toldailytopic: Overpopulation. Is the world really over populated as some assert?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Flipper

New member
I think the question might better be, is the world UNDER-populated? Given the number of people already on the earth, the number of children we are giving birth to and raising is inadequate for our need.

We might note, too, that God has never rescinded the command to "multiply and replenish" the earth. The Savior said that when he came again, it would be as it was in the days of Noah. Interestingly, here is one of the big (BAD) practices of the days of Noah as found in the apocryphal Book of Jasher—

19. For in those days the sons of men began to trespass against God, and to transgress the commandments which he had commanded to Adam, to be fruitful and multiply in the earth.

20. And some of the sons of men caused their wives to drink a draught that would render them barren, in order that they might retain their figures and whereby their beautiful appearance might not fade.

—Jasher 2:19-20

The more things change, the more they stay the same. The "draught" (or drink) was undoubtedly a herb or concoction to cause a fetus to die, at whatever stage it was at. These would be some of the "unwanted children" of that day and age.

Besides the 50 million PLUS babies aborted in the US since Roe v Wade, there have been countless other millions "prevented" from ever becoming "viable". The "haves" (those who have had their birth) versus the "have nots" (those who will not likely see, alive, the light of day, or take the breath of life), is a war that continues.

Jesus told us to follow his example. He also said, "Suffer the little children to come unto me(/us)!" Babies are little children, are they not? Do "we" suffer them to "come unto us"?

Our nation is in trouble with the "baby boomers" retiring now and soon. The "baby boom" is as much defined by the BIRTH DEARTHS that preceded & followed it. The one that preceded it was caused by WWI, a flu pandemic, a decrease in marriage and morality in the 1920's, and the economic depression of the 1930's, and WWII.

The BIRTH DEARTH following the "boom" was caused by "the pill", an "anything goes" 'sexual revolution', abortion (Roe v Wade legalizing it), and continued iniquity, greed, covetousness, "careerism" (young people postponing or failing to marry, and/or to have children early enough and in sufficient numbers, if at all)!

Certainly, this SIN of denying children birth WON'T bring us the blessing of "inheriting the earth". Remember, Jesus promised those who were meek that they would inherit the earth. None are more meek than babies or "little children". Since we don't generally have veery many any more, this promise will not, cannot, come to us!!!

Repent and REPRODUCE!!!

Yes, let's reproduce our way out of resource shortages, what fantastic logic and use of reason.

I guess you must be the President of the Have Sex For Chastity Society.
 

Aimiel

New member
Its fairly simple math

1 square mile = 5280 x 5280 square feet

= 27,878,400 square feet

So 268,581 square miles (the approximate area of Texas) is around 7,487,608,550,400 square feet.

That divided by 6.7 x 10^9 (the current human population of earth) is 1117 square feet per person.
If everyone on earth moved to Texas, right? I still think you've miscalculated.
Now you might still argue that the earth isn't overpopulated except there's only around 7.68 billion acres of arable land, that is land that's suitable for agriculture.
I dont' buy that figure either, but with hydroponics and greenhouses, making year-round harvests possible, even that is plenty.
With there being around 6.7 Billion people that means that there's 1.14 acres of cropland for each person on earth. That's not a whole lot and this is one of the major reasons why population IS a problem.
I don't believe I could eat the food that might grow on 1.14 acres within ten years, much less one. I don't know about you.
Try growing enough food to eat in on a few acres of land in 90% of Texas. There's simply not as much cropland as you think, not to mention the land needed for electrical power production, drugs and all other aspects of modern technology that we value so highly.
I don't buy your reasonng much less the math behind it.
Its not due to infertility. People are simply choosing not to have children. Population in the developing world however is still growing.
In most countries, yes; but in many, they're looking at decreasing populations right now.
But we in the western world consume far more than anyone in the developing world. Is there enough for every person on earth to consume at the level of the US and the EU? No.
With new developments of wind, solar, wave and even new nuclear plants there will be.
We don't know how soon the Lord will return. What will he find when he does return? Human beings that have destroyed the planet God gave us to use and care for?
He commanded that we be fruitful, multiply and re-plenish it, not give up hope, throw in the towel and prevent people from having children.
 

