Population control?

[Soul2Soul]

I wanted to know what the Earth's current population is and I came across a website on google.

World Population Clock is the first search result (I typed in "the Earth's population") and clicking on that takes you to the Worldometers web page. Anyone else been on it?

Anyway the live population clock displays births and deaths literally by the second and quicker! There are roughly 3 times more births as deaths occurring live and the current population is approx 7.3 billion.

So if death could be greatly minimised - apart from natural causes, etc, the population of the Earth would increase much more rapidly, maybe far too quickly for the planet to cope with in the near future?

Which led me to wonder .... is the population of the Earth being regulated?

And, if it is, are illegitimate, unnatural etc deaths also necessary/needed?

Regulated by God, and/or nature or other?

Please share some of your thoughts Thank you

 

[Paradoxum]

As far as I know, the prediction is that the population will level out in a few decades. People who are better educated, 'richer', and have access to contraception, tend to have less children.

So I don't think it's necessary for people to die young.

 

[TillICollapse]

As far as I know, the prediction is that the population will level out in a few decades. People who are better educated, 'richer', and have access to contraception, tend to have less children.

So I don't think it's necessary for people to die young.

"Idiocracy".

 

[HerCrazierHalf]

Frankly, we are overdue for a culling of the herd. In the past various diseases and pandemics (plague, smallpox, Spanish flu, etc) would occasionally kill a decent number of us or in the case of certain STDs make some sterile.

We have limited the impact of most population thinning events, but it seems that given the ability (contraceptives) and a higher standard of living more and more people choose to have smaller families. Actually, it seems that we might be self correcting as we tend to have fewer children in areas of high population density.

 

[JJM]

I wanted to start by pointing out that that website works based on an algorithm of estimation and does not actually get regular up to date data.

It seems to me that God has His fingers in everything, but this conviction is based more on revelation and the human desire for providence than something that may seem appropriate in this subforum. This topic is directly related to one I started on providence http://www.christianforums.com/t7861845/ .

Assuming that is the case then I guess the answer is that it is probably not "necessary". Paradoxum's suggestion in my mind would result in and in many respects be a major moral failing. Voluntary celibacy would be another option. However, given the fall both as a physical reality and a moral one it becomes "necessary" for other reasons and so God probably uses it for this purpose as well. That said the fact that God does something does not give us warrant to do it as well.

 

[Inkfingers]

Which led me to wonder .... is the population of the Earth being regulated?

There is a built in regulation system, but it is not completely fool-proof. Modern society allows us to temporarily suspend it and support the rapid expansion of a truly idiotic populace....but it will only last a short time because sooner or later it will collapse under its own weight.

Its just a question of whether we destroy the planet in doing so, or whether some humans survive and they and the planet recover.

It seems to rest on a 200 year bubble based around the presence of internal combustion engines and radioactive isotopes. Once we learned how to use them, the 200 year clock started to tick.

 

[kristina411]

Maybe the "natural disasters" are also "natural population control", and these disasters have increased in frequency, perhaps because population has grown so rapidly.

Not speaking on just "global warming" but when you have billions of people impacting our environment, turning what is meant to be forest into a forest of concrete; the world is bound to retaliate in some way.

If humans have been around as long as science says and population hasn't increased to alarming numbers still, I think we are in the clear on this issue... The issue of "idiocracy", as mentioned above, is more pressing.

 

[football5680]

The population will be naturally regulated. We can either adapt in a way that will allow us to sustain a larger population or the population will level off and will eventually decline because we can no longer support it. We probably won't feel it in developed and advanced nations but underdeveloped countries will be hit hard. In the US we export a large amount of our agricultural products so we would simply export less to sustain a larger population.

 

[Soul2Soul]

As far as I know, the prediction is that the population will level out in a few decades. People who are better educated, 'richer', and have access to contraception, tend to have less children.

So I don't think it's necessary for people to die young.

Thanks for sharing. I was trying to get some idea of the how unnatural, illegitimate etc deaths play a part in the Earths population. I get that a prediction could be made based on birth control etc but how do they figure wars etc in that equation?

 

[Soul2Soul]

Frankly, we are overdue for a culling of the herd. In the past various diseases and pandemics (plague, smallpox, Spanish flu, etc) would occasionally kill a decent number of us or in the case of certain STDs make some sterile.

We have limited the impact of most population thinning events, but it seems that given the ability (contraceptives) and a higher standard of living more and more people choose to have smaller families. Actually, it seems that we might be self correcting as we tend to have fewer children in areas of high population density.

Thanks for sharing. I wonder if economics, birth control, quality of life and density of local populations are factors considered by all nations/cultures though?

 

[Soul2Soul]

I wanted to start by pointing out that that website works based on an algorithm of estimation and does not actually get regular up to date data.

It seems to me that God has His fingers in everything, but this conviction is based more on revelation and the human desire for providence than something that may seem appropriate in this subforum. This topic is directly related to one I started on providence http://www.christianforums.com/t7861845/ .

Assuming that is the case then I guess the answer is that it is probably not "necessary". Paradoxum's suggestion in my mind would result in and in many respects be a major moral failing. Voluntary celibacy would be another option. However, given the fall both as a physical reality and a moral one it becomes "necessary" for other reasons and so God probably uses it for this purpose as well. That said the fact that God does something does not give us warrant to do it as well.

Thank you for the info regarding the website. Thanks also for sharing about your thread .. which I will look at. Your thoughts are interesting and appreciated. Many thanks

 

[Soul2Soul]

There is a built in regulation system, but it is not completely fool-proof. Modern society allows us to temporarily suspend it and support the rapid expansion of a truly idiotic populace....but it will only last a short time because sooner or later it will collapse under its own weight.

Its just a question of whether we destroy the planet in doing so, or whether some humans survive and they and the planet recover.

