Overpopulation

[Anonymous No.10255244]

How severe is the overpopulation problem right now?

I keeping seeing that most of the human population of Earth is situated in India and China, but not so much the rest of the world.

I also know that the world population could fit into the size of North America with the same density of Houston, Texas.

Is overpopulation at worrying levels or not yet?

[Anonymous No.10255295]

>>10255244
The state that all humans can fit into a area the size of san Francisco or something is a poor arguement its more about the resources we use or rather consumerism that comes with a large amount of people rather than the people themselves.

[Anonymous No.10255311]

>>10255295
Resources aren't even that big of a problem. I'm not going to go on a /pol/ related rant, but overpopulation and resources aren't that big of problems.

[Anonymous No.10255336]

>>10255311
Finite earth implies finite ressources anon. The nature has its cycle and you can't draw from it infinitely without disturbing it.

What's the point of searching the limit of the human population? Why not controlling our population so that everyone has plenty?

[Anonymous No.10255340]

>>10255244
>Overpopulation

No such thing in regards to Earth and Humanity.

[Anonymous No.10255344]

I can't believe people still believe in the overpopulation myth even on /sci/.

>Current models expect humanity to peak at 8-10 billion people in 2100 after which it'll decline
https://ourworldindata.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Updated-World-Population-Growth-Rate-Annual-1950-2100.png
>we're producing more food per capita every year
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8f/Food_production_per_capita.svg
>and also have more production per hectare of land.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0b/Wheat_yields_in_Least_Developed_Countries.svg
>While at the same time using fewer and fewer land to farm every year.
http://crops.missouri.edu/audit/images/WheatAcresHarvested_MO.jpg

>First world countries have been making Massive strides in lowering CO2 output
http://www.carbonbrief.org/media/394541/emissions-based-to-ref-year.png
>we found so much new oil reserves in the last decade that it could now last humanity at current consumption 300 years and this is just normal liquid oil without taking tar sands and fracking into account. Estimates guess that we probably have a few thousand years of oil left if you account for every type.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_proven_oil_reserves
>Meanwhile reforestation is so big that we now have more trees on the planet Than we've had EVER in the history of mankind
https://phys.org/news/2018-08-global-forest-loss-years-offset.html

TL;DR: We use fewer and fewer farmland every year despite our global population. And food is becoming more and more plentiful while using fewer pesticides every year and doing less harm to the environment as well. The population will peak at around 10 billion in 2100 and reduce after that. We find and produce more resources faster than the population is growing and consuming them while at the same time lowering CO2 output. And we are actually rebuilding the ecosystems and have a net reforestation which led to a global environmental golden age right now.

[Anonymous No.10255352]

>>10255344
(2/2).

In fact our fertility rates are dropping so rapidly right now that experts are afraid we will actually face a UNDERPOPULATION crisis in the long term. Which is also why countries such as China stopped the 1 child policy and is not pressuring women to have more children.

In my picture you can see just how rapidly the fertility is dropping globally. All dark blue countries have a declining population right now and even Africa is projected to be completely light blue in the mid 2030s if current trend continues.

This is a very big problem because after having a lot of campaigns to try and stop overpopulation in the 1990s it's very hard for governments and institutions to suddenly change the narrative that we need to grow our population again. This rapid shrink is not sustainable especially as an aging population means that younger people will have to work more to provide for the older people in society.

Do the world a favor and have as much kids as possible.

[Anonymous No.10255414]

>>10255336
I didn't say resources were infinite, I said they aren't that big of problems right now.

[Anonymous No.10255427]

>>10255244
There are hundreds of kms of human free vacant land in each American state, overpopulation my ass.

[Anonymous No.10255435]

>>10255344
what a crock of shit.
decreasing growth is still growth.
anyway, I'm glad you've found something convenient enough to get you to sleep at night while you consume.

[Anonymous No.10255445]

>>10255344
>>10255352
right on q the UN sustainable development shill.
I really have to wonder if you believe this stuff because it supports the status quo, and you profit from the status quo.

[Anonymous No.10255456]

>>10255435
You're missing his point, that growth is declining to the point where a plateau (and possibly a decline) is expected within the next century as the efficiency of food production increases. It's hard to claim that famines or global disaster are imminent in light of that. What are you complaining about?

