Jump to content
Ian Zonja

How Long Earth Can Stand The Pollution?

Recommended Posts

Just now, Paul Singh Jr said:

The UN like to hide there problems

..what problems UN hide.. ?

 

Edited by Sensei

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Paul Singh Jr said:

The UN like to hide there problems until they have a solution or until it’s to public just Incase they need to use drastic measures 

 

So in other words you think the UN and virtually everyone working on population growth is wrong and you are right, despite it being biologically impossible? You do know that humans do not replicate via budding, right?

 

On 7/21/2019 at 2:47 PM, Paul Singh Jr said:

and regardless of that there’s to much ppl on the planet in 5 yrs it’s gonna be 20billion

Just for to illustrate the silliness (assuming this is not obvious), currently we are at 7.7 billion. Roughly, there are 2 billion women of child-bearing age. Even if every woman in the world gets one child per year, every year, it will increase the population by 10 billion, which is still insufficient to reach your number. So to re-iterate, please operate on facts not on conspiracy theories. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Paul Singh Jr said:

The UN like to hide there problems until they have a solution or until it’s to public just Incase they need to use drastic measures

Do you have any evidence for that? Because we don't like crazy conspiracy theories here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

20billion might be high but regardless, the point being not enough resources for the global population. But I’m suprised u haven’t found it suspicious that we grew near enough 2 billion in the matter of ten years, but yet the UN show that from 2050 to 2100 we only grow 1.4billion does that make any sense to u?  Or do they know something we don’t know. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Paul Singh Jr said:

Totally agree with a lot what ur saying but as u said the world is not set up like that at the moment 

So what? Does that mean we can't work towards a better goal? We can set up the world like that if more people thought it was possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Sensei said:

..what problems UN hide.. ?

 

Well there’s the current state of agriculture, and farming over the past 10-15 years we have been harvesting a lot more often than we should, that’s why food quality has fell, and our sell by dates have gone longer because things r sitting on the shelves in stores for a shorter period of time than they used to. If the UN wanted they could flood the news with a lot of issues that have been addressed on this forum. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Paul Singh Jr said:

20billion might be high but regardless, the point being not enough resources for the global population. But I’m suprised u haven’t found it suspicious that we grew near enough 2 billion in the matter of ten years, but yet the UN show that from 2050 to 2100 we only grow 1.4billion does that make any sense to u?  Or do they know something we don’t know. 

It is not suspicious at all,  if you understand population dynamics a little bit. Roughly speaking, higher standard of living, health (especially reduction of infant mortality) and education reduces fertility rates. This is most visible in industrialized nations many of which are close to zero growth (and in some cases below). Likewise, countries who moved out of poverty have seen drastic reduction in growth rates and a trend to (much) smaller families. It is an observation that you yourself can easily make.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Strange said:

Do you have any evidence for that? Because we don't like crazy conspiracy theories here.

Well iv looked at your own link on the global statistics to see we only grew by a few billion from 2000 to now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Paul Singh Jr said:

Well there’s the current state of agriculture, and farming over the past 10-15 years we have been harvesting a lot more often than we should, that’s why food quality has fell, and our sell by dates have gone longer because things r sitting on the shelves in stores for a shorter period of time than they used to. If the UN wanted they could flood the news with a lot of issues that have been addressed on this forum. 

That does not make sense. How do you harvest more than you should? Do you mean it would be beneficial to leave crop out? If you mention that intensive agriculture could make problems with water and other resource use, that would more sense. Sell by dates are arbitrary to some degree and have no bearing whatsoever with the rest. And give it a rest with the UN, they are not involved in that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Paul Singh Jr said:

The UN like to hide there problems until they have a solution or until it’s to public just Incase they need to use drastic measures 

How is it helpful to make such vague and broad judgements against any of the actors in today's world environment? It would be nice if things were so easy to pigeonhole, but most things happen on a spectrum, and most things are much more highly nuanced than simple conspiracy can address. How about drilling down to some meaningful arguments?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, CharonY said:

It is not suspicious at all,  if you understand population dynamics a little bit. Roughly speaking, higher standard of living, health (especially reduction of infant mortality) and education reduces fertility rates. This is most visible in industrialized nations many of which are close to zero growth (and in some cases below). Likewise, countries who moved out of poverty have seen drastic reduction in growth rates and a trend to (much) smaller families. It is an observation that you yourself can easily make.

I do make all those observations but the global standard of living has improved so why would our population decline instead of increase that’s what I find suspicious,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Paul Singh Jr said:

I do make all those observations but the global standard of living has improved so why would our population decline instead of increase that’s what I find suspicious,

It hasn't declined. The rate of growth has slowed, but population continues to grow.

I know. Math is like hard and stuff, but this one is pretty simple.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, CharonY said:

So in other words you think the UN and virtually everyone working on population growth is wrong and you are right, despite it being biologically impossible? You do know that humans do not replicate via budding, right?

