I always thought that if it got that dire we'd see a lot of subsistence farming. Made me want to build a victorian walled kitchen garden a few years ago(Shame It never happened really, Now I have the time to spend in the garden).
I always thought that if it got that dire we'd see a lot of subsistence farming. Made me want to build a victorian walled kitchen garden a few years ago(Shame It never happened really, Now I have the time to spend in the garden).
... either one would require far more land than is available to support today's large urban populations.
Thats an extremely vague set of statistics
Seams simple really, CANILBALISM, I mean It worked in the andes, and John Franklins expedition, and even polynesia until recently, AND it would solve the problem of too many competing people as well as not having enough land to feed yourself.Palmnut said:Hence my middle of the night question of "...how many competing people would we each need to kill off?".santaman 2000 said:......either one would require far more land than is available to support today's large urban populations.
Peter
A major problem for 'survivalists' and indeed UFO believers is both topics seem to attract more than their share of somewhat strange people (both areas of interest for me worryingly enough!).
.
While I wouldnt dispute the fact that most data suggest that the people of the hunter-gatherer-age were working together in small family-groups/tribes, I would consider the numbers you posted to be taken from a specific context.
Your data suggest a kind of liniarized connection between the number of people and the survivability; which would be very difficult to achieve in a hunter-gatherer environment.
The temperature, soil type, yearly precipitation and the distribution of this precipitation has tremendous impact on how large a population a piece of land can accomodate.
This table shows a simple overview for different types of terrain.
![]()
So, considering a realistic area coverage (radius 10 km), these 28 persons would be SURE to die, if they should choose to stay together in an arctic environment, whereas the could invite quite a number of friends if they were to stay in a tropical environment.
This is probably one of the main reasons that so many of the hunter-gatheres infact were nomads.
//Kim Horsevad
That was the reason why I quickly 'dropped out' of the survivalist scene (good Lord I hated, and still do hate, that word) in the eighties about as quick as I got into it. Everybody I met who was involved in it was the sort of person that made me glad the doors of my house had locks on them. They really were the sort of people that the term 'social misfit' was designed for, and while some social misfits can be entertaining and enrichening via contact, not this lot. They were a little too close to Michael Ryan of Hungerford clones with huge chips on their shoulders.
So off I went, and did my own thing as far under the radar as possible. I did NOT want to be associated in any way with that lot.
Glad to say that bushcraft, and the whole scene around it, is much more socially acceptable now. I got a friendly 'hi' and a smile from some walkers as I trekked down the path to the woods today with my 72hr sack with the golok handle sticking out of the top of the pack. 25 years ago they'd have looked at you with suspicion and horror. Thats how much it has changed.
And for that, I'm seriously grateful.