[Anonymous No.10256358]

>>10255244
there is no overpopulation,
One single fat-burger is using more resources then an entire village in India or China,
just wipe out America and other western nations to save the planet

[Anonymous No.10256485]

>>10255336
ok thanos.

[Anonymous No.10256874]

>>10255244
>Overpopulation

That's sci-fi.

[Anonymous No.10257785]

>>10255336
Then why are some resources renewable?

[Anonymous No.10257823]

>>10255244
>the five stages of grief
>1. Denial and isolation;
2. Anger;
3. Bargaining;
4. Depression;
5. Acceptance.

Getting there.
Would it kill you to do your own research?

[Anonymous No.10257834]

>>10255445
What do facts have to do with profiting

[Anonymous No.10257878]

>>10255344
>The population will peak at around 10 billion in 2100 and reduce after that.

Your source is out of date, from 2013. Most recent UN population projection is 12 billion people for a medium scenario.

https://population.un.org/wpp/Graphs/Probabilistic/POP/TOT/

[Anonymous No.10257884]

>>10255244
Non existent problem, resource allocation is the issue, as well as poor resource extraction.

[Anonymous No.10257892]

>>10255244
The main hive world of humanity is not even 10 billion. How pathetic haha

[Anonymous No.10257906]

>>10257878
We'll get closer and closer to the peak the more data we get.

[Anonymous No.10257915]

>>10255344

im scared for when 500 years from now the only people left on Earth are niggers, the Amish, mormons, and hasidic Jews because nobody else had children. If those are the only people that are going to be left, it doesn't seem like a world even worth having so in a way I kind of hope that climate change wipes everyone out because I'd rather have humanity go extinct than to have our legacy defined by niggers and religious nutjobs.

[Anonymous No.10257920]

>>10255344
>>10255352
Thank you lol. The same blue collar /pol/ immigrant has been spamming these overpopulation threads for the last couple of weeks so it’s nice with some good sources

[Anonymous No.10257939]

>>10255352
>underpopulation
I mean, it's only underpopulation insofar as we won't be able to care for the elderly or minorities using state funds, and land prices and consumption might go down. It wouldn't be a big deal in the grand scheme of things, but businesses might not like it much. This is why they're shilling for immigration constantly.

[Anonymous No.10257952]

>>10257915
Shut the fuck up white boy.

[Anonymous No.10257971]

>>10257915
>Anime girl poster
Back to r9k

[Anonymous No.10257980]

>>10257920
Pretty cool how that guy was ready for this thread with all that data, huh?

[Anonymous No.10257993]

>>10257878
Expect the projected peak to continue to increase.
These people literally require population growth to sustain themselves. They'll lie about about a supposed future peak to buy themselves time.

[Anonymous No.10258004]

>>10257878
Expect the projected peak to continue to increase.
These people literally require population growth to maintain profits. They'll continue to lie about a supposed peak any year now for as long as they can get away with it.

[Anonymous No.10258011]

>>10258004
Then we shouldn't accept any more peaks lmao. 10 billion is the peak.

[Anonymous No.10258012]

>>10255244
It's disturbing mostly because it undermines the individuals value. Each passing year it becomes more and more obvious that their will be no more great leaders as there were only recently in the past (WW2 for example), because people are too disparate and widespread to listen to idealism in the present time when our population size bloats up to the billions.

[Anonymous No.10258086]

>>10255352
>NZ
>2-3 births per woman
What is this based off?
Because it's not even remotely accurate, NZ birth rates are well below replacement rate. The population stills grows due to asian immigrants though.

[Anonymous No.10258119]

>>10258086
>NZ birth rates are well below replacement rate
That's only fertility though. You've got to weigh that against mortality.
I mean you can have 100 kids a day, but if 101 people are dying you're still at a net loss.

[Anonymous No.10258124]

>>10255244
Giant hive-cities or bust. We'll only need like three and then we can leave the rest of the environment alone, we just have to regulate our pollution and recycle as much as we can.

[Anonymous No.10258132]

>>10258124
Depends what you're going to be feeding them. You need resources from the rest of your world to keep your archologies from eating themselves alive.
Not without a star trek tier technology or two.

