October 31; 7 BILLION people on Earth

Started by Tsanten Eywa 'eveng, September 03, 2011, 05:15:42 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Tsanten Eywa 'eveng

Quotehttp://www.7billionactions.org

take a look at the website

It's misses under 1 million and then we are 7 billion

it is now:
6,999,019,150

Irtaviš Ačankif

Quote from: 'Itan Atxur on October 25, 2011, 09:58:12 PM
Quote from: Toruk Makto on October 25, 2011, 07:27:19 PM
I'm afraid I have much too low of a regard for our species to ever even hope that logic and sense would prevail over the superstition and ignorance that religion is built on. I think we have a catastrophic population reducing event in store. Question is will it be natural or man-made?

Unfortunately this is the way I see it too. The amount of people I know who don't understand what we're doing to ourselves, don't believe we're actually harming ourselves, or just... don't... care is staggering. And I really hate to say this, and I swear I'm trying to say it as respectfully as I can, but I believe that while religions are generally good and such, the amount of damage that comes from them far outweighs the good. Many of my more religious friends just don't see the need to look out for the future of the planet.

And for the record I also believe that 90% of religious people ARE good people who truly believe they are doing the right thing in trusting their deity.
I am very seriously religious (Protestant) and I think that I DO care for the future of the planet. And I am actually a strong believer in the power of science and rationality so I could not be called irrational.

90% of people who call themselves "religious" don't even rationally understand their religion. Therefore, they could not be called "religious", only "credulous" and "irrational." Your generalization is from these people, which I despise.
Previously Ithisa Kīranem, Uniltìrantokx te Skxawng.

Name from my Sakaš conlang, from Sakasul Ältäbisäl Acarankïp

"First name" is Ačankif, not Eltabiš! In Na'vi, Atsankip.

Toruk Makto

Quote from: Lolet te Maticay on October 25, 2011, 07:34:46 PM
Quote from: Toruk Makto on October 25, 2011, 07:27:19 PM
Quote from: Tsyal Maktoyu on October 25, 2011, 04:50:26 PM
Here's my plan -

- Government subsidized female and male contraceptives
- Government subsidized abortion (religious-right be damned)
- Rolling back tax breaks for large families (over 2 children)
- Thorough sexual education as a standardized part of the school curriculum (for public schools and private schools that take any form of public funding)
- Thorough environmental education standardized for school curriculum's (again, for public schools and publicly-funded private schools)

Not a mandatory one-child policy, but a policy that offers a wide-variety of family-planning options, and ensures that each new generation is knowledgeable about themselves and the effects they have on the planet.

I think you are taking for granted that the small-minded among us will roll over and play dead.  I'm afraid I have much too low of a regard for our species to ever even hope that logic and sense would prevail over the superstition and ignorance that religion is built on. I think we have a catastrophic population reducing event in store. Question is will it be natural or man-made?



Religious people are not stupid. And it would be great if we could keep the discussion respectful.

Please read what I said again without adding your own words. I didn't say religious people are stupid. I said religion is based on superstition and ignorance.

- Markì

Lì'fyari leNa'vi 'Rrtamì, vay set 'almong a fra'u zera'u ta ngrrpongu
Na'vi Dictionary: http://files.learnnavi.org/dicts/NaviDictionary.pdf

Irtaviš Ačankif

Which IMO is not always true except for esoteric religions like UFO religions.
Previously Ithisa Kīranem, Uniltìrantokx te Skxawng.

Name from my Sakaš conlang, from Sakasul Ältäbisäl Acarankïp

"First name" is Ačankif, not Eltabiš! In Na'vi, Atsankip.

'Itan Atxur

Quote from: Uniltìrantokx te Skxawng on October 26, 2011, 09:24:22 AM
Quote from: 'Itan Atxur on October 25, 2011, 09:58:12 PM
Quote from: Toruk Makto on October 25, 2011, 07:27:19 PM
I'm afraid I have much too low of a regard for our species to ever even hope that logic and sense would prevail over the superstition and ignorance that religion is built on. I think we have a catastrophic population reducing event in store. Question is will it be natural or man-made?

