The Population Precipice: Where Mankind Rises or Falls

Tuesday, February 26, 2013

The world's population is a at a very dangerous, unstable place.

What is that place?

A narrow cusp of either rapid growth or dangerous decrease in the human population.

Based on birth rates in already developed countries, the world's human population may be much closer to a bottleneck event than some are aware. While it seems the population is expanding at exponential rates, the expansion is slowing. The expansion is slowing so much that the birthrate may drop below the stabilization rate causing a massive decrease in population that would have a devastating snowball effect on future generations.

Posted by HeuristicGratis at 01:20 PM | 79 COMMENTS | permalink | Comment on This Entry |

Front Page
Breaking News
Comments
Flagged Comments
User Blogs
Write a Blog Entry
Create a Poll
Edit Account
Weekly Digest
Stats Page
RSS Feed
Back Page

Subscriptions

Read the Retort using RSS.

RSS Feed

Author Info

HeuristicGratis

Joined 2013/01/14
Visited 2013/05/18

Status: user

MORE STORIES

Dzhokhar Tsarnaev Left Note on Boat (35 comments) ...

Eric Holder Just Doesn't Know: Or So He Says (3 comments) ...

Sit Down Restaurants Worse for You Than Fast Food (16 comments) ...

'We're Getting the Big Stories Wrong' (27 comments) ...

NBC Refuses to Identify Hicks as Hillary/Obama Supporter (14 comments) ...

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Personal attacks, profanity, abusive conduct and expressions of prejudice are not allowed. If you have comments about site moderation, contact the site publisher in email.

Ever watch Idiocracy? That's where we're headed. The lower the standard of living, the higher the birth rate. When people don't have video games, fast cars and 300 cable channels, they have babies.

#1 | Posted by MUSTANG at 2013-02-26 01:37 PM | Reply | Flag:

"The expansion is slowing so much that the birthrate may drop below the stabilization rate causing a massive decrease in population that would have a devastating snowball effect on future generations."

A massive decrease in population is the only thing that can save humanity from total extinction. Deal with it.

200,000 people will be born today. And tomorrow. And the next day.

#2 | Posted by nullifidian at 2013-02-26 01:45 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Stabilization of world population is perhaps the paramount issue of the 21st century. Without global population stabilization, humankind will find it enormously more difficult to deal with the critical issues facing the planet, such as global warming, biodiversity, the environment, energy, food/water supplies, migration and security.

The path to population stabilization requires sustained and critical attention and informed policymaking at all levels. Today's decisions not only affect human well-being, but also the quality of all life forms on Earth in the coming decades and beyond."

Oh, he might as well go home and stop trying. We are all doomed anyway. Everyone knows that.

#3 | Posted by Corky at 2013-02-26 01:49 PM | Reply | Flag:

"the path to population stabilization requires sustained and critical attention and informed policymaking at all levels."

Not going to happen. Americans won't even give up their child tax credits. Keep dreamin'.

#4 | Posted by nullifidian at 2013-02-26 01:52 PM | Reply | Flag:

200,000 people will be born today. And tomorrow. And the next day.

#2 | Posted by nullifidian at 2013-02-26 01:45 PM | Reply

Null says that with great certainty----what a stud!!!!!

#5 | Posted by matsop at 2013-02-26 01:53 PM | Reply | Flag:

Null says that with great certainty----what a stud!!!!!

#5 | Posted by matsop

The future will not be kind to you and your descendents that thought the gravy train of endless population growth and resource consumption could continue forever.

#6 | Posted by nullifidian at 2013-02-26 01:56 PM | Reply | Flag:

#3 | Posted by Corky at 2013-02-26 01:49 PM | Reply |

Typical demonrat/lefty speak----government policy screwups.

Corky, you won't have to worry. Famine, pestilence, and Obama's coming financial nightmare will control populations quite nicely.

#7 | Posted by matsop at 2013-02-26 01:56 PM | Reply | Flag:

The future will not be kind to you and your descendents that thought the gravy train of endless population growth and resource consumption could continue forever.

#6 | Posted by nullifidian at 2013-02-26 01:56 PM | Reply |

Null; Zat's twin bro.

#8 | Posted by matsop at 2013-02-26 01:57 PM | Reply | Flag:

-Obama's coming financial nightmare

He obviously already sleeps under your bed at night.

#9 | Posted by Corky at 2013-02-26 01:59 PM | Reply | Flag:

Null must be in "I told you so" heaven on this one. :-)

#4 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN
In the animal world reproduction is controlled by environmental pressure of food availability, predators, local environment. The human race is no different. Birth rates have dropped under Obama.

