> In most mammal populations there can be wild swings in total population without extinction. Humans, at least at this point could reduce the total population by multiple times and be just fine.
In all of those examples, the fertility rate remains constant. In every single one. When the moose all die off, it's not because they all decided that they enjoyed double income households with no offspring. Or that their parents kept nagging them for grandmoose.
It's "all the vegetation on the island was stripped" and they all starved but a few.
If their fertility rate dropped, we wouldn't see it swing back and forth. The only way they even survive is that the fertility rate doesn't drop.
This will become apparent even to the current naysayers... but not nearly soon enough.
I mean, if population gets 'too low' then we'll likely just fall into some kind of authoritarianism where forced breeding occurs. I'm not saying this is a good outcome, I'm just saying it's the most likely one.
I don't think forced breeding works, or doesn't work well for those unprepared to do it well. That said, I can definitely see China managing the attempt efficiently.
In all of those examples, the fertility rate remains constant. In every single one. When the moose all die off, it's not because they all decided that they enjoyed double income households with no offspring. Or that their parents kept nagging them for grandmoose.
It's "all the vegetation on the island was stripped" and they all starved but a few.
If their fertility rate dropped, we wouldn't see it swing back and forth. The only way they even survive is that the fertility rate doesn't drop.
This will become apparent even to the current naysayers... but not nearly soon enough.