• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Human Population Growth & Overpopulation

The Guardian opened a discussion piece an hour or so ago about British houses being the worst in Europe.

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...st-built-homes-europe-extreme-weather-upgrade

Some comments made the perfectly valid point that we have a far higher population/population density than say France, Spain, Germany, Italy etc. and British citizens much prefer living in a house - even a small one, than a flat.
The Guardian is censoring any posts mentioning high population though, presumably because it goes against their narrative.
 
Elon Musk tweeted a few days ago that the counties where the birth rate is around 1.2 which takes in China, Europe, Japan, Korea are dying countries.

The U.S. is at the lowest birth rate since WW II at 1.6.

The UN claims the world population will still increase because of modern medicine making people live too long.

So our future is a world of wheel chair, laxative taking, farting, old people ?
 
I can smell food and gain weight.

I have often wondered what it would be like to be a normal size ?

I have often wondered what it would be like to shop clothes other then in the big size department ?

I have often wondered what it would be like to be comfortable an airplane seat ?

But heck !

I am still “trucking along “ when I have known some thin men who have died early.
 
charliebrown said:
I can smell food and gain weight.

I have often wondered what it would be like to be a normal size ?

I have often wondered what it would be like to shop clothes other then in the big size department ?

I have often wondered what it would be like to be comfortable an airplane seat ?

But heck !

I am still “trucking along “ when I have known some thin men who have died early.
Click to expand...
A lot of it is genes. But we all need some fat, I think it gives us strength.
And very thin people don't look that good, ever see Sarah Jessica Parker? She could do with 15 pounds!
I wish I could give it to her, I need to lose 15 lbs!
 
charliebrown said:
I can smell food and gain weight.

I have often wondered what it would be like to be a normal size ?

I have often wondered what it would be like to shop clothes other then in the big size department ?

I have often wondered what it would be like to be comfortable an airplane seat ?

But heck !

I am still “trucking along “ when I have known some thin men who have died early.
Click to expand...
Maybe try cutting out anything with wheat in it (gluten free and spelt is ok). Also no dairy, especially hard cheese and yoghurt, and no red meat. It means a lot of label reading because wheat is used as a filler.

Perhaps try it for a few months.
 
Empty carbs from rice, potatoes, pasta, bread etc etc stick to your bones like glue.
I have tried to totally eliminate any carbs from my diet but it is almost impossible.
 
kesavaross said:
Maybe try cutting out anything with wheat in it (gluten free and spelt is ok). Also no dairy, especially hard cheese and yoghurt, and no red meat. It means a lot of label reading because wheat is used as a filler.

Perhaps try it for a few months.
Click to expand...
Only problem with that is, we need calcium and Vitamin D.
But you're right, too much wheat is not good -
More exercise is the way to go, my doctor told me that 5 miles a day of walking (or the equivalent) is the best, and keeps the weight off.
 
Ronnie Jersey said:
Only problem with that is, we need calcium and Vitamin D.
But you're right, too much wheat is not good -
More exercise is the way to go, my doctor told me that 5 miles a day of walking (or the equivalent) is the best, and keeps the weight off.
Click to expand...
About 300 calories an hour... :)
 
blessmycottonsocks said:
Officially the human population has passed the 8 billion mark today.
Ironically this was in the middle of the COP 27, when a lot of virtue signalling is going on, but gross overpopulation doesn't even appear to be on the agenda.

https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/
Click to expand...

Then personally I will not take man made global warming seriously until it is on the agenda. The biggest threat to this planet and human kind is overpopulation imo
 
Dick Turpin said:
Then personally I will not take man made global warming seriously until it is on the agenda. The biggest threat to this planet and human kind is overpopulation imo
Click to expand...
Nope. The UN Population Division projects the world population will level out around 2100 at 10.9 billion. Estimates of food waste are currently around 30%. That suggests we only have to increase food production a little more than 10% over today's figures to manage.

(Although today a little over 10% of the population don't have enough food.)

The most important thing we need to deal with this is energy. We have a solution for this. Also, we have GM modified staples and there is much untapped potential for improving crop yields there (I recently read about a GM potatoes strain with more vitamin C than a lemon). We also effective and cheap fertilisers (energy required to manufacture).

We really have the resources to run the planet for a century or two at least and the biggest obstacle to this, is those nay-and-doom-sayers who block every attempt to provide more energy and grow more food. Because something something wah wah wah.

Enough with the doom and gloom. :hoff:
 
Ronnie Jersey said:
A lot of it is genes. But we all need some fat, I think it gives us strength.
And very thin people don't look that good, ever see Sarah Jessica Parker? She could do with 15 pounds!
I wish I could give it to her, I need to lose 15 lbs!
Click to expand...
I get into trouble with my mates for muttering 'she could do with a good feed' or similar when observing some of the very thin (and skimpily clad) women that float about Liverpool City Centre in the evenings.

It's particularly sad on tall women, who I suspect sometimes are bullied by shorter compatriots. Also, petite isn't the same as thin.

Mind you, obese isn't good either. For men or women.

And , on the wider point, we do have to find some way of controlling our population growth or I suspect Nature will do it for us.
 
Coal said:
Nope. The UN Population Division projects the world population will level out around 2100 at 10.9 billion. Estimates of food waste are currently around 30%. That suggests we only have to increase food production a little more than 10% over today's figures to manage.