 

Just for reference, currently we are at 7.7 billion

No I don’t no I don’t think everyone is wrong and I do believe in the uN wanting to do good but it seems like u have a issue with me question someone else’s stats when instead of just accepting, please have a look at this link it’s birth and death rates, and regardless of my stats and there’s come up with ur own https://www.ecology.com/birth-death-rates/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Paul Singh Jr said:

I do make all those observations but the global standard of living has improved so why would our population decline instead of increase that’s what I find suspicious,

That is because you do not understand the relationship between standard of living and children choice. First, try observation. Look at family sizes in industrialized countries. Then look at families with high educational standards. What is more common there. a family with 9 children or family with 2? Then take a look at less developed countries and look at family size there.

This is a well-known phenomenon because in areas where children are important as labour and to secure generational stability (e.g. as labour and to care for parents) and with high infant mortality a higher birth rate is expected. Once other opportunities arises (social welfare system, broader job market etc.), and medicine improves (reduced infant mortality, availability of contraceptives) , folks start making decisions whether they want offspring or not.

Especially when women become more educated and want to have careers, they decide to have fewer or no children. In other words, your model of population growth is too simplistic and takes only survival into account, but does not reflect reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And this is why we don’t get in anywhere because we spend most of our time trying to prove other ppl wrong than focusing on the global problems.

Lmao Charon Y has us going back and forth helped anyone apart from increase ur hart rate.have u even looked at my link. I looked at strangers . as ppl we best learn from mistakes.im a person who is happy when proven wrong because then I at least have the right answer 

If someone disagrees with my comments please tell me why and I’m the words of someone else please give me proof at least a link 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Paul Singh Jr said:

And this is why we don’t get in anywhere because we spend most of our time trying to prove other ppl wrong than focusing on the global problems.

We don't get in anywhere? We spend most of our time? Again, how does it help to mischaracterize the situation? We do progress, we spend time improving, but a LOT of progress is stifled because so many people claim we aren't doing anything, and they ignore the good that IS being done in favor of complaining.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean that people spend more time trying to prove people wrong, that’s why we don’t get anywhere, I totally 1million percent agree with u in all aspects of life the good we do is hardly ever acknowledged, 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Paul Singh Jr said:

20billion might be high but regardless, the point being not enough resources for the global population. But I’m suprised u haven’t found it suspicious that we grew near enough 2 billion in the matter of ten years, but yet the UN show that from 2050 to 2100 we only grow 1.4billion does that make any sense to u?  Or do they know something we don’t know. 

Well, they obviously know something you don’t. 

The average global birth rate fell below the replacement level years ago. So fewer people are being born than will die each year. So the population will level off in a few decades. 

1 hour ago, Paul Singh Jr said:

Well there’s the current state of agriculture, and farming over the past 10-15 years we have been harvesting a lot more often than we should

Again: evidence?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Paul Singh Jr said:

And this is why we don’t get in anywhere because we spend most of our time trying to prove other ppl wrong than focusing on the global problems.

Lmao Charon Y has us going back and forth helped anyone apart from increase ur hart rate.have u even looked at my link. I looked at strangers . as ppl we best learn from mistakes.im a person who is happy when proven wrong because then I at least have the right answer 

If someone disagrees with my comments please tell me why and I’m the words of someone else please give me proof at least a link 

And yet I think that just assuming things to be right, even if they are not, is what prevents us from getting anywhere. Most projections assume that the population is likely going to stabilize beteen 9,6- 12.5 billion. Meanwhile you are assuming impossible numbers, use conspiracy theories to support your point. That, however,  is not helpful in developing strategies. If you plan for a population that may never arrive, you are not planning for the right thing. Also, since you do not understand the connection between fertility and education (especially women's education), it means that you are missing out that in high-fertility countries increasing the standard of living and increasing women's education may be stabilize the world population at the lower end of the prediction.

In other words, if one wants to make a proper risk assessment and develop appropriate strategies, the most important bit is getting familiar with the actual situation and look at mechanisms that are relevant to them. Bold assumptions without any evidence is helping no one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Paul Singh Jr said:

I do make all those observations but the global standard of living has improved so why would our population decline instead of increase that’s what I find suspicious,

Quite a lot of different but related reasons. For example, if infant mortality is lower then there is less incentive to have more children. As a society gets wealthier there more opportunities for education and paid work. If people are healthier and better educated, they no longer live at subsistence level, and have less need for children to work the land and support them. And so on. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Paul Singh Jr said:

I do make all those observations but the global standard of living has improved so why would our population decline instead of increase that’s what I find suspicious,

Declining are only countries/nations with ratio children per woman less than 2.

Here you have links:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependencies_by_total_fertility_rate

(check table with fertility rate per woman)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_fertility_rate#Replacement_rates

(check world map on the right, colors indicate whether country has replacement or decline of population)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.