Unfortunately this is the way I see it too. The amount of people I know who don't understand what we're doing to ourselves, don't believe we're actually harming ourselves, or just... don't... care is staggering. And I really hate to say this, and I swear I'm trying to say it as respectfully as I can, but I believe that while religions are generally good and such, the amount of damage that comes from them far outweighs the good. Many of my more religious friends just don't see the need to look out for the future of the planet.

And for the record I also believe that 90% of religious people ARE good people who truly believe they are doing the right thing in trusting their deity.

You're definitely right. I was undeniably generalizing. I know not all religious people are like I said.
I am very seriously religious (Protestant) and I think that I DO care for the future of the planet. And I am actually a strong believer in the power of science and rationality so I could not be called irrational.

90% of people who call themselves "religious" don't even rationally understand their religion. Therefore, they could not be called "religious", only "credulous" and "irrational." Your generalization is from these people, which I despise.

Check out more from my DeviantArt page HERE

Tsmuktengan

I don't think religion is related to this close-to overpopulation situation, even if there are strict doctrines that were enforced in the past. I'd rather point out the uneffective politic of some countries who now have by far the biggest populations.

Keep in mind that even in all countries, there are death rates who also need to be taken in account, along with population migrations.


Seze Mune

I think religion is related to the situation, but it is not the only reason we have this problem.  It's probably not even a major reason for overpopulation.  Imho it's a confluence of factors including technology which allows us to produce more food, ship more food, clear more land, serve more people.  To some extent the technology has ordained our doom because its use has not been tempered with a spiritual understanding of our symbiotic relationship with all things.   Of course, that's simplying things greatly and as always, your mileage may vary. :D

Irtaviš Ačankif

Quote from: Seze Mune on October 26, 2011, 06:39:40 PM
I think religion is related to the situation, but it is not the only reason we have this problem.  It's probably not even a major reason for overpopulation.  Imho it's a confluence of factors including technology which allows us to produce more food, ship more food, clear more land, serve more people.  To some extent the technology has ordained our doom because its use has not been tempered with a spiritual understanding of our symbiotic relationship with all things.   Of course, that's simplying things greatly and as always, your mileage may vary. :D
If we don't have technology, we would reach a carrying capacity much earlier. People would starve and resources would be depleted pretty much the same way it will be if we ever reach the carrying capacity. Reaching the carrying capacity is NEVER going to be pleasant, so that's why people have tried to push that date as far back as possible.
Previously Ithisa Kīranem, Uniltìrantokx te Skxawng.

Name from my Sakaš conlang, from Sakasul Ältäbisäl Acarankïp

"First name" is Ačankif, not Eltabiš! In Na'vi, Atsankip.

Seze Mune

Quote from: Uniltìrantokx te Skxawng on October 26, 2011, 06:42:15 PM
Quote from: Seze Mune on October 26, 2011, 06:39:40 PM
I think religion is related to the situation, but it is not the only reason we have this problem.  It's probably not even a major reason for overpopulation.  Imho it's a confluence of factors including technology which allows us to produce more food, ship more food, clear more land, serve more people.  To some extent the technology has ordained our doom because its use has not been tempered with a spiritual understanding of our symbiotic relationship with all things.   Of course, that's simplying things greatly and as always, your mileage may vary. :D
If we don't have technology, we would reach a carrying capacity much earlier. People would starve and resources would be depleted pretty much the same way it will be if we ever reach the carrying capacity. Reaching the carrying capacity is NEVER going to be pleasant, so that's why people have tried to push that date as far back as possible.

The end result is the same.  The sad thing is, no one knows how to prevent the end result, they just try to push it further away.  It's like the national debts of some countries...eventually the bill must be paid.  The question only becomes how many people will have to suffer the payment?

