Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Tele man
WWIII should take care of MOST of the population(s)...depending upon whom (winner or loser) they're aligned.
|
War has lost it's teeth ... as far as global human population control goes ... And that's a good thing .. history of war shows a decreasing effect on total population % over time .. and now with unmanned this and unmanned that .. the death tolls are likely to take a nose dive even in raw numbers... if there ever is a WWIII (which I doubt).
End of Han Dynasty ... killed ~40mil People in the year 280 , which was more than 10% of the entire global human population at the time .. at most 85mil people killed in WWII by 1945 , which was less than 3% of the total human global population at that time.
- - - - - - -
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesqf
Not such a thumb up, if you think about it. Even if the rate of increase is slowing, it's still a rate of increase. Has to become a rate of decrease to do any good.
|
Bold ---- Only if you assume that current global total population is already actually higher than would be sustainable ... if there is still more sustainable capacity .. than a decrease is not yet needed.
But ... good news for you ... some countries have begun to experience a net negative birth rate .. some are only growing through immigration now...
Link.
- - - - - - -
Quote:
Originally Posted by niky
70+ million a year is still a lot of new mouths to feed.
|
But that angle just leads us to more good news .. as much as the doom and gloom crowd might hate the sunshine as much as vampires
See attached graph of the decreasing average % of income spent on food... We on average spend about 25% less of our income on food today than we did in 1970s .. while at the same time we have about 75% more total mouths to feed... food has become cheaper at a faster rate than population has increased.
And it gets even better ... we've achieved that %$ decrease on less than 46% of the available land ... ie there is room to grow if we had to .. see attached ... switching to a low meat consumption society would more than double the amount of mouths we could feed (sustainably) on the same amount of land ... All current estimates .. even the worst case ones in P-hack's graph above .. put us leveling off (total global population) well bellow these max sustainable levels.
Quote:
Originally Posted by niky
The slowing, however, is perhaps indicative that we're reaching the energy limits of our civilization.
|
Nope .. not even close to the energy limits of our civilization .. Good news there too ... run vampires run
See attached ... Our total energy consumption per person has not been increasing with our increased modern world .. ie more computers .. more TVs .. more cell phones .. Air Conditioning .. etc .. despite our increasing usage of these things ... we peaked in our per person energy usage back in the 1970s.
And we haven't tapped even a tiny fraction yet of the available energy... we have plenty of available energy room to grow if we need to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by niky
Asymmetrical warfare with every man, woman and child out in the streets fighting with Molotovs and Kalashnikovs as the big governments try... and fail... to reassert their moral and authoritative ascendancy in thousands of bushfire revolutions across the globe.
|
Sorry to break it to you .. the days of armed revolution in 1st world countries has past... Any such effort today would fail (be put down) miserably.
If we want to change the system today or in the future ... of any 1st world country today ... it now has to be done within the system itself.
Which is a good thing ... run vampires sun from the sunshine