[Anonymous No.10258145]

>>10258132
Everyone's moving to Texas I see. And that's easy, we just recycle our excretions into more food and supplement our diets with the amount of plant matter we can grow in indoor/roof farms to replace the heat we lose from entropy.

[Anonymous No.10258149]

>>10258145
>Everyone's moving to Texas I see.
As a 512 fag let me say, fuck off, we're full!

[Anonymous No.10258175]

>there are Malthusians on /sci/ of all boards
Really?

[Anonymous No.10258183]

>>10255244
Serious, and getting worse daily.

Why are there so many refugees fleeing Africa and Latin America? The land and other resources can't support everyone.

Why is there global warming? More people are consuming more energy.

World population has doubled in my lifetime. That's not sustainable.

[Anonymous No.10258189]

>>10258183
>The land and other resources can't support everyone.
Bullshit. There are plenty of resources there. Not much infrastructure though.
There is plenty of food that goes to waste, and geopolitical-economical bullshit incentivizes developing nations to ignore subsistence farming in favor of a monocrop that can be sold on the international market (because why is the IMF going to loan you money without a way to pay it back).
Also when you look at shit like NAFTA it's a huge trade imbalance where as much money and resources can be wrung out of central and south america by multinational corporations stationed in north America.
It's a much more complicated and integrated answer than a simple "Durr too many brown people."

[Anonymous No.10258190]

>>10258183
Africans and Latinoamericans are moving for welfare.

[Anonymous No.10258276]

>>10255344
/thread

[Anonymous No.10258304]

>>10258132
Farming is getting cheaper and requires less and less land. Vertical farming is going to be key. Algae farming also

[Miniature Spacecraft No.10258307]

>>10255244
>Overpopulation


Go back to /pol/

[Anonymous No.10260184]

Anyone that ever looked at the global fertility rates can straight up tell you overpopulation is fake.

[Anonymous No.10260232]

>>10255244
You need to also count their oxygen production, their livestock and crop... If you import food you can flex as much as you want but that density number is retarded.

[Anonymous No.10260330]

>>10257884
This honestly. We need a more efficient infrastructure and logistics, which will happen thanks to AI, robots, self driving cars, drone deliveries, flying cars, etc.

[Anonymous No.10260338]

>>10257884
>>10260330
Both false. There is no problem. Resource per capita as well as resource extraction efficiency have all gone up WAY faster than the population has grown. Basically it gets better and better for everyone.

I mean have you noticed the global poverty in the 90s (when I was young) compared to now in 2019?

Everyone on the planet is almost first world right now. The poorest of poor have access to smartphones and the internet. They enjoy almost all of our digital luxuries and famines are restricted to war areas and politically marginalized people that would have starved anyway due to it being done on purpose.

Countries like China, Most of the Middle East and Asia all pretty much have near-first world quality of life despite us going from barely 3 billion in the 1950s where everyone is poor to almost 8 billion people.

People underestimate how fucking awesome humanity is actually doing right now.

[Anonymous No.10260348]

To any fool who utters that we have enough resources for every and all humans: Just because we have enough resources for 100 billion humans, does not mean we should have 100 billion humans.

[Anonymous No.10260350]

>>10260338
Sure, but that doesn't mean we couldn't have more efficient and sustainable systems.

[Anonymous No.10260351]

>>10260338
>Resources per capita grows faster than population

Don't you think that resources grow, and per capita would be even higher with less population, as more population is not direct increase in resources, but technology is end more population doesn't necessarily make more technology?

[Anonymous No.10260373]

>>10260348

(continued)

As if every last square mile of Earth must be filled to the brim with fucking subhumans, just because we can. Imagine being so diseased in the head that you think this is the way humanity must head.

[Anonymous No.10260404]

>>10260373
Race is a social construct so it doesn't matter what humans fill the world.

[Anonymous No.10260418]

>>10260351
Don't act so entitled to more resources. You have more than enough. Work for it if you want it. You want others to disappear so you yourself can do better. That's not how the world works.
High population growth is correlated with high technological development

[Anonymous No.10260459]

>>10260373
They are acolytes of the religion known as economics
>>10260418
Here folks, we have a true believer.
This person has actually performed the mental gymnastics necessary to convince himself that the more he consumes, the more he can consume, and that resources are effectively infinite.
This particular passage in the good book of economics is known as economies of scale
>Believe brothers, and become bloated and content feasting on the worlds vast bounty.