It seems to rest on a 200 year bubble based around the presence of internal combustion engines and radioactive isotopes. Once we learned how to use them, the 200 year clock started to tick.

Thanks for sharing. You have given me some food for thought.

 

[Albion]

Maybe the "natural disasters" are also "natural population control", and these disasters have increased in frequency, perhaps because population has grown so rapidly.

Not speaking on just "global warming" but when you have billions of people impacting our environment, turning what is meant to be forest into a forest of concrete; the world is bound to retaliate in some way.

If humans have been around as long as science says and population hasn't increased to alarming numbers still, I think we are in the clear on this issue... .

Two thoughts to keep in mind with this subject.

The world's population grew at a very slow rate until about two hundred years ago when it began to skyrocket. No one who is concerned about overpopulation should take refuge in the idea that "humans have been around as long as science says and population hasn''t increased to alarming numbers still."

Also, natural disasters have never slowed population growth for more than a few years--not even the worst such disasters in human history. Therefore, a meteor striking Earth or something we've never seen could wipe out half the population of the planet, but nothing we've experienced so far would make any significant difference were it to happen again (and that includes some pretty bad epidemics and wars, for example).

 

[Soul2Soul]

Maybe the "natural disasters" are also "natural population control", and these disasters have increased in frequency, perhaps because population has grown so rapidly.

Not speaking on just "global warming" but when you have billions of people impacting our environment, turning what is meant to be forest into a forest of concrete; the world is bound to retaliate in some way.

If humans have been around as long as science says and population hasn't increased to alarming numbers still, I think we are in the clear on this issue... The issue of "idiocracy", as mentioned above, is more pressing.

Thank you for sharing. I was also trying to get some idea of how unnatural, illegitimate etc deaths like murders etc are a (necessary or perhaps even planned) part of the control?

 

[Soul2Soul]

The population will be naturally regulated. We can either adapt in a way that will allow us to sustain a larger population or the population will level off and will eventually decline because we can no longer support it. We probably won't feel it in developed and advanced nations but underdeveloped countries will be hit hard. In the US we export a large amount of our agricultural products so we would simply export less to sustain a larger population.

Thanks for sharing some thoughts which I find interesting.

 

[Albion]

The population will be naturally regulated. We can either adapt in a way that will allow us to sustain a larger population or the population will level off and will eventually decline because we can no longer support it. We probably won't feel it in developed and advanced nations but underdeveloped countries will be hit hard. In the US we export a large amount of our agricultural products so we would simply export less to sustain a larger population.

Sure, that's essentially what Malthus argued, but the leveling will of necessity be at the "subsistence level" of existence.

 

[HerCrazierHalf]

Thanks for sharing. I wonder if economics, birth control, quality of life and density of local populations are factors considered by all nations/cultures though?

Assuming that birth control is available, the economics and quality of life of an individual couple will affect population growth. It is not the nation that directly drives population growth. Past attempts to increase population from a top down approach have been subpar at best (see Romania).

That said, nations do try to create incentives for baby making because virtually all societies today rely on continual exponential growth.

 

[keith99]

Two thoughts to keep in mind with this subject.

The world's population grew at a very slow rate until about two hundred years ago when it began to skyrocket. No one who is concerned about overpopulation should take refuge in the idea that "humans have been around as long as science says and population hasn''t increased to alarming numbers still."

Also, natural disasters have never slowed population growth for more than a few years--not even the worst such disasters in human history. Therefore, a meteor striking Earth or something we've never seen could wipe out half the population of the planet, but nothing we've experienced so far would make any significant difference were it to happen again (and that includes some pretty bad epidemics and wars, for example).

There is a classic question with amoeba. If they split every 30 seconds and it takes one put into a jar full of nutrients will fill it in 30 days how long until it is half full?

The answer is 29 days 23 hours 59 minutes and 30 seconds. (Ok the classic is once a day for the split, but my example my twist).

So a meteor wipes out half the population and it is then stable 20 years later and then we start growing again. Right back where we are now after a total of less than 50 years!

Wipe out 99% of the population but leave our knowledge so we have no barrier to breeding like we are now and figuring a 25 year doubling rate and we are back worse mare than now in 175 years.

The problem is that it is a bubble. When it pops it will get nasty.

 

[Albion]

There is a classic question with amoeba. If they split every 30 seconds and it takes one put into a jar full of nutrients will fill it in 30 days how long until it is half full?

The answer is 29 days 23 hours 59 minutes and 30 seconds. (Ok the classic is once a day for the split, but my example my twist).

So a meteor wipes out half the population and it is then stable 20 years later and then we start growing again. Right back where we are now after a total of less than 50 years!

With apologies to amoeba, I don't think that's what would happen. However, it doesn't make any difference. My point was simply that no natural disaster that mankind has ever experienced would slow the growth of population for long BUT that there might be something (nuclear war, perhaps?) that could.

 

[Neogaia777]

I wanted to know what the Earth's current population is and I came across a website on google.

World Population Clock is the first search result (I typed in "the Earth's population") and clicking on that takes you to the Worldometers web page. Anyone else been on it?

Anyway the live population clock displays births and deaths literally by the second and quicker! There are roughly 3 times more births as deaths occurring live and the current population is approx 7.3 billion.

So if death could be greatly minimised - apart from natural causes, etc, the population of the Earth would increase much more rapidly, maybe far too quickly for the planet to cope with in the near future?

Which led me to wonder .... is the population of the Earth being regulated?

And, if it is, are illegitimate, unnatural etc deaths also necessary/needed?

Regulated by God, and/or nature or other?

Please share some of your thoughts Thank you

I believe it could be... If it is would that might be an ultimate act to protect us and the earth. If we get to be too many, will he devastate us?

God Bless!