When the demand for foodstuffs grows, then the agricultural production must therefore also grow. When this grows then the use of fertilisers and pesticides also increases and – as a result – the soil becomes increasingly exhausted and poor, so that the erosion of the fertile acreages grows. When the fertility of the soil is constantly decreasing, then the agricultural production also decreases and consequently also the amount of foodstuffs. But when the amount of foodstuffs decreases then the number of undernourished people and those who die from starvation grows. When the demand for material goods and energies increases, then the industrial production increases and, consequently, also the extraction of raw materials, water and fuel consumption etc. increases as well, whereby the Earth’s resources are reduced. But when the Earth’s resources constantly decrease, then there are more frequent wars and conflicts over these resources. And finally: When the industrial production grows, the environmental pollution grows accordingly, and if this growth is continuous, then this will have a strong adverse effect on the life and health of the human being.

Since then it has become normal among most of the scientists and experts to claim that the Club of Rome’s drawn up reports and prognoses have proven themselves to be wrong, and they attempt to bring the group’s members into disrepute by labelling them as mad prophets of doom and gloom as well as enemies of progress and the economy and to let them be recorded in the annals of history as such. To all appearances, the warning call contained in this controversial report has had the effect of being a bone of contention for the scientific community as well as for politics. Yet how careless and unreasonable were and are the arguments of all those who reject the theses of those warning of and fighting against the overpopulation, without thinking it over enough or simply basing their rejection on learned prejudices and wrong hypotheses. A very good example of this can be seen in the reaction to the above-mentioned report on the Limits to Growth: Firstly the economists reacted with indignation because they assumed that a reduction of the population would seriously affect the economic growth and that this would result in stagnation and standstill regarding the production of goods and technical development. That the Scandinavian countries, who have a relatively low population density, boast the highest per capita income is not taken into consideration, naturally. In addition the assumption was that a limit, i.e. reduction in growth on the part of the West was to the advantage of the Eastern Bloc. For this reason the creators of the report were characterised as dangerous revolutionaries and traitors of the West. It was also argued that the progress concerning technical inventions as well as the invisible and divine-like hand of the economic market and its natural laws would solve every future problem related to shortage in resources, and so there generally was no reason to worry about the population growth. Then loud voices also arose in the Catholic churches which were highly critical of the report, because from their point of view every descendent produced – regardless of how many – as well as all life is according to Christian teaching a gift and work of God and his providence; and so, human beings have no right to interfere in the divine plans in order to regulate the increase, respectively decrease of human beings since in the bible it is clearly written “be fruitful and multiply and fill the Earth”.