EVERYONE is going to die. That’s not “the problem”.
Rees' point is that the population of Earth could be reduced by six billion as a direct result of overshoot.
THAT'S as close to guaranteed as any vague statement can be. Are these 'direct result' deaths as opposed to indirect results of overshoot, or are indirect deaths resulting from overshoot added in after the advertised price, like taxes?
In any event, one thing truly IS guaranteed if "overshoot" has that impact. It will mean at least 6 billion fewer people, and probably much more due to indirect results of overshoot.
If it happens soon enough, it will reduce the population to a level where "overshoot" means unnecessarily using up ammunition that is no longer manufactured in a semi-post-technological world. Then, in another thousand years or few, depending upon where it bottoms out, we can do it all over again!
But seriously, Merle, overshoot is an abstraction. It is arguable in the abstract that right now, we should all embrace guns and their indiscriminate use, because.... overshoot. Billions could die from overshoot, and
not killing the few tens of thousands who perish every year from guns, would just cause even more overshoot deaths. Think of the chilluns!
As a matter of fact, Merle, I do believe I am going to die of either accident or overshoot.
Not being facetious or sarcastic, either.
Overshoot may not be the proximate cause of death*, but it will almost certainly be a huge contributor to the stress that will almost certainly underlie, accelerate and enable any fatal malady that should befall me. But that would be an indirect result, right? So if there are 6 billion dead as a direct result of overshoot, can we extrapolate the REAL damage? Just so's we don't overshoot in our mitigation efforts...
* If I get the chance on my deathbed** I will certainly ask if they could please, on the death certificate, put "overshoot" as the cause of death! Thanks for that...
** NO, I'm not on any damn deathbed! Or any other bed. Reminds me, I gotta go change the bed.