Alate_One

Well-known member
If everyone on earth moved to Texas, right? I still think you've miscalculated.
The math is right in front of you. Feel free to tell me EXACTLY where I went wrong.

I dont' buy that figure either, but with hydroponics and greenhouses, making year-round harvests possible, even that is plenty.
Where's the electricity to heat and light the greenhouse coming from? Where's the salts for the hydroponics coming from? Where's the electricity for the water pumps and fans coming from?

I don't believe I could eat the food that might grow on 1.14 acres within ten years, much less one. I don't know about you.
How much oil, fertilizer and pesticides would it take to grow that much food? Could you cover all of your nutritional needs with that much land? What about livestock?

I don't buy your reasonng much less the math behind it.
You need STUFF, equipment fertilizer to grow food . . . where is it coming from?

In most countries, yes; but in many, they're looking at decreasing populations right now.
not that many, World population is still increasing (though the RATE of increase has slowed). We will either hit around 8 or 11 billion at our peak. At that point I'm not sure we can actually feed everyone.

With new developments of wind, solar, wave and even new nuclear plants there will be.
Nuclear power is non-renewable, we will run out. Wind, Solar and other power sources are an infinitesimal amount of our current power output. There needs to be a MASSIVE investment in these alternative energies.

He commanded that we be fruitful, multiply and re-plenish it, not give up hope, throw in the towel and prevent people from having children.

I don't think God meant be fruitful, multiply and make the earth so it cannot support the next generation of humans. Since that is what we are doing at current. The earth isn't infinite. It may have seemed that way for many thousands of years but not now. We've subdued the earth and its crying "Uncle".
 

WandererInFog

New member
Nuclear power is non-renewable, we will run out. Wind, Solar and other power sources are an infinitesimal amount of our current power output. There needs to be a MASSIVE investment in these alternative energies.

None of those sources, individually or combined have any hope of replacing the energy output of fossil fuels. Replacing fossil fuels is going to take coming up with something completely different. Such as orbital solar power or helium 3 based fusion power.
 

wholearmor

New member
Considering over 50 million human beings have been destroyed via abortion, who knows how many of them would have helped us fullfill our future demands? Besides, we can't know if we're running out of oil or not because the greenies stifle efforts to explore for it. The people-hating, earth-loving hippies have grown up and influenced enough gullible people to go along with their paranoid Chicken Little theories.

The problem with the earth isn't too many people, it's too few people who are God-fearing, born-again Christians who know the Word of God and live by It by loving their neighbor as themselves.
 

Aimiel

New member
How much oil, fertilizer and pesticides would it take to grow that much food? Could you cover all of your nutritional needs with that much land? What about livestock?
With everyone living in Texas, working together at the greenhouses and hydroponics plants, no oil, only natural compost for fertilizer and no pesticides, either. The livestock would have plenty of room, since the greenhouses and hydroponics plants would be in skyscrapers, leaving most of the cattle ranches intact, not to mention the underground fish hatcheries.
You need STUFF, equipment fertilizer to grow food . . . where is it coming from?
GNP. We have more than enough land, manpower, equipment and willpower to grow enough food to feed the world, many times over.
Nuclear power is non-renewable, we will run out.
With just the fuel we have, it will be several thousand years before that happens, even if all we had were nuclear plants running all over the world. And with mining and reclamation (such as the one my company is working on where the USA and Russia are reclaiming plutonium from weapons to use in power plants) projects, we're probably set for at least ten or twenty thousand years. But I believe that energy won't be a huge problem, very shortly, due to research and discoveries.
I don't think God meant be fruitful, multiply and make the earth so it cannot support the next generation of humans. Since that is what we are doing at current. The earth isn't infinite. It may have seemed that way for many thousands of years but not now. We've subdued the earth and its crying "Uncle".
What we've been able to do in just over 6,000 years has yet to darken one single cloud in the sky or put out one single star. God didn't design this planet so that we might one day out-grow it and have to move. It's not good, a lot of things evil men have done, but the earth shows striking resiliency.
 

