Paul Sabin's The Bet review

I have no strong feelings for or against the book, The Bet by Paul Sabin.  I guess my stance is very neutral. I felt that it presents a lot of new information to me. The reason being that I do not know much about the history of environment science, the bet included. However I also never fully felt engaged in the reading and had a sense of disconnection.  The lesson I gained from the book is that there will always be two sides to the story, and sometimes even though you believe you are right, someone will always try to disprove you. This seemed to be the case for Ehrlich who very much thought he was right warning humanity against our own self-destruction. Yet he did not understand that people could have opinions that are the complete opposite of him, and those opposite opinions may also prove true.  A reflection I take on myself after reading this book is that I do not fully believe in either Simon’s or Ehrlich’s way of thinking.  I believe that I am somewhere in the middle. My stance is similar to Ehrlich’s because I do believe we need to change our habits to preserve nature to keep our species alive. However, unlike Ehrlich I do not believe in a all out doomsday scenario. Rather I agree with Simon in that population is a necessary component to our society and the growth of the human species both in numbers and advancement. I have noticed that in the entity of the book Sabin does not fully address how radical some of the thoughts during this time had become.  In a way it is beneficial because it allows us to form our own opinion on each reference. Yet, I feel that it also leads to a disconnection from the author.