#1 - The Law of Propagation and Consumption

(This is the second of a nine-part installment, offering a fresh new perspective on Climate Change.  For the big picture summary, see Turning Climate Change on its Head.)

All living species are programmed at their core to propagate and make maximum use of available resources.  Evolution has consistently selected for these properties.  When these biological imperatives are unchecked, they lead inevitably to exponential growth and resource depletion.

Aerial view of Cairo, Egypt

Propagation

There is not a single living species, animal, plant, or microscopic, that has not been programmed for propagation of its species.  If it were otherwise, that species would have disappeared thousands of years ago.  I think we can confidently assign the term "Law" to this fact.

From a statistical perspective, we can also state emphatically that the average basic reproduction number, or R0 ("R-zero" - a term we got to know during the CoViD-19 pandemic) has to have been 1 or more.  That means for the average population of a given species, they are producing at least the same number of progeny - and typically, many more.  If they are not, or their progeny are not surviving until they are reproductive themselves, then that species population will be in decline and, again, will eventually disappear.

Death is a fact of life, and for reasons that we will explore more thoroughly in part 3 (The Law of Negative Feedback), we know it to be the case that not every individual in a given species population will survive long enough to produce a replacement progeny.  For that reason, it is almost always the case that the average number of offspring it has will be greater than 1.  In the animal kingdom one of the most prolific species has to be the seahorse, which has about 2000 offspring with every successful mating.  In the plant world, trees can produce tens of thousands of seeds - each with the potential to grow into a mature tree.

Let's consider what would happen if the basic reproduction number is greater than 1, and ALL progenies were to survive to reproductive maturity.  Firstly, the population will grow, obviously.  Eventually, it will double in size.  And then double again.  And again.  By immutable mathematics, this growth will be exponential.  In other words, the growth will not be a straight-line increase.  On top of the population increase, the number of additional progenies in every generation will itself increase, producing a curve that will slope ever more vertically. 

Consumption

The second part of the proposed law - that every species makes maximum use of available resources - is less necessary to my final conclusion.  Still, even though the proof may not be as empirical as for the first, every piece of anecdotal evidence available to us suggests that the second part is also true enough.

It is safe to say that all life, as we know it, needs to consume at least a bare minimum of resources in order to survive to reproductive maturity.  If the consumption of any given resource would be to the organism's advantage - especially if it would further the goal of propagation, there is no species that consistently and consciously makes its own decision to conserve resources instead of consuming them.  And if the population is growing, that survival imperative of that species will drive it to consume all available resources, as needed.

If you combine the consumption of at least a fixed minimum of resources with a population experiencing exponential growth, then the overall consumption of resources will also be growing at an exponential rate.  If these resources are not being replaced at the same rate at which they are consumed, then the species will, once again, eventually disappear.  Since the amount of energy and raw materials on a finite planet can be considered fixed, exponential growth of resources is unsustainable.

What about Humans?

Of course, it is very tempting to think of humans as an exception to the Law of Propagation and Consumption.  Certainly, as individuals, we seem to have acquired sufficient self-awareness and power to eschew propagation and control consumption - at least to a survival minimum.  However, overall, I believe this exceptionality to be a myth - one that we will address in part 4 (The Myth of Self-Control and Immunity) - but first, let's consider how nature typically manages population growth in part 3 (The Law of Negative Feedback).

(Continue to part 3 of 9)