Irtaviš Ačankif

People do not say "get as many children as you can and let the extra ones die from starvation." This means that the natural law of a carrying capacity being really painful doesn't actually apply to humans. We will reach the carrying capacity far before resources are completely depleted - we are NOT laboratory mice! Mice just reproduce as many times as possible and when they reach the carrying capacity, they do so because resources are totally depleted. We will reach the carrying capacity because our interest in giving birth, which is declining, goes down so much that birth rate=death rate.
Previously Ithisa Kīranem, Uniltìrantokx te Skxawng.

Name from my Sakaš conlang, from Sakasul Ältäbisäl Acarankïp

"First name" is Ačankif, not Eltabiš! In Na'vi, Atsankip.

Seze Mune

Quote from: Uniltìrantokx te Skxawng on October 26, 2011, 06:56:34 PM
People do not say "get as many children as you can and let the extra ones die from starvation." This means that the natural law of a carrying capacity being really painful doesn't actually apply to humans. We will reach the carrying capacity far before resources are completely depleted - we are NOT laboratory mice! Mice just reproduce as many times as possible and when they reach the carrying capacity, they do so because resources are totally depleted. We will reach the carrying capacity because our interest in giving birth, which is declining, goes down so much that birth rate=death rate.

Hhmm.  Thinking aloud here: even if birth rate = death rate, that would still leave us with the status quo which we pretty much agree is already destructive.  Not much of help there. Also, I don't see anyone even close to losing interest in giving birth either nationally or on a personal level, unfortunately.  Except for me, of course.  :D

As for mice, I've seen my brother's collection outstrip their resources when he was being careless with them, and they ended up eating each other.  While it's true we are not laboratory mice, we eat each other in different ways, like a stronger country taking the resources of a weaker country.  I don't see cannibalism as the end result of human overpopulation unless you're talking Soylent Green.

Tsyal Maktoyu

#51
An important thing to remember is that because we are so spread out and so high up on the food chain, it will take a longer time for it to become apparent that we have passed our carrying capacity. The example with mice isn't very accurate. That's a very small system, a cage. The Earth is a very big system, but it is still a single closed biosphere. While the effects of passing the carrying capacity might become obvious very rapidly in a cage, it will take longer for the effects to set in on a global scale, but the causality might already be here. We might have passed the carrying capacity already, but we don't know it yet (us, at least, maybe not those in the third world). We're still draining the fresh water, depleting the fisheries, depleting nonrenewable resources, depleting soil nutrients, destroying ecosystems, deforesting, forcing species into extinction, creating new conduits for pathogens, etc.

Alternatively, you could also look at the cannibalism that developed as the Maori people drove the Moa bird to extinction about a millennium ago as they arrived in New Zealand, so maybe we aren't so unlike the mice after all... ;)

Again, remember, we have to share this planet with billions of other species. We can't keep simply only concerning ourselves with our ability to multiply while continuing to allow other species to go extinct or be pushed out of their ecosystems. We must all share this one planet if we want a sustainable future. That's one of the main messages of Avatar. To not only be concerned with our future, but the future of every other species, as well. A holistic approach to conservation.

Anyway, here's an article on the population matter:

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/jonathon-porritt-overpopulation-the-global-crisis-that-dare-not-speak-its-name-2376464.html


Revolutionist

"You mustn't be afraid to dream a little bigger, darling." - Inception

"Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest". - Denis Diderot

Irtaviš Ačankif

Quote from: Tsyal Maktoyu on October 26, 2011, 11:04:27 PM
An important thing to remember is that because we are so spread out and so high up on the food chain, it will take a longer time for it to become apparent that we have passed our carrying capacity. The example with mice isn't very accurate. That's a very small system, a cage. The Earth is a very big system, but it is still a single closed biosphere. While the effects of passing the carrying capacity might become obvious very rapidly in a cage, it will take longer for the effects to set in on a global scale, but the causality might already be here. We might have passed the carrying capacity already, but we don't know it yet (us, at least, maybe not those in the third world). We're still draining the fresh water, depleting the fisheries, depleting nonrenewable resources, depleting soil nutrients, destroying ecosystems, deforesting, forcing species into extinction, creating new conduits for pathogens, etc.

