World's population officially reaches 7billion

[alms24sebring]

Heard it on the news today. Honestly its kind of a scary thought. One of the stats was that there are 5 births for every second worldwide. Another was something like if you were to take all of the newborns in 1 day head to foot, they would wrap the Earth 245 some odd times (something like that).

Its scary because usually when a species gets overpopulated, some kind of epidemic or natural phenomena takes over and tries to retake control of the number. Last time I remember reading some years ago, the death rate was like 3/5 of the birth rate. Since then, Im sure that new medicines and technology had shrunk that number. And the fact that I see more and more 22 y/o girls having 5 kids running around is only increasing the gap. I dont understand why anyone would want that many life ruiners so early anyways. IMO, its gross and there is no reason for it.

I feel like this is a hard thing to accept and eventually control, that the world is really becoming overpopulated and it will pose a serious problem some day. There are only so many places to farm food and only so fast that livestock can mature. Anyways before I get off topic, any thought or opinions on this? Do you think that Earth's human population could collapse on itself?

[BusyBadger]

Weird, I was just talking about mass extinction events and pandemics with someone last week, I'm a happy sort like that!

There have already been two pandemics in "modern times" (I'm not counting the 1918 influenza pandemic) - HIV/AIDS (ongoing) & H1N1 (2009).

Unlike previous pandemics that would "burn themselves out" because they could kill off all the carriers before spreading the disease(s) to outlying populations modern pandemics don't have that fire break built in.

Thanks to the speed of modern travel a disease could be spread across the globe before symptoms were even exhibited. Imagine either the Plague of Justinian or The Black Death (both bubonic plague) happening now instead of 500 AD or the 1300's.

Earth will get along just fine without us here, check out the Permian-Triassic ME event (The Great Dying) and see how lifeless the planet was, and how long it stayed that way.

[numbnuts240]

stop trying to save everybody and just let natural selection run its course. trim the excess and weed out the undesirable genes from the reproductive pool.

[Bubba1]

stop trying to save everybody and just let natural selection run its course. trim the excess and weed out the undesirable genes from the reproductive pool.

I think if it gets any more crowded, I could see relocating to Costa Rica, where the people per square mile is about 0.4. Great weather, great coffee, great beaches,

[frapjap]

I think if it gets any more crowded, I could see relocating to Costa Rica, where the people per square mile is about 0.4. Great weather, great coffee, great beaches,

You forgot great women.

[themadscientist]

You's gonna get the fever.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yUmJZ1kyYoU[/youtube]

[themadscientist]

But seriously. Soylent Green; it's what's for dinner!

[sbird1]

http://pandemic3.com/

[alms24sebring]

You forgot great women.

=

great beaches

^ That is an awesome game! I could never dominate the entire world though. Thanks for posting that, Ill be sure to replay that later. The first one was good too.

Is it bad if the dark side of me actually wanted H1N1 to cut the population by half? I would just hope I wouldnt be one of the billions like everyone else. Also, has anyone watched 'Life After People'? Somethin cool to think about..

[SBC 240Z]

They also said on the news that at the current rate it's likely that we'll reach 8 billion by 2025 (or 2035, can't remember which one)

[zacmil]

They also said on the news that at the current rate it's likely that we'll reach 8 billion by 2025 (or 2035, can't remember which one)

That's way too many people. I say we start colonizing mars!

[sbird1]

I say we engineer a zombie virus as a weapon and then have it get "out of control"

[alms24sebring]

whoa whoa, we just need to kill about 2 billion people, not only have a few thousand struggling to survive. Your thinking though, I like that.

Or we could just kill all the stupids and people (woman) that cant drive

Oh yeah and this subject makes me want to watch Outbreak again. Its been awhile.

[BusyBadger]

Oh yeah and this subject makes me want to watch Outbreak again. Its been awhile.

Read these instead...

The Demon in the Freezer

The Coming Plague

[alms24sebring]

Not much of a reader but If its really good, Ill try it. I think the first one looks much more appealing being based off a true story. But the 2nd one.... ugh! 600+ pages no way.

[Jesda]

[nissangirl74]

I don't think the population will get too far out of hand for two main reasons:

- More and more people are deciding NOT to have children. This will help counteract those couple who feel like they must f*** like rabbits and breed babies until the woman's uterus falls out.

- One of the largest populations, the baby boomers, are all beginning to reach retirement / death age. A great number of them have not taken very good care of themselves so I don't suspect a lot of them will be joining a centurians club.

[Jesda]

I worry about the disadvantaged/disconnected/uneducated around the world breeding like crazy, organizing, and coming after us. That's more frightening to me than diseases.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo[/youtube]

[z32pilot62]

There is a movie out there that I truly feel is an accurate representation of where the world is headed. Some of you may still have faith in the human race but I say the movie Idiocracy is exactly where we are going. I agree with Jesda on this one. I also would like to see how Hans Rosling's little map/graph would look if you took inflation into account? I would imagine that the map/graph plot points would stay on the left side but just move up and slightly to the right. Indicating what is true in Idiocracy as well, there are just a lot of healthy poor people that don't know anything.

[zacmil]

- More and more people are deciding NOT to have children. This will help counteract those couple who feel like they must f*** like rabbits and breed babies until the woman's uterus falls out.

