<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Upside to a Total Breakdown in Society, Or Why Utter Chaos Might Not Be So Bad (For the Earth)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://earthfirst.com/the-upside-to-a-total-breakdown-in-society-or-why-utter-chaos-might-not-be-so-bad-for-the-earth/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://earthfirst.com/the-upside-to-a-total-breakdown-in-society-or-why-utter-chaos-might-not-be-so-bad-for-the-earth/</link>
	<description>A Sharp Eye -- With a Green Edge</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 22:28:31 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: h1n1</title>
		<link>http://earthfirst.com/the-upside-to-a-total-breakdown-in-society-or-why-utter-chaos-might-not-be-so-bad-for-the-earth/comment-page-1/#comment-7200</link>
		<dc:creator>h1n1</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2009 10:01:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://earthfirst.com/?p=2608#comment-7200</guid>
		<description>&quot;Just to say, if a disease, be it virus or bacteria, can take out 6 billion people, I’m pretty sure it could mutate enough to take out a lot of animals too.&quot;

Unless it was an artificially created super-germ designed and targetted specifically to cull the human population.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Just to say, if a disease, be it virus or bacteria, can take out 6 billion people, I’m pretty sure it could mutate enough to take out a lot of animals too.&#8221;</p>
<p>Unless it was an artificially created super-germ designed and targetted specifically to cull the human population.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ray</title>
		<link>http://earthfirst.com/the-upside-to-a-total-breakdown-in-society-or-why-utter-chaos-might-not-be-so-bad-for-the-earth/comment-page-1/#comment-5594</link>
		<dc:creator>Ray</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Dec 2008 16:29:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://earthfirst.com/?p=2608#comment-5594</guid>
		<description>Just to say, if a disease, be it virus or bacteria, can take out 6 billion people, I&#039;m pretty sure it could mutate enough to take out a lot of animals too.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just to say, if a disease, be it virus or bacteria, can take out 6 billion people, I&#8217;m pretty sure it could mutate enough to take out a lot of animals too.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Shea Gunther</title>
		<link>http://earthfirst.com/the-upside-to-a-total-breakdown-in-society-or-why-utter-chaos-might-not-be-so-bad-for-the-earth/comment-page-1/#comment-4452</link>
		<dc:creator>Shea Gunther</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Nov 2008 14:57:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://earthfirst.com/?p=2608#comment-4452</guid>
		<description>@JJ You&#039;re right if you think about it as the same amount of people. But if the world fell all to shite, the human population would see massive and sudden drops in population. How would the average American react to not being able to shop at the local grocery store? They&#039;d starve, fight, kill, and die. The more advanced a nation, the higher the death rates would be after a complete retreat of technology and resources. 

I could be wrong, but I&#039;d guess that a half a billion survivors running super low tech would produce less pollution/emissions then our current load of six billion.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@JJ You&#8217;re right if you think about it as the same amount of people. But if the world fell all to shite, the human population would see massive and sudden drops in population. How would the average American react to not being able to shop at the local grocery store? They&#8217;d starve, fight, kill, and die. The more advanced a nation, the higher the death rates would be after a complete retreat of technology and resources. </p>
<p>I could be wrong, but I&#8217;d guess that a half a billion survivors running super low tech would produce less pollution/emissions then our current load of six billion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JJ</title>
		<link>http://earthfirst.com/the-upside-to-a-total-breakdown-in-society-or-why-utter-chaos-might-not-be-so-bad-for-the-earth/comment-page-1/#comment-4439</link>
		<dc:creator>JJ</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 Nov 2008 17:08:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://earthfirst.com/?p=2608#comment-4439</guid>
		<description>Simply not true. Lo-tech is actually more polluting, not to mention earth-damaging than hi-tech. Think about the same amount of people burning coal or plain wood for heating, hunting to eat, and foraging for wild berries. True, it would last a single generation, but even so, technology is a ecosystem carrying-capacity augmentation device.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Simply not true. Lo-tech is actually more polluting, not to mention earth-damaging than hi-tech. Think about the same amount of people burning coal or plain wood for heating, hunting to eat, and foraging for wild berries. True, it would last a single generation, but even so, technology is a ecosystem carrying-capacity augmentation device.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt D.</title>
		<link>http://earthfirst.com/the-upside-to-a-total-breakdown-in-society-or-why-utter-chaos-might-not-be-so-bad-for-the-earth/comment-page-1/#comment-4398</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt D.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Oct 2008 08:37:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://earthfirst.com/?p=2608#comment-4398</guid>
		<description>Bring on the apocalypse!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bring on the apocalypse!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
