Plenty more, technology is our saviour!
Some more.....maybe if we conserve our resources.
Right about where we are now, 7 billion souls.
We passed the ideal number back in.....?
Why do you hate 'merica so much?
We are approaching 7 BILLION people! Find out where you fit into that number with this handy site:
Here are my numbers, what are yours?
When The One was born, you were the:
3,725,133,543rd
person alive on Earth
77,878,242,752nd
person to have lived since history began
Oh and How many people do you think the earth can possibly hold? (basic food, water and just surviving?)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-15391515
On the ground, protecting the Cyburbia Shove since 2004.
When RJ was born, he was the:
2,847,778,567 person alive on Earth
76,324,696,580 person to have lived since history began
A nuisance may be merely a right thing in the wrong place — like a pig in the parlor instead of the barnyard.
Born in the early 5 billions. Somewhere in the 80 billions for humanity.
When I was the 2,879,324,094th person living on Earth, and I was the 76,386,503,850th person to have lived on Earth.
"I am very good at reading women, but I get into trouble for using the Braille method."
~ Otterpop ~
We have plenty of room...not for everyone to live like a Westerner and eat meat for every meal but plenty of room for billions to live in terrible poverty surviving off less than a dollar a day.
"If you don't like change, you're going to like irrelevance even less" General Eric Shinseki
When you were born, you were the:4,749,347,497th person alive on Earth
79,511,989,222nd person to have lived since history began
I was under 5 and 80 billion. Boom!
I look forward to telling my kids that... when I was born there were less than 5 billion people on earth...
Personally, I think that our population problem deals more with efficiency of space than actual lack of resources. We do need to invest in more renewable energy sources, which will only get more efficient and pervasive over time, to allow energy production for the long term, but food and water will be around for a long time. More people means more opportunity for the one person who figures out the worlds problems to be born.
I like the idea of knowing that everyday a kid that might cure cancer is born. Or the one that stabilizes nuclear fusion. Or that creates a weight loss pill that allows me to not exercise, eat what I want, and not gain a pound! (Okay fine maybe not the last one....)
A common mistake people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools. -Douglas Adams
5,074,603,297th
person alive on Earth
80,019,334,720th
person to have lived since history began
Cool site...
I generally agree, at least in the sense that I am more concerned about the gap between rich and poor than the availability of resources. When you think about how many people can be sustained by the amount of resources the wealthiest population spends, I think there is plenty available for more people in the world. The issue is being fair and efficient with those resources.Originally posted by Hink
Certainly doesn't hurt for people to actively reduce their consumption, most don't have much of a choice. One good thing to take away from the U.S.'s economic situation is the realization that we can do a lot more with less.
Insanity in individuals is something rare - but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule.
When you were born, you were the:3,958,865,971st person alive on Earth
78,256,025,550th person to have lived since history began
I think the right technology will get us off our coal dependance and into something more sustainable, but it will be a hard battle to get there. At the same time I would vote for why do you hate 'Merica so much since we all know this climate change and limited resources thing is just a hoax from the left wing Obama loving liberal nazi communists, or at least that's what the radio told me this morning.
Need a planner? Why not Dvd?
Even if it were a hoax, its good practice not to abuse the planet anyway.
I definitely think a lot of the problem lies in the structure of the world's economy.
When you were born, you were the:
4,237,759,511th
person alive on Earth
78,702,560,829th
person to have lived since history began
I personally think we passed the ideal number long ago. To me, ideal would be about half a billion people. Enough for civilzations to exist but no so much as to despoil most of the environment and put pressure on limited land, water, and earth resources.
"When life gives you lemons, just say 'No thanks'." - Henry Rollins
When you were born, you were the:
4,765,878,993rd
person alive on Earth
79,537,469,422nd
person to have lived since history began
While I think technology has helped Spaceship Earth accept more passengers, eventually we are going to have to think smarter about how we grow. There is a whole crop of countries (China, India, Brazil, etc.) that have seen how the U.S. have lived for the last 50 years and crave the same opportunity to live like Americans. If the entire world lived like the US we would need a lot more resources than we have now. Now this is a simplified idea because some resources can be replenished, you can always raise more animals up to a certain point. But it is a sobering thought. I am not of the idea that we should cull the earth's population, but I think we would better off as a planet if there was 3 or 4 billion, instead of 7 billion. http://persquaremile.com/2012/08/08/...on-lived-like/
The real question is how do we as a planet prepare for another 1 to 3 billion people in the next 40 years? This is a topic that doesn't get much discussion as we all have our own countries problems to deal with. For nearly all people, they couldn't care less what the population growth is in the city or state over, let alone another country.
Otis was the
2,551,879,689th person alive on earth
75,728,512,616th person to have lived since history began
I think the world was better off three or four billion people ago. Technology will not be our savior. Malthus will solve the problem, though. It will be painful for a while.
At what point do you believe that will begin Otis?
When you were born, you were the:
4,555,385,909th person alive on Earth
79,206,923,762nd person to have lived since history began
I believe some areas of the world will suffer Malthusian corrections, but it will not be universal or affect 1st world countries in a significant way unless they choose to involve themselves. In the first world, any issue with resource scarcity will be resolved through conservation, technological advancement and/or changes in cultural values (eg. modifications to the "American Dream")
3rd world & even some 2nd world countries are more susceptible. There you will see violence between nations over scarcity of resources.
Of the advanced countries, I worry most about India and China.
"Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."
- Herman Göring at the Nuremburg trials (thoughts on democracy)
Quote