Birth Rate In U.S. Down For Fourth Year In A Row
NEW YORK -- U.S. births fell for the fourth year in a row, the government reported Wednesday, with experts calling it more proof that the weak economy has continued to dampen enthusiasm for having children.
www.huffingtonpost.com

Soon Obamanomics will reduce our population.

#10 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-26 02:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

The premise is that as cultures become more technologically and civilly advanced, the birthrate drops below the sustainability rate.

When that happens in enough countries to bring the average sustainability rate below its necessary level, there will be mass population loss which will cause enormous problems, probably more problems than population growth.

The key aspect of the article is the need for balance. You don't want too much growth, but you don't want loss either.

#11 | Posted by HeuristicGratis at 2013-02-26 02:26 PM | Reply | Flag:

Population is too damn high!

#12 | Posted by rearendhat at 2013-02-26 02:27 PM | Reply | Flag:

Losing too much population growth means less people to consume, less consumption means less profit.

#13 | Posted by moneywar at 2013-02-26 02:30 PM | Reply | Flag:

#13 It is more than that. Losing population brings about the inability to sustain society as it currently exists. This has drastic effects on other situations as well. Simple profit is the least of worries.

#14 | Posted by HeuristicGratis at 2013-02-26 02:36 PM | Reply | Flag:

"200,000 people will be born today. And tomorrow. And the next day."

"Consider this: each day the population of humans on the planet expands by more than 200,000. That is one good-sized city, complete with water, food, energy, transportation, communication and sanitation infrastructure. To feed that city may require, if storage and process losses are kept to a minimum, 1 million kilocalories every day - something like a 20-acre stockyard of cattle, a Tyson's poultry farm the size of a superdome, and a large fleet of Japanese fishing vessels seine-netting dolphins as they scour the dwindling ocean stores for tuna.

And the next day, you have to find somewhere to put another, while still feeding the first."

www.culturechange.org

#15 | Posted by nullifidian at 2013-02-26 02:36 PM | Reply | Flag:

Soon Obamanomics will reduce our population.

You mean something that we can all support him on? HOOOOOORAY!

#16 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2013-02-26 02:37 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Losing too much population growth means less people to consume, less consumption means less profit."

Exactly. Capitalism is a growth system on a finite planet. That's why it is fated for extinction.

#17 | Posted by nullifidian at 2013-02-26 02:39 PM | Reply | Flag:

#15 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN AT 2013-02-26 02:36 PM | FLAG: NW!

Newsworthy mother f[...]er!

Mother f[...]ing NEWSWORTHY!

#18 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2013-02-26 02:39 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Over time, relatively small differences in fertility rates can lead to enormous differences in population size. For instance, if fertility rates eventually settled at about one-quarter child above replacement, i.e., 2.35 births per woman, world population would more than double to 14 billion by the century's end and continue growing thereafter.

On the other hand, if fertility rates settle at about one-quarter child below replacement fertility, or 1.85 births per woman, world population would be around 5.5 billion by the end of the century and continue declining thereafter.

In other words, replacement fertility in the long term is essentially the tipping point for population change: above it growth and below it decline."

#19 | Posted by Corky at 2013-02-26 02:41 PM | Reply | Flag:

Whose suggesting that this will happen in enough countries? Hasn't globalization ensured that most countries' resources will be dried out by the massive supremacy of Westernized nations with their glutinous greed and appetite?

China and India's growing middle classes will be the true determining factor as to whether the current system will pan out as the article suggests. If they are able to sustain it as long as the U.S. has, I believe the system could be sustained. But if either China or India show that the system is unable to support them, how can the system support 40-50 countries like them?

#20 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2013-02-26 02:44 PM | Reply | Flag:

#13 It is more than that. Losing population brings about the inability to sustain society as it currently exists.

#14 | Posted by HeuristicGratis at 2013-02-26 02:36 PM | Reply | Flag

Huh? I would like you prove this.

We currently are having difficulty in sustaining society and to decrease will just aid us not hurt us. It is about profit, less labor force hurts profit, less consumers hurts profits, less demand hurts profits.

#21 | Posted by moneywar at 2013-02-26 02:44 PM | Reply | Flag:

Exactly. Capitalism is a growth system on a finite planet. That's why it is fated for extinction.

You're on a roll, NULLI. I'm going to shut up, sit back, and learn from the master.