While that is the case in some areas, as a whole the Earth's population continues to rise. Personally, I think it would be cool if the majority of the human population would agree to try and limit themselves to one child. That's not to say that someone would come take away your birthday if you had more than one kid, but if the majority of people made an attempt to limit themselves we could have this population thing knocked out in a couple of generations. That won't happen though.

[alms24sebring]

For some reason I think we are in another baby boomers era. Like I said, Im seeing large families, 5+ kids per mother, and great grandmothers at age 50 (you get the idea). Again, I will not mention any genre of people for the sake of getting flamed.

Just another major probrem to eventually be forced to handle when its too late

[sbird1]

Again, I will not mention any genre of people for the sake of getting flamed.

I WILL!!!

Catholics, poor/stupid people, and degenerates

[zacmil]

Again, I will not mention any genre of people for the sake of getting flamed.

I WILL!!!

Catholics, poor/stupid people, and degenerates

I agree though, it does seem like people are having large families. Kinda strange seeing as how people are so concerned about the current economic state... kids are expensive.

[alms24sebring]

AHHHH, SO..... MANY..... LIFE RUINERS!!!!!!

[C-Kwik]

I don't think the population will get too far out of hand for two main reasons:

- More and more people are deciding NOT to have children. This will help counteract those couple who feel like they must f*** like rabbits and breed babies until the woman's uterus falls out.

- One of the largest populations, the baby boomers, are all beginning to reach retirement / death age. A great number of them have not taken very good care of themselves so I don't suspect a lot of them will be joining a centurians club.

Women in modern countries have definitely slowed down their rates of bearing children. But this is only true in modernized countries. 3rd world country population growth rates are still quite high. Lack of education (thus career women), lack of access to birth control, and the desire to offset low survival rates contribute to this effect. It will max out, if it does because carrying capacity is reached, it will already be out of hand. Cost of food will be high, and I would expect to see large incidents of famine, especially in less developed nations. Distribution to such areas are already a problem as it is. Its not out of the realm of plausibility that this could be just one more global resource that could add more tension between nations...

[costa_rican13]

I think if it gets any more crowded, I could see relocating to Costa Rica, where the people per square mile is about 0.4. Great weather, great coffee, great beaches,

this!!! ^^^^^

[SBC 240Z]

The world has a way of balancing things out, anytime any one species gets out of hand something comes along. I'm just hoping we aren't the next dinosaurs (if we were though my stepmom would be a fatbitchosaurus). We are expecting our first child in January, so the baby isn't here yet and we're already researching which birth control to go with since we don't want to be one of those families.

One thing I thing I have thought about before is limiting the amount of children you have based on your income. If you are on welfare and food stamps then why do you need six kids? A better question is why are you a 400lb mother with government assistance and all your kids look to be starving? Limiting kids based on income would either motivate people that really want a lot of kids to make a lot of money or keep us from having our tax dollars pay for shaquitas 20 kids.

[Bubba1]

I think if it gets any more crowded, I could see relocating to Costa Rica, where the people per square mile is about 0.4. Great weather, great coffee, great beaches,

this!!! ^^^^^

I need to go back there soon. I'm running low on my favorite Costa Rican coffee (Molito Cafe 1820). mmmmmmmmm...burp.

[alms24sebring]

The world has a way of balancing things out, anytime any one species gets out of hand something comes along. I'm just hoping we aren't the next dinosaurs (if we were though my stepmom would be a fatbitchosaurus). We are expecting our first child in January, so the baby isn't here yet and we're already researching which birth control to go with since we don't want to be one of those families.

One thing I thing I have thought about before is limiting the amount of children you have based on your income. If you are on welfare and food stamps then why do you need six kids? A better question is why are you a 400lb mother with government assistance and all your kids look to be starving? Limiting kids based on income would either motivate people that really want a lot of kids to make a lot of money or keep us from having our tax dollars pay for shaquitas 20 kids.

I ask these same questions myself everytime I see it. I either scream behind my windshield "Why the F*** do you have 7 kids and pregnant if your paying with food stamps!" Or, "God, all those kids better not be all hers.. who would even lay that?!"

I can agree with you on the gov't funds. They should really police that more. When people become jobless, some rely on those funds as a parent to bail them out rather than actually trying to find work. But I guess in their defense, it is really hard right now, and it really truely is.

[PapaSmurf2k3]

Women in modern countries have definitely slowed down their rates of bearing children. But this is only true in modernized countries. 3rd world country population growth rates are still quite high. Lack of education (thus career women), lack of access to birth control, and the desire to offset low survival rates contribute to this effect. It will max out, if it does because carrying capacity is reached, it will already be out of hand. Cost of food will be high, and I would expect to see large incidents of famine, especially in less developed nations. Distribution to such areas are already a problem as it is. Its not out of the realm of plausibility that this could be just one more global resource that could add more tension between nations...

I was about to post almost exactly the same thing.

Really, the US isn't contributing to the "problem" much at all (go us!). I think we average 2.2-2.3 children per family? I don't know how they calculate that though... like for people like me (I'm not in a family), do they take my data and throw it in? (no kids... and I intend to keep it that way).

The US, with it's ~300 million or so people, is fairly insignificant in the world's population (4.3%?).

I guess what really worries me is kinda what Jesda said. The 99% think they have it bad here, and we already have Sally Struthers pushing "donate to these starving babies" commercials in less developed countries. They are the ones mass-reproducing anyway... so the problem will only get worse. How long til some crazy bastard gets all self-righteous and convinces them to go to war?