7 Billion!!

[woodbloke]

Here's a bit of trivia that DW hasn't seen yet :lol: :lol: - Rob

 

[Max Power]

Surprised that no-one else has commented on this. 7000,000000 and rising :shock: expected to be 9 billion by the middle of the century.
How the hell is the planet going to support that many people. :?
This current "crisis" is nothing compared to whats to come

 

[Dibs-h]

Nature always has a way of dealing with things - be they pleasant or unpleasant (from our perspective).

 

[RogerS]

...
How the hell is the planet going to support that many people. :?
.

Answer is...it can't. We already have too many people on this planet. And no, we have no kids.

 

[woodbloke]

I'm reminded of the bell jar experiment that was done years ago. It's probably flawed in many ways and open to all sorts of interpretations but it went something like this. Once upon a time, a mad scientist got hold of glass bell jar, whereupon in he placed a quantity of water, suitable nourishment and a small colony of ordinary house flies. Conditions inside the bell jar were ideal for the colony to develop and as can be expected...they did, massively. However, there came a point when numbers were so great, (even with adequate food and water) that the bell jar could no longer sustain them and those that were surplus died. The mad scientist concluded that even with perfect conditions, a fixed environment would only support a finite number of living creatures.
Probably lots of holes that can be picked in the idea, but food for thought - Rob

 

[Max Power]

"Nature always has a way of dealing with things - be they pleasant or unpleasant (from our perspective)."

In all other species this would be true Dibs but events such as famine, plagues, tsunamis etc that would have reduced population numbers dramatically in previous centuries no longer have the same impact globally, and with half of the world breeding as though they need to have ten chidren to ensure two survive, numbers will go through the roof. :shock:

Nb. I have one child

 

[devonwoody]

RogerS is on the right lines, think 14, no I better not go there. :wink:

 

[Max Power]

14 what DW :?

 

[devonwoody]

14 what DW :?

:wink: :wink: :wink:

 

[sue denim]

found 14

 

[Karl]

Well I suppose i've got more than my fair share of resource eaters - i'll have to put them on rations!

 

[Max Power]

Wouldnt worry about your contribution Karl :lol: :lol:
The population in the west is in decline

 

[woodbloke]

Wouldnt worry about your contribution Karl :lol: :lol:
The population in the west is in decline

...and Japan, apparently - Rob

 

[theartfulbodger]

The can of worm-flavoured elephants in the room would seem to be that the population in the more "sensible western" countries that are experiencing recent economic collapse is in decline, and the population in those countries that are traditionally seen as economic black holes is in growth..

The Bell Jar experiment is something I'll have to google. Despite volunteering for Oxfam and being in general a nice person, I've thought about this before (in a detached, unemotional, third party way) with respect to Africa.

The analogy I've come up with is the "fish pond".
If you put too many fish into a pond then some will die, until there is enough oxygen/food/space for the survivors.
At what point do thoughts like that turn from being curiosity and into sociopathy? :|

 

[devonwoody]

I am actually in the fish pond scenario, I am tempted to take the bird nets of the pond and let the heron have a feast.

 

[theartfulbodger]

Graph of population over time
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-15391515
The BBC seems to think that the exponential increase in population will slow down after 7 billion... :?
And the Beeb is usually so optimistic. and dare I say it, Liberal :wink:


A thought provoking article on population growth:
http://www.nationalpost.com/news/number ... story.html

"The Club of Rome, the mother of all think tanks, started ringing similar bells in 1972, with the book Limits to Growth, and they're still at it. Apparently, if the world wants to live like North Americans, it can only support 1.7 billion people. That means 5.3 billion people are going to have to make, ahem, other arrangements."
:shock:
The trouble is that the previously backward nations will want to "live like North Americans" as they advance in their grasp of technology and trade. As the likes of India, Pakistan, Iran etc etc develop nuclear power and space programs they will inevitably consume more resources and produce more pollutants, and children. China is fast becoming an economic power that will maybe one day dominate the World.

I wonder what the Illuminati and the Bilderberg Group have planned for us?
:mrgreen:

 

[theartfulbodger]

I am actually in the fish pond scenario, I am tempted to take the bird nets of the pond and let the heron have a feast.

Put some Perch in? They're an interesting pretty fish, and they'll mop up any weak fish and eat lots of fry and keep numbers in check.

 

[woodbloke]

The analogy I've come up with is the "fish pond".
If you put too many fish into a pond then some will die, until there is enough oxygen/food/space for the survivors.
At what point do thoughts like that turn from being curiosity and into sociopathy? :|

That's an interesting one. With good pond management and decent filtration etc, I suppose a pond could support a much greater number of fish than if they were managed without any artificial 'interference'...which begs the obvious question.
How well is the world managed to support an increasing population?...I suspect it's a bit like the curates egg. Good in parts - Rob

 

[flounder]

Having recently seen the film Contagen at the cinema I am under no doubts that Mother Nature will find a solution!

 

[theartfulbodger]

[
.... With good pond management and decent filtration etc, I suppose a pond could support a much greater number of fish than if they were managed without any artificial 'interference'

That's the idea..
From memory Ethiopia had a population of about 40 million at the time of Bob Geldorfs Live Aid in the early 80's...now the population is closer to 80 million. Amount of increase in natural resources? None. Although they no doubt have better wells, better farming methods and so on these days.

The population of the World is a ticking time bomb. Saturation will happen one day, and then what?

I feel sympathy for the individuals suffering, and certainly wouldn't want the job of coming up with a long term plan.