Alternatively, you could also look at the cannibalism that developed as the Maori people drove the Moa bird to extinction about a millennium ago as they arrived in New Zealand, so maybe we aren't so unlike the mice after all... ;)

Again, remember, we have to share this planet with billions of other species. We can't keep simply only concerning ourselves with our ability to multiply while continuing to allow other species to go extinct or be pushed out of their ecosystems. We must all share this one planet if we want a sustainable future. That's one of the main messages of Avatar. To not only be concerned with our future, but the future of every other species, as well. A holistic approach to conservation.

Anyway, here's an article on the population matter:

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/jonathon-porritt-overpopulation-the-global-crisis-that-dare-not-speak-its-name-2376464.html

If we have passed our carrying capacity, there would be no overpopulation problem. In biology, there is three phases of population growth: 1. exponential growth 2. stabilization 3. carrying capacity. We are in the exponential growth phase, so we could not possible have reached the carrying capacity. If we had, the population would stop growing and then go down and stabilize at some value.
Previously Ithisa Kīranem, Uniltìrantokx te Skxawng.

Name from my Sakaš conlang, from Sakasul Ältäbisäl Acarankïp

"First name" is Ačankif, not Eltabiš! In Na'vi, Atsankip.

Seze Mune

Quote from: Uniltìrantokx te Skxawng on October 27, 2011, 08:17:37 AM
Quote from: Tsyal Maktoyu on October 26, 2011, 11:04:27 PM
An important thing to remember is that because we are so spread out and so high up on the food chain, it will take a longer time for it to become apparent that we have passed our carrying capacity. The example with mice isn't very accurate. That's a very small system, a cage. The Earth is a very big system, but it is still a single closed biosphere. While the effects of passing the carrying capacity might become obvious very rapidly in a cage, it will take longer for the effects to set in on a global scale, but the causality might already be here. We might have passed the carrying capacity already, but we don't know it yet (us, at least, maybe not those in the third world). We're still draining the fresh water, depleting the fisheries, depleting nonrenewable resources, depleting soil nutrients, destroying ecosystems, deforesting, forcing species into extinction, creating new conduits for pathogens, etc.

Alternatively, you could also look at the cannibalism that developed as the Maori people drove the Moa bird to extinction about a millennium ago as they arrived in New Zealand, so maybe we aren't so unlike the mice after all... ;)

Again, remember, we have to share this planet with billions of other species. We can't keep simply only concerning ourselves with our ability to multiply while continuing to allow other species to go extinct or be pushed out of their ecosystems. We must all share this one planet if we want a sustainable future. That's one of the main messages of Avatar. To not only be concerned with our future, but the future of every other species, as well. A holistic approach to conservation.

Anyway, here's an article on the population matter:

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/jonathon-porritt-overpopulation-the-global-crisis-that-dare-not-speak-its-name-2376464.html

If we have passed our carrying capacity, there would be no overpopulation problem. In biology, there is three phases of population growth: 1. exponential growth 2. stabilization 3. carrying capacity. We are in the exponential growth phase, so we could not possible have reached the carrying capacity. If we had, the population would stop growing and then go down and stabilize at some value.

I feel agreement with what ma Tsyal has said.  Within his commentary is a tacit acknowledgement that we are not completely aware of the dynamics involved and that we could have already passed the point of no return.  The ecosystem is a living, dynamic system.  There are so many factors that impact it that we humans would be arrogant to assume we have completely locked down the mechanism by which everything impacts everything else. 

Science often forgets that it rests very tenuously upon hypotheses and asserts itself absolutely.  It creates its own blind spots by doing that.  Not only that, but it often functions as a religion for its believers, and scientists with competing theories are sometimes shunned for long periods until they are finally allowed to be proven correct. Therefore my personal stance is a little more skeptical, even when it comes to things supposedly proven...."That may be true...for now" is my view.  It leaves room for new understandings. 




