Back when the Club of Rome or whatever did its doomsday thingy back in 1972 (all as memory serves) they drew curves of population, food per capita, and all these sorts things ... they were soundly trached by those who didn't want to see it, labelled radical socialists or politicians masquerading as scientists and so on.
They plotted it through something like 2100. Indeed they showed many things improving, for a time). I belive all hell broke loose on their charts around 2030.
The thing is, that was 40 years ago, so one should be able to judge. On each of the items thnigs are a wee bit better (but only a wee bit better) than they said, but by and large, considering 40 years have passed, their lines and what has happened are by no means that far apart.
A fair bit more food and services, a wee bit more population, a fair bit less industrial production and hence a wee bit less pollution.
But, in then end, a bunch of scientists came up with stiff that the techno-optimist-wacko-unlimited earth folks ridiculed to no end.
The scoreboard, after 40 years, puts those folks in a pretty good light, which doesn't say good things about 2030.
screw memory, here's the link:
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/Looking-Back-on-the-Limits-of-Growth.html
Obviously, a migration towards sustainable technologies, IMO, would break the rules of the limits of growth hypothesis ... but the unlimited earth wackos seemed determined to drive the car of the cliff.
| 
