ehrlich

Ah, yes he has, and so has Ehrlich and every other 'the world is ending' doomsayer that ever walked.

Watching the video on NYT, Ehrlich wanted to add taxes for people who have children which is more accurately coersion.

If there were a large social penalty for false alarms, Ehrlich wouldn't have remained credible after all his past prediction failures.

And, if you notice, that's exactly what people like Ehrlich have advocated: population control.

Maybe an Ehrlich supporter was right, but for the development of better crop yields.

Um ehrlich zu sein habe ich nicht gewusst, dass man eigene Beiträge posten kann.

Tetlock's Expert Political Judgment[0] and Ehrlich gets namechecked pretty early in it.

It's why Paul Ehrlich and John Malthus were wrong.

* Unless you're talking about the predictions Ehrlich made about things that didn't ultimately happen.

Decades later, the world Ehrlich and I still live in seems more like a confirmation of criticisms of the book[1] than like a confirmation of the book.

Plus, "magic bullet" usually has a medical connotation owing to the early use of the term by Paul Ehrlich.

Forty -five years ago Paul Ehrlich wrote "The battle to feed all of humanity is over.

Ehrlich does note on page 189: "By the mid-twentieth century, abortions were being performed legally in some other [non-US] parts of the world.

Read "The Bet: Paul Ehrlich, Julian Simon, and Our Gamble over Earth’s Future" and learn why this sort of thinking has been shown to be wrong again and again.

Ehrlich gets credit in my book for making concrete falsifiable predictions and acknowledging some are wrong.

Ehrlich wasn't wrong - hundreds of millions of people did die from starvation in the 1970s.

Simon, an economist who established himself as the anti-Ehrlich, arguing that 'humanity’s condition will improve in just about every material way.