#22 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2013-02-26 02:45 PM | Reply | Flag:

What this thread needs is a planned genocide advocate.

#23 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2013-02-26 02:50 PM | Reply | Flag:

"What this thread needs is a planned genocide advocate."

What humanity needs is a planned contraction.

#25 | Posted by nullifidian at 2013-02-26 02:54 PM | Reply | Flag:

"What humanity needs is a planned contraction." #25 | Posted by nullifidian

You're right. Sorry. This is clearly a serious discussion. I spent my seriousness allotment on the gay marriage thread.

*backing out, hands up defensively

#27 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2013-02-26 03:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

What humanity needs is a planned contraction.

#25 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN

Contractions are part of the problem. "Push! Push!" :)

#28 | Posted by MUSTANG at 2013-02-26 03:01 PM | Reply | Flag:

I could have but I'd just be doing a second rate impersonation of chairborne.

Poor 101.

#29 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2013-02-26 03:03 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Contractions are part of the problem. "Push! Push!" :)"

Semen emissions are really the biggest environmental problem of all. You can't fix anything if you're adding 200,000 people per day.

#30 | Posted by nullifidian at 2013-02-26 03:11 PM | Reply | Flag:

I grew up in Oregon. In eastern Oregon, the rabbit population is on a 7-10 year cycle. The population increases steadily until there are so many rabbits that there isn't enough food or water to sustain them and something like 90% of them die off in a combination of famine and disease. Then the cycle starts over.

I agree with Nulli. It seems like there would be a high probability that at some point, we're going to reach a point where there aren't enough resources to support the human race and the population will take a nosedive at the hands of one of the four horsemen. It's true that we're not rabbits, but there are far too many sheep...

#31 | Posted by MUSTANG at 2013-02-26 03:12 PM | Reply | Flag:

Semen emissions are really the biggest environmental problem of all.

#30 | Posted by nullifidian at 2013-02-26 03:11 PM | Reply

That's a tough one to solve. We'd have to put billions into Nasa for transportation vehicles and space stations; transport the female part of the species to the stations and construct a huge latex condom between earth and the stations.

#32 | Posted by matsop at 2013-02-26 03:23 PM | Reply | Flag:

will take a nosedive at the hands of one of the four horsemen.

#31 | Posted by MUSTANG at 2013-02-26 03:12 PM | Reply |

Famine, death, pestilence, and Obamanomics.

#33 | Posted by matsop at 2013-02-26 03:26 PM | Reply | Flag:

We'd have to put billions into Nasa for transportation vehicles and space stations; transport the female part of the species to the stations and construct a huge latex condom between earth and the stations.

Only then will the members of the United Planetary Galactic Alliance officially make themselves known to our species and invite Earth to join the UPGA, thereby enlightening humans to the true 'multi-versal reality' that in which we live.

#34 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2013-02-26 03:29 PM | Reply | Flag:

#21 | Posted by moneywar at 2013-02-26 02:44 PM | Reply | Flag:

Uncultivated gardens become overrun by weeds ultimately becoming defunct for growing purposes.

#35 | Posted by HeuristicGratis at 2013-02-26 03:38 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Uncultivated gardens become overrun by weeds ultimately becoming defunct for growing purposes"

So?

www.barnesandnoble.com

#36 | Posted by nullifidian at 2013-02-26 03:44 PM | Reply | Flag:

You're not contributing anything to this thread, Matflop. Just so you know.

#38 | Posted by nullifidian at 2013-02-26 03:57 PM | Reply | Flag:

Exactly. Capitalism is a growth system on a finite planet. That's why it is fated for extinction.

#17 | Posted by nullifidian

More ridiculousness from a couch potato.

The earth may be finite in resource, but we continually recycle material as we grow, we will get better at it, we live in a closed material system, but open energy one. Energy is continually added via the sun. The end is not near, and the sky isn't falling.

We may reach a population max, we may come down, but certainly it doesn't need to always be growing. Forests don't have to continually grow to be sustainable, but they do change, what was here this year maynot be there 100's of years from now. It is nothing more than our frame of reference at this time....

Just because you drink water doesn't mean that water is forever taken out of the system. Just because you use a resource doesn't mean the resource is forever lost an input to another on the planet.

Capitalism is nothing more than the most efficient man-made method of potential energy redistribution.

ps: hows your startle response....

#39 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2013-02-26 04:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

"More ridiculousness from a couch potato."

Ouch. I'm flagging that as abusive. ;)

#40 | Posted by nullifidian at 2013-02-26 04:13 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Capitalism is nothing more than the most efficient man-made method of potential energy redistribution."