Irtaviš Ačankif

Yes. Humans are a bit strange since their population doesn't actually fit a logistics curve like all others do... Hmm...
Previously Ithisa Kīranem, Uniltìrantokx te Skxawng.

Name from my Sakaš conlang, from Sakasul Ältäbisäl Acarankïp

"First name" is Ačankif, not Eltabiš! In Na'vi, Atsankip.

guest2859

Quote from: Uniltìrantokx te Skxawng on October 27, 2011, 10:51:13 AM
Yes. Humans are a bit strange since their population doesn't actually fit a logistics curve like all others do... Hmm...

I personally think that Humanity repeats itself in the trigonometric Tangent, where we grow to uncontrollable numbers, and then slam rock-bottom to almost nothing, at which point we do it again.


Irtaviš Ačankif

Quote from: Nargacuga667 on October 27, 2011, 02:13:50 PM
Quote from: Uniltìrantokx te Skxawng on October 27, 2011, 10:51:13 AM
Yes. Humans are a bit strange since their population doesn't actually fit a logistics curve like all others do... Hmm...

I personally think that Humanity repeats itself in the trigonometric Tangent, where we grow to uncontrollable numbers, and then slam rock-bottom to almost nothing, at which point we do it again.


We can never know, since the "slam rock-bottom" has never happened before.
Previously Ithisa Kīranem, Uniltìrantokx te Skxawng.

Name from my Sakaš conlang, from Sakasul Ältäbisäl Acarankïp

"First name" is Ačankif, not Eltabiš! In Na'vi, Atsankip.

guest2859

Quote from: Uniltìrantokx te Skxawng on October 27, 2011, 03:20:15 PM
Quote from: Nargacuga667 on October 27, 2011, 02:13:50 PM
Quote from: Uniltìrantokx te Skxawng on October 27, 2011, 10:51:13 AM
Yes. Humans are a bit strange since their population doesn't actually fit a logistics curve like all others do... Hmm...

I personally think that Humanity repeats itself in the trigonometric Tangent, where we grow to uncontrollable numbers, and then slam rock-bottom to almost nothing, at which point we do it again.


We can never know, since the "slam rock-bottom" has never happened before.

Exaggeration... should've hinted at that somewhere.  ;)

Seze Mune

Quote from: Uniltìrantokx te Skxawng on October 27, 2011, 03:20:15 PM
Quote from: Nargacuga667 on October 27, 2011, 02:13:50 PM
Quote from: Uniltìrantokx te Skxawng on October 27, 2011, 10:51:13 AM
Yes. Humans are a bit strange since their population doesn't actually fit a logistics curve like all others do... Hmm...

I personally think that Humanity repeats itself in the trigonometric Tangent, where we grow to uncontrollable numbers, and then slam rock-bottom to almost nothing, at which point we do it again.


We can never know, since the "slam rock-bottom" has never happened before.

Has it never happened before, or do we just not know whether it has never happened before?  Perhaps there is some significance to this difference?

Tsyal Maktoyu

#59
I think our population growth is more of something of a Sine wave, where the negative peak is > 0, obviously that we don't go extinct (and all animals, for that matter). Plus, I don't see carrying capacity as a "phase" on the curve, but more as a threshold line on the curve, in which three phases: incline, stabilization, and decline. For an organism in equilibrium with it's environment, the + peak will always level out soon after crossing the threshold of carrying capacity, before declining, stabilizing, and inclining again (without declining too far, thus putting the organism in danger). In other words, an animal in equilibrium will follow a low amplitude, low frequency sine curve. Unfortunately the further the species goes beyond the threshold line, and the more it stretches it's resources, the shorter the frequency in the line will become, as well as amplitude (meaning the - peak will become closer to 0), and the more abrupt the transition from incline > stabilization > decline will become. The fact that a wave (and our cycle) can stay on the incline phase for quite a while while passing the CC threshold is why I say we might have passed the line already and not even know it, and we are also unaware of the approaching abrupt curve changes.




Revolutionist

"You mustn't be afraid to dream a little bigger, darling." - Inception

"Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest". - Denis Diderot