[Anonymous No.10260470]

>>10260459
Resources per capita are increasing faste than the population which is also slowing down.
Africans are having less kids than they did 50 years ago per family. This is bad. Why don't you see it idiot

[Anonymous No.10260480]

>>10258183
>World population has doubled in my lifetime. That's not sustainable.
It's really quite amazing how so many people manage to convince themselves that it is sustainable. I believe they are blinded by greed and they simply love to consume - it's the only thing in life that gives them any meaning - sort of like crack addicts. They actually compete with eachother over who can consume more, who has the shiniest glitziest stuff.
I have more respect for the morbidly obese than I do these people, because at least the morbidly obese aren't hurting people.

[Anonymous No.10260490]

>>10260470
You're a very sick individual. I almost feel sorry for you. You are literally the cancer that will kill us all.

[Anonymous No.10260501]

>>10260490
You're the one trying to kill us. I want to create a hive world with a population in the hundreds of billions

[Anonymous No.10260511]

>>10260480
Less and less land is required for farming every year. Vertical farming hasn't even been TRIED.

Most people live in hive cities like Paris and New York.

The entire world's population can live in cities like that and take up almost no space.

Keep whining though. Keep trying to kill our progress

[Anonymous No.10260533]

>>10260470
>>10260490
>>10260501
Makes me wonder what the Earth's fate will be in the far future. Will we have left the Earth to heal itself and return to a balanced natural ecosystem, or will we literally turn it inside out, into a kind of city planet? Most likely it will be somewhere in the middle, but it makes one's noggin jog.

[Anonymous No.10260534]

>>10255344
>>10255352
Do you know how evolution works, right? After a couple of decades fertility will go up again hard because high fertility people are being born and reproduction, we are walking toward a idocracy overpopulated world.

[Anonymous No.10260548]

>>10260534
I think you're wrong. It's very worrying.
Things don't just reverse for no reason.
People care more about sex and careers than kids these days

[Anonymous No.10260553]

>>10260533
>into a kind of city planet
we're flurting with extinction if we even attempt that.

[Anonymous No.10260558]

>>10260553
I think a 20-30 billion cap would be enough. We need to do it sustainably

[Anonymous No.10260571]

>>10260558
if you cap it at 20-30 billion how long can you sustain that? 1000 years?
why not cap it at 2-3 billion and sustain for 10,000 years? its not like you'll have 30 billion friends. (exact numbers here dont mean anything just throwing them out to make a point)

[Anonymous No.10260583]

>>10260558
>>10260571
economists want to cap it out a 2000-3000 billion and sustain for 10 years, and get there as quickly as possible. That's literally what "economic growth" means.

[Anonymous No.10260599]

>>10260571
I was here when the world was 2-3 billion. We didn't even have smart phones.

[Anonymous No.10260617]

>>10260548
Selection, my boy, is all about selection, we're selecting for low iq, highly neurotic and highly fecund people. Demographics will go down for a few decades, after that the trend will reverse and say hello to idocracy and the return of malthus.

[Blank No.10260636]

>>10260501
Based warhammer 40k poster

[Anonymous No.10260638]

>>10260558

Forget 20-30 billion on Earth. I propose this cap: 100 million (of the finest) and not a single one more.

[Anonymous No.10260647]

>>10260501
> I want to create a hive world with a population in the hundreds of billions.

It's the natural instinct of a cockroach, so I do not blame you.

[Anonymous No.10260800]

>>10260599
I wasnt here until there was around 4.5. Still remember the days before internet/smart phones. Those days were horrible. I hate actually having to call and talk to my friends/family - personally invite people with friendly phone calls / be invited to events that way.

[Anonymous No.10260862]

>>10255244
If we nuke china and india, it literally fixes itself.

Not such proble.exist, china is already working on it. Just teach Indians to wear fucking.condoms

[Anonymous No.10260974]

>>10260638
But that's not even enough for a real superpower country.
I guess you can say 60-80 million is enough for something like Germany or France or the UK.
Once you become untold numbers of people. Once you become a statistic, I don't think it matters if there's few or more. We're already not missed when we die. Like bacteria

[Anonymous No.10262262]

overpopulation is the biggest meme on the planet