What da' hell you talkin' about, boy?

#41 | Posted by nullifidian at 2013-02-26 04:15 PM | Reply | Flag:

#41 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN

Since all of our entitlement programs like are based on a pyramid scheme requiring growth how do you think this is going to play out in your zero growth world?

#42 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-26 04:40 PM | Reply | Flag:

#41 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN

Sorry Null you don't do redneck.

Null= Dude, like what, sssssspp, ARE you talkin bout, phoooooo.

#43 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-26 04:42 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Since all of our entitlement programs like are based on a pyramid scheme requiring growth"

Industrial civilization is a pyramid scheme based on using a half billion years worth of fossil fuels in a century or two. Guess what happens on the downside of the petroleum bell curve?

#44 | Posted by nullifidian at 2013-02-26 04:43 PM | Reply | Flag:

#44

We perfect cold fusion?

#45 | Posted by Daniel at 2013-02-26 05:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

We perfect cold fusion?
#45 | POSTED BY DANIEL

That'll work, or hydrogen generators, Nano technology.

#46 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-26 05:20 PM | Reply | Flag:

Nano tech would be awesome for starship construction in orbit. Maybe they will have Ion drives perfected by then as well.

#47 | Posted by Daniel at 2013-02-26 05:24 PM | Reply | Flag:

lol. You're delusional. You people always think there is some techno-fix to fix the damage from the last techno-fix. Cold fusion...lol...put down the crack pipe.

#48 | Posted by nullifidian at 2013-02-26 05:25 PM | Reply | Flag:

Of course, we will need to be mining the asteroid belt for the raw material.

#49 | Posted by Daniel at 2013-02-26 05:27 PM | Reply | Flag:

Technology breakthroughs have enriched many billions of lives. Further breakthroughs will continue to make life more enjoyable. It's the morals of man that is destroying civilization, not the technology.

#50 | Posted by Daniel at 2013-02-26 05:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

You guys are ruining his Doomsday meme...

It's not like "necessity is the mother of invention", or anything.

(Quote often ascribed Plato, that dumbass)

#51 | Posted by Corky at 2013-02-26 05:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

Cold fusion...lol...put down the crack pipe.
#48 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN

How's that investment in that buggy whip factory working for you?

#52 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-26 05:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

#50 | POSTED BY DANIEL

They jerked off in ancient times too, DAN.

#53 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2013-02-26 05:33 PM | Reply | Flag:

How's that investment in that buggy whip factory working for you?

Posted by paneocon

You techno-fetishists are always praying for some new technology [...]. It's not going to happen.

#54 | Posted by nullifidian at 2013-02-26 05:37 PM | Reply | Flag:

Of course, we will need to be mining the asteroid belt for the raw material.

#49 | Posted by Daniel

Just think. If asteroid-mining spaceships were fueled by hot air, you could save humanity!

#55 | Posted by nullifidian at 2013-02-26 05:45 PM | Reply | Flag:

#54

No techno fetishes here. I'm kind of into the more simpler things. Like, my gardens are all organic, no chemical fertilzers or pesticides. I leave parts of my fields for the wildlife to use. My woods are teeming with deer, turkey and squirrel that I only hunt when I need to harvest some meat. I don't hunt for the fun of killing something. And right now, I'm sitting in my recliner with large flat screen tv tuned to the local news while reading the DR on my tablet. Life is good. Enjoy it while you can.

#56 | Posted by Daniel at 2013-02-26 05:47 PM | Reply | Flag:

#54 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN

Ye of little faith. You should check this guy out sometime He is amazing.
Null I just want to say two words to you, nano technology. enough said.

The Graduate "One Word: Plastics"

Ray Kurzweil: Solar Will Power the World in 16 Years

solar power, driven by exponentially-increasing nanotechnology, will satisfy the entire world's need for energy in less than twenty years.

bigthink.com

#57 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-26 05:49 PM | Reply | Flag:

Nano tech would be awesome for starship construction in orbit. Maybe they will have Ion drives perfected by then as well.

#47 | Posted by Daniel

What? I have an Ion drive sitting in my garage already! You want it?

#58 | Posted by nullifidian at 2013-02-26 05:50 PM | Reply | Flag:

#58

Oh thats cool but, I already have mine I've been working on down at the barn. How did you solve the thermal nuclear phase inversion issue? It's got me stumped.

