be one with disasterous consequences. The OP did not state that the events had to only have a postive effect.
Well, the real answer to questions like this tend to be the most simple, basic concepts - for the simple reason that they provide the foundation upon which everything else is built. Consequently Skytrekker's answer of "the invention of agriculture" is a great answer because it provided a stable, plentiful food source that allowed society more time to pursue other endeavors. This is because:
#1) they didn't have to spend so much time getting their food
#2) they didn't have to continually travel to follow the migrating herds
Thus with agriculture you had settled, perminent societies and a suddenly flowering of those society into many different areas. Folks began to specialize into the creation of all manner of advancements - pottery, metalurgy, woodworking, etc, etc, etc - the list just goes on and on - all of which would have been difficult (if not impossible) to pursue (at least to any degree of refinement) had the society been constantly on the move. All in all a VERY good answer.
However, I have to say that Twixcookie's reply was even better - for the development of lanquage was even more critical in our change from being "mere animals" to being intelligent beings. Clearly, lanquage helped us develop a far more complex and rich culture than we would have had otherwise. It made possible the idea of abstract thought - such as numbers (or at least of conveying that thought to others) - as well as the possiblity of far greater organization, cooperation, and coordination than almost any other creature (aside from a few species of insects) - and those three thing went a long way towards our sucess as a species (unlike the insects who practice those 3 things, we don't have a massive reproductive rate to help us along).
There is however another important aspect of the development of language that is no doubt even more critical - and that's the fact that development and use of language probably even resulted in physical changes to the human brain as different areas of the brain were stimulated to additional activity - thus really making us what we are today.
So the most significant event in human history would be to freeze or even reduce the human population.
That time IS coming. World population growth rate is falling fast - with many countries already at or near zero - or even negative growth, and many of the those countries that had been growing the fastest starting to level off (Mexico for example).
That time IS coming. World population growth rate is falling fast - with many countries already at or near zero - or even negative growth, and many of the those countries that had been growing the fastest starting to level off (Mexico for example).
Too bad about bio-energy then.
Now the danger lies in the fact that agriculture-based bio-energy will compete with food production for landmass. The more landmass is converted to either agriculture-based bio-energy or food production, the less diverse our biodiversity will become.
Even if we could freeze the size of our world population, can we also freeze our increasing desire for more energy?
The way we've set up our economy is to grow, grow, grow.
Which automatically means that our need for energy will grow with it.
Originally Posted by LordBalfor Too bad about bio-energy then.
Now the danger lies in the fact that agriculture-based bio-energy will compete with food production for landmass. The more landmass is converted to either agriculture-based bio-energy or food production, the less diverse our biodiversity will become.
Even if we could freeze the size of our world population, can we also freeze our increasing desire for more energy?
The way we've set up our economy is to grow, grow, grow.
Which automatically means that our need for energy will grow with it.
The big challenge we now face is - now that world population is starting to at last stablize (still growing at the moment, but that growth is definitely slowing) - how do we provide for the increased expectations of all those people. The world is changing dramatically and standards of living are skyrocketing all over the globe. This of course leads to a whole set of new problems - notably how to deal with the increased demand (and it's associated increase in waste generated) for pretty much EVERYTHING - but most expecially energy.
Truly a major challenge.
Ken
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How else would you explain the increase of the world population, but with surplus food (which is only possible with modern agriculture)?
So the most significant event in human history would be to freeze or even reduce the human population.
I forgot about this 1.
Too bad about bio-energy then.
The more landmass is converted to either agriculture-based bio-energy or food production, the less diverse our biodiversity will become. 