(Although today a little over 10% of the population don't have enough food.)

The most important thing we need to deal with this is energy. We have a solution for this. Also, we have GM modified staples and there is much untapped potential for improving crop yields there (I recently read about a GM potatoes strain with more vitamin C than a lemon). We also effective and cheap fertilisers (energy required to manufacture).

We really have the resources to run the planet for a century or two at least and the biggest obstacle to this, is those nay-and-doom-sayers who block every attempt to provide more energy and grow more food. Because something something wah wah wah.

Enough with the doom and gloom. :hoff:
Click to expand...
Yep. (I disagree with you.)

The problem with the projections, in my view, is that by the time the population stabilizes, the environment will be badly damaged. Species lost. They do not deal with these two aspects which are important to me. Perhaps the species can be recreated through science. Perhaps the environmental damage can be mitigated through science. These projections do not deal with all the aspects of the situation.

Your ridiculing "something something wah wah wah" the objections of the situation by focusing on the ignorant idiots is disappointing.

I would be very interested to read your opinions and projections about these larger contextual topics: environment and species. Coal, I vaguely wonder to what extent your opinions are shaped by your living on an island whose land has almost entirely been converted to human food production, has a much higher population density than the country where I live, and in a country which is not food-independent.

My objections with the scenario you present:
1. They are projections, meaning that these are estimates. Very good estimates, but if they underestimate the time of population stabilization, and have not estimated the different contributing variables closely, then they do not hold up. Time will tell.

2. These projections do not take into account the environmental damage which terraforming the entire planet - a slight exaggeration for dramatic effect - for human food production will do.

3. These projections do not take into account the species lost while the human population stabilizes.

I love nature and the wilderness. I want to see it preserved and flourish. It has shrunk in size and degraded much in my lifetime.
 
People that live in big cities are usually the ones that complain about 'over-population' but they have a skewed reference point based on their observations of their immediate vicinity.
There are places in the UK where I can drive for miles and miles and not see a building or another person even. And I'm not talking only about the vast areas of farmland and (eg) 'The Fens', I'm also including places like The Lake District, The Peak District, The New Forest, Exmoor, Dartmoor, I could go on.
And those people that live in the big cities have little understanding of scale either. They do not realise when they talk about (eg) deforestation in the Amazon Forest (which is 2,100,000 sq mi), that if they wanted to fly East to West across the Amazon Forest, at it's widest point (eg from Sao Luis, Brazil to Sullana, Peru), that they would have fly over 2,500 miles, similar to flying from London Heathrow to Baghdad, Iraq.
Siberia also is vast and sparsely populated, covering an area of over 5,100,000 sq mi, and being something like 3,500 miles across, but home to merely one-fifth of Russia's population.

If you took the 8bn people on the planet and spaced them out equally across just the flat parts of land on the planet, your next nearest person would be something like 120 metres away.
And although there is little context, as of course, people need food and water and space to move around etc, but just taking the physical size of an average person, and standing all 8 billion shoulder-to-shoulder, you could theoretically fit everyone into a box with sides 50 miles x 50 miles (ish).
 
Last edited:
Trevp666 said:
People that live in big cities are usually the ones that complain about 'over-population' but they have a skewed reference point based on their observations of their immediate vicinity.
There are places in the UK where I can drive for miles and miles and not see a building or another person even. And I'm not talking only about the vast areas of farmland and (eg) 'The Fens', I'm also including places like The Lake District, The Peak District, The New Forest, Exmoor, Dartmoor, I could go on.
And those people that live in the big cities have little understanding of scale either. They do not realise when they talk about (eg) deforestation in the Amazon Forest (which is 2,100,000 sq mi), that if they wanted to fly East to West across the Amazon Forest, at it's widest point (eg from Sao Luis, Brazil to Sullana, Peru), that they would have fly over 2,500 miles, similar to flying from London Heathrow to Baghdad, Iraq.
Siberia also is vast and sparsely populated, covering an area of over 5,100,000 sq mi, and being something like 3,500 miles across, but home to merely one-fifth of Russia's population.

If you too the 8bn people on the planet and spaced them out equally across just the flat parts of land on the planet, your next nearest person would be something like 120 metres away.
And although there is little context, as of course, people need food and water and space to move around etc, but just taking the physical size of an average person, and standing all 8 billion shoulder-to-shoulder, you could theoretically fit everyone into a box with sides 50 miles x 50 miles (ish).
Click to expand...

The fact that some discrete parts of the UK and the wider world may appear sparsely populated is irrelevant.
Too many people using too much energy and consuming too much is the root cause of the global ecological crisis.
Every country on Earth should commit to limiting their population to a sustainable level.
Whilst global warming may free up frozen tundra and such like for human occupation, other currently occupied areas (like large swathes of Bangladesh and Pakistan) will find themselves under water.
 
brownmane said:
Here's a news article I just read today. It talks about the decreasing world population.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/8-billion-global-population-1.6646018

Good or bad, humans have greatly changed the planet in ways we can't understand until something is lost. Only when it is lost, do we realize that it had a purpose.
Click to expand...
You're right, but I'd be careful about spreading the highly controversial views of this Canadian guy.
Too many people is the problem. I doubt if it will ever be too few people.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top