#59 | Posted by Daniel at 2013-02-26 05:54 PM | Reply | Flag:

What? I have an Ion drive sitting in my garage already! You want it?
#58 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN

A rusted out Rambler and a bad case of gas does not a ION drive make.

#60 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-26 05:55 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Ray Kurzweil: Solar Will Power the World in 16 Years"

Solar has been powering the world since the birth of the planet. Kurzweil's been senile for almost as long.

#61 | Posted by nullifidian at 2013-02-26 05:57 PM | Reply | Flag:

-the thermal nuclear phase inversion issue

You say, "Make it so, Scotty!".

And leave the rest to him.

#62 | Posted by Corky at 2013-02-26 05:58 PM | Reply | Flag:

"You techno-fetishists are always praying for some new technology to save your worthless azzes."

Goodness, you're starting to sound like Zat with posts like that.

#63 | Posted by eberly at 2013-02-26 05:59 PM | Reply | Flag:

"A rusted out Rambler and a bad case of gas does not a ION drive make."

Says you.

#64 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2013-02-26 05:59 PM | Reply | Flag:

Senile and genius share a border.

#65 | Posted by Daniel at 2013-02-26 06:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

-sound like Zat

Ray, more like.

#66 | Posted by Corky at 2013-02-26 06:01 PM | Reply | Flag:

#61 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN

With your batting history and Kurzweil's? My money is on Ray Kurzweil.

Nano technology will lower energy usage and allow solar panels to be built without being the environmental nightmare they are now. It will make them affordable for everyone. You should be happy, it's a green dream.

#67 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-26 06:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

forgot about Ray. You're right....he does.

which is funny because Nulli couldn't stand Ray.

#68 | Posted by eberly at 2013-02-26 06:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

-Senile and genius share a border.

Between Juarez and El Paso.

#69 | Posted by Corky at 2013-02-26 06:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

#68

He's taken Ray's "The Sky is Falling!" mantle.

#70 | Posted by Corky at 2013-02-26 06:03 PM | Reply | Flag:

Goodness, you're starting to sound like Zat with posts like that.

#63 | Posted by eberly

So? I'm having as much fun as Zat. Nothing wrong with that, sourpuss.

#71 | Posted by nullifidian at 2013-02-26 06:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

I don't know if it came with the Chicken Little outfit.

#72 | Posted by Corky at 2013-02-26 06:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

#64 | POSTED BY HAGBARD_CELINE

The Rambler will not handle the Flux Capacitor. Marty McFly

#73 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-26 06:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

hey, it's all good, Nulli. whatever makes you happy.

#74 | Posted by eberly at 2013-02-26 06:07 PM | Reply | Flag:

How did you solve the thermal nuclear phase inversion issue? It's got me stumped.

#59 | Posted by Daniel

Great question, Daniel, thanks for asking. You put the neo-hypostatized reality plates on the rear neo-conductors, and then fire a 10-nanosecond neo-blast of pure neo-plasm from steerage.

#75 | Posted by nullifidian at 2013-02-26 06:07 PM | Reply | Flag:

The Rambler will not handle the Flux Capacitor. Marty McFly
#73 | Posted by paneocon

Before the flux capacitor was the... O-ring. Practice your Kegels and get back to me.

#76 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2013-02-26 06:07 PM | Reply | Flag:

#75

Awesome! I'll have to try that. Nulli, you're a genius or er....senile. LOL

#77 | Posted by Daniel at 2013-02-26 06:10 PM | Reply | Flag:

"I'm having as much fun as Zat"

I don't gather from his posts that he ever has any fun....unless he's shooting something.

you? I think you have fun all the time.

#78 | Posted by eberly at 2013-02-26 06:10 PM | Reply | Flag:

The wife has been a little upset with me since I cannibalized the manure spreader to build this thing.

#79 | Posted by Daniel at 2013-02-26 06:14 PM | Reply | Flag:

"which is funny because Nulli couldn't stand Ray."

That's not true at all. I like Ray, and would be happy to see him return. He was/is a worthy antagonist.

#80 | Posted by nullifidian at 2013-02-26 06:15 PM | Reply | Flag:

- I cannibalized the manure spreader

I would not have wished Ray such a horrible.... nevermind.

#81 | Posted by Corky at 2013-02-26 06:20 PM | Reply | Flag:

you? I think you have fun all the time.

#78 | Posted by eberly

Ssssssh. I don't want it to get around. Easier to enrage people that way.

#82 | Posted by nullifidian at 2013-02-26 06:28 PM | Reply | Flag: