The worst thing that ever happened to earth was human reproduction... This is one option that may help equal the equation.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
The worst Ebola outbreak in history - it's on the move
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by ShiftyEyedWaterboy View PostThe way our population is growing we're probably gonna see large pandemics/famines in our lifetime. Could have around 11 billion humans on the earth by the '40's/'50's.
Anyone know what the max sustainable population is supposed to be? I've heard its technically less than half of where were at now.
Comment
-
Originally posted by ShiftyEyedWaterboy View PostThe way our population is growing we're probably gonna see large pandemics/famines in our lifetime. Could have around 11 billion humans on the earth by the '40's/'50's.
Anyone know what the max sustainable population is supposed to be? I've heard its technically less than half of where were at now.
Comment
-
Originally posted by ShiftyEyedWaterboy View PostThe way our population is growing we're probably gonna see large pandemics/famines in our lifetime. Could have around 11 billion humans on the earth by the '40's/'50's.
Anyone know what the max sustainable population is supposed to be? I've heard its technically less than half of where were at now.
Most economists and ecologists I've studied have argued that we've already reached the tipping point, and mass extinction is inevitable.
Comment
-
I've heard our carrying capacity for humans is 10 billion (in terms of food & water). I expect that with GMOs and cultivating farmland around the globe, we could probably amp that up a bit.
I'm of the school of thought that we should work to taper population growth though. There are plenty of people on the planet right now.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mogulseeker View Post
Ever read the book "The Road"?
That **** made me want to save up for a doomsday bunker.
Comment
-
Originally posted by randerson1184 View PostI've heard our carrying capacity for humans is 10 billion (in terms of food & water). I expect that with GMOs and cultivating farmland around the globe, we could probably amp that up a bit.
I'm of the school of thought that we should work to taper population growth though. There are plenty of people on the planet right now.
We should be sending men to live in our own back yard, the moon, Europa, Titan, etc... Hell Enceladus has geysers shooting water into space.
I think it is funny that Econ's like Smurf wrote about don't add any variables for man finding or promoting the need to go off world for resources. Spend some of that Wall St money on missions to places that have the things we need to sustain life within our reach and humanity will be just fine at least until the sun burns out.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mogulseeker View PostAccording to Thomas Malthus, and before GMO's, the sustainable global population was about 1 billion.
Most economists and ecologists I've studied have argued that we've already reached the tipping point, and mass extinction is inevitable.
Comment
-
Ive heard to that there is enough food produced to support 10 billion people on this planet
And there is definitely enough space
I think it was Stephen Hawking though that said ultimately the ability of our species to survive hundreds of thousands of yearsin the future will depend on our ability to colonize other planets
Comment
-
any hard numbers for earth's sustainability are made up garbage at this point. no one knows, because any hard number is an artificial barrier. for one, technological efficiency directly alters our sustainability. for another, population density is grossly uneven, so any hard global numbers are essentially nonsense. and wealth distribution has a huge effect on both the efficiency and quantity of resource consumption. each American consumes and produces a whole lot more than each Indian, and the infrastructures that service and ameliorate the effects of our footprint share essentially nothing in common.
Comment
-
Originally posted by broncosteven View PostWhy do we need to stay on the planet? That is the type of limiting thinking that is holding us as a species back and threatening our extinction.
We should be sending men to live in our own back yard, the moon, Europa, Titan, etc... Hell Enceladus has geysers shooting water into space.
I think it is funny that Econ's like Smurf wrote about don't add any variables for man finding or promoting the need to go off world for resources. Spend some of that Wall St money on missions to places that have the things we need to sustain life within our reach and humanity will be just fine at least until the sun burns out.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Br0nc0Buster View PostI think it was Stephen Hawking though that said ultimately the ability of our species to survive hundreds of thousands of yearsin the future will depend on our ability to colonize other planets
And idiot politicians/citizens think there is no point to NASA and the space program.
It should be receiving more funding, not getting it cut.Last edited by ShiftyEyedWaterboy; 07-29-2014, 08:18 PM.
Comment
Comment