AMosely

This is not something worth celebrating - and although each of our 300,000,000 puts out more pollution, waste and garbage than the other 5.7 billion, the fact that India and China both have more than 1 billion people each is far more disturbing. North America's population is merely the tip of a very, very large iceberg. I'll spare you the lecture on exponential growth, sustainability and carrying capacity and instead just leave it at that.

leejo

Nothing a little nuclear war can't fix. Mass suicides by environmentalists would work, too I guess.

Strag

Hey, what if the huge increase in our planet's population is partially responsible for the Global Warming? Would environmentalists then say that war is a good thing, since reducing our population could potentially help to save our planet?

"We must destroy our population to save it!"

xTYBALTx

Please.


Edit: Seriously though, someone needs to put down the Ehrlich. No wonder some people freak out about stuff all of the time - population bomb, acid rain, global warming... Just swap out the caffeine for alcohol and chill out.

Final Edit: Some light reading to go with that decaf Irish coffee.

__________________
Current Tybalt theme song: Mason v. Princess - Perfect

Strag

leejo

We should all go gay. Everyone in the pile!

icky

You first?

__________________
Peace through fear... since 1947!

leejo

I got your back, dude.

Totally out of context, but this is about the most perfect quote I can imagine given the ridiculous turn I've inflicted on this poor thread.

Obviously we need to stop making babies, start killing more people, stop medical research, or find another solution. Maybe living in huts eating tofu and reading mother jones would do the trick. We could lecture each other about sustainibility, thereby increasing both murders and suicides while virtually eliminating baby-making.

AMosely

Let me help put the thread back on track. Please view the following graph:


Reference: http://www.deathreference.com/Nu-Pu/...on-Growth.html

Global Population has been growing exponentially since around 1750. During the 20th century, the curve was pushed even higher by falling mortality rates (mostly due to technological advances in medicine) despite two major world wars and the Holocaust.

Yet as population numbers continue to climb, population growth rates have been slowing for the past two decades. Many studies suggest that increased literacy rates, education levels, and even socio-economic factors have a major effect on growth rates - that is, the more educated and economically comfortable a person is, the less offspring they are likely to have.

So, while I don't think we are doomed by our own masses, I do think many more populations of people need to be educated on the subject. Birth control remains a major issue in this debate.

The simple fact that 200,000,000 was celebrated in America with much fanfare in 1967, yet 300,000,000 only seems to be generating concern in 2006 is somewhat encouraging. China and India have also learned some valuable (and hard) lessons. This will continue for some time until the exponential trend is eventually broken sometime in the next 150 years, because if it doesn't, we most certainly are doomed.

Obi

I thought Global Warming was responsible for the huge increase in our planet's population.

__________________

Steeler

China has believed it has been at the top of the resource curve for the past 50 years or so. Hence their brutal single child laws. As they industrialize and urbanize, however, the country significantly increases its resource base, as technology makes more land arable and expands the food supply. Unfortunately, poverty and starvation is still a way of life in many parts of that country.

The practical science of sustainability is still a little fuzzy, unfortunately. Mainly because infrastructure is a terribly inconsistent factor.

__________________