exponetial population growth

if we think of teens as irrational and adults as rational then population growth suggests that irrational people will overwhelm rational people by 2100. comments?

 

Population growth rates have been declining, and will probably reach pre-industrial levels within 50 years:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:World_population_growth_rates_1800-2005.png

 

Birth rates are projected to decline and people are tending to live longer. Also, aren't educational levels rising throughout the world?

 

Greta is proving you right, though a little earlier than your projection.

 

There was a guy who pointed out that extremly young population was more correlated to war in subsaharian countries than the lack of water

The earth can not substain that much people anyway, I think that by 2100, there would be a probable decline of population, if not by 2050.

 

In the 1960s, they thought the earth couldn't sustain 5 billion people. We are at 7.7 billion, and our percentage of starving people is down compared to the 1960s. Malthusian principles haven't been shown to be correct for humans.

 

the death ratios of rational people available to teach the irrational new population will decrease wont they?

 

im honestly not sure that higher education is increasing. the need for attending college or university is decreasing steadily.

 

my teenage years were filled with ideals of rebellion. it just seems like more and more people are either openly rebelling or opening engaging in the activities in which I rebelled against.

 

the population has increased to a point where the amount of starving people has not increased percentage wise yet it has increased in numbers.
I wish our world leaders could form a world wide restoration coalition providing jobs and medical advancements to billions.

 

Actually, both percentage and absolute numbers are down.

https://www.google.com/search?tbm=i...5#imgdii=UdpL26e0nuQiUM:&imgrc=XDccCYByRO6FoM:

 

You're right. Well, it's hard to say, and beyond the 7,7 billions problem, it's more of "with the general trend".
Maybe in the most ideal situation, we could feed 10 billion people, maybe 12, but we're not in that situation. Beyond the growth of population, what's more problematic it's the rate at which is it done.

Many elements I read about make me thing that we could go through a terrible crisis in the next decades, and I'm not the only one to think that.

 

A terrible crisis is always being predicted. It's human nature.

 

Yes
Otoh. What will happen in those 50 years

 

Yes. There are I suppose today more elements to predict such crisis. I wouldn't take the risk to announce a precise moment, and only the future will show us if I am right or wrong.
I'm not speaking of a plain "this is the end of the world", like there was in 2012 with all the maya calendar.
Basically, it's an analysis based on current : biodiversity, ressources left, financial health and so on which make thing many people today that the boat can only sink. It won't be the end of the world, just our civilization.

It's absolutly legitimate to think it's just another "it's the end of the world" movement, however, I don't think there was other theories with so many rationnal arguments behind.

 

Otoh, that does not prove their is no crisis
People predicted a terrible outcome with hitler

People said there was a growing hole in the ozone.... the prediction sparked action. The fact that the issue WAS addressed is not proof that there never was an issue

There are all sorts of problems that have been correctly predicted, and as a consequence successfully addressed. The fact that disaster was averted is no proof that there never was a looming disaster

 

I would add that furthermore, overpopulation creating non-reversible damages to an ecosystem already happened : Easter islands, where the locals managed to ravage their island beyond repair.

 

That's a small oceanic island (63 square miles), not the world as a whole. Also, using 21st century technology, that would not have been a problem.

 

Small oceanic island but aswell much smaller population.

 

Probably the Singularity. So all bets are off.

 

Yeah... but saying population growth will end in 50 years still accepts at least a doubling of current population. So it’s not as if that “no growth after 50 years” scenario is a particularly comforting reassurance

but, yeah, the whole singularity issue does put us in a weird situation that will be so discontinuous that it renders all projections relatively meaningless

 

I hate to admit it but I watched the movie 2012 recently and ive been able to view first hand how fragile our civilization is. there probably will be a natural disiaster of some sort and I apologize for my spelling as I am rather uneducated. im more concerned about our civilization failing because we are no longer concerned with being civilized.

 

I cant help but to wonder who will help us with the next or current looming issue. apparently it takes our own country days to get water to disaster sites. what the hell can we do about the fact that the way we as a whole are living is wrong. im new to all of this. voicing my opinion that is. if voicing my opinion as a adult is not commonplace then action seems less and less likely.

 

yet theres a island made of trash much larger then that as a result of modern technology floating in our ocean. how do we rebuild that?

 

our government appears to be more focused on being politically correct then it is concerned with action. and I certainly don't know what action I can take besides using social media.