Would less people mean less Science?

Less people + the same growth of the economies and education system [which would continue for a short time at the same rate as with net population growth, then slow down] = more teachers and money per person = more effective education + higher quality of life = more scientists = more science.
Lots of assumptions there. Will quality people want to go into teaching in a zero population growth society? Wouldn't it be a dying profession?
 
lol. i don't mean to be rude, but it's funny how everyone just ignores john j. bannan's dumb ideas.
 
What's so dumb about zero population growth? This is a real problem for developed nations around the world. Europe especially is facing the problem of zero or even negative population growth. If you think this idea is dumb, you don't understand the problem. Wise up friend.http://www.economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=9545933
Don't worry, John. The Europeans who can't be bothered to breed will soon be replaced by Muslim immigrants who don't seem to mind having children in the least. Soon Europe will an extension of the middle east.

Charles"the hammer"Martel must be rolling over in his grave to think that after his great victory at the Battle of Tours; Europe would fall under Islamic domination because its people lack the vitality to reproduce.
 
So, you think Islam can survive Capitalism and consumerism and democracy? I don't think so. Europe will be full of lax Muslims, just as it is now full of lax Christians.
 
So, you think Islam can survive Capitalism and consumerism and democracy? I don't think so. Europe will be full of lax Muslims, just as it is now full of lax Christians.
Let's hope so. Christianity reversed the advance of civilization and Europe descended into a thousand years of ignorance and squalor. I don't think it could take another thousand like that.
 
Back
Top