King David

New member
O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken

O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken

Yes, let's reproduce our way out of resource shortages, what fantastic logic and use of reason.

I guess you must be the President of the Have Sex For Chastity Society.

Flipper,

The one resource of which we currently have by far the greatest shortage is children! Just this morning I read in the UK Daily Telegraph where economic writer Ambrose Evans-Pritchard says—

"The underlying debt burden is greater than it was after the Second World War, when nominal levels looked similar. Ageing populations will make it harder to erode debt through growth."

In the US, the "ageing population" of concern are the "baby boomers", my own generation. While I and my wife have born, raised (& are continuing to raise) nine offspring, the rest of my "sex crazed" generation had only "feel good sex" that was rather fruitless. Current TFR (Total Fertility Rate) for white women in the US is estimated between 1.6 and 1.7 child per woman per lifetime. Fifty & sixty year old people typically don't bring new babies into the world. There is a 20-30 year "window of opportunity" to do that, that, if missed, cannot be made up.

Japan's government spending is over 200% of annual GDP (Gross Domestic Product). Since 2005, Japan has more retirees per year than young people entering the work force. Even though their savings rate was over $100,000 per household, money can't replace "bodies" when you need humans to bake the bread, run the dairy farms, manufacture automobiles, pay taxes, buy the homes and businesses of those of previous generations!

Europe has an average TFR of 1.5. This means that for every 200 adults, only 150 children are born to replace them. If you think the world was not planned, and that we don't have sufficient natural resources, then yes, according to your logic, having more children is part of the problem.

However, judging how "the wisdom of the wise" has and is failing, and that quite miserably (those who have been crying since the late sixties and seventies that there are too many people, the sky is falling, give Al Gore a Nobel medal & prize for his rubbish, etc - their "wisdom" is proving to be utter nonsense), then we need to step back, reassess the situation, and realize that we are definitely heading in the wrong direction.

You, Flipper, appear to be a person who does not believe there is a god. Or, if you do, you severely lack confidence in what he/she/it has done on or with earth or mankind.

I think of when Jesus said, "O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken..." —(Luke 24:25)

This faithless and adulterous generation are left to their own devices, because they have rejected God and his commandments and his fatherly, loving care for them. They trust in "the arm of flesh" which is man's own efforts and solutions to their problems.

The script you are quoting from is old and disproven. The sky is falling, the sky is falling— the mantra of the extremist environmentalists is truly passe. But, most can't unlearn what they think they know for sure is sure.
 

Flipper

New member
The script you are quoting from is old and disproven. The sky is falling, the sky is falling— the mantra of the extremist environmentalists is truly passe. But, most can't unlearn what they think they know for sure is sure.

Well I sure hope you guys are right. I guess time will tell.

By the way, it's not extremist environmentalists who are making the predictions regarding gas resources. The very conservative International Energy Agency predicts that we can meet "current demand" until 2030, but of course demand is increasing as India and China industrialize.

However, two IAE whistleblowers have both claimed that the IAE is hiding how dire the actual situation is.

Their estimates are exactly in line with the predictions of geophysicist Glenn Morton, who works in the oil industry and has been calling the recent oil ructions with surprising accuracy. When he started his web page, we were paying $1.60 or so for a gallon and Peak Oil was not a fashionable concept. His site gives you an extremely sobering insider's look at the highly precarious global oil and gas situation.

I don't care if you listen or not, but you can't say you weren't informed.
 

King David

New member
Peak Oil, Gold & Manna

Peak Oil, Gold & Manna

Well I sure hope you guys are right. I guess time will tell.

By the way, it's not extremist environmentalists who are making the predictions regarding gas resources. The very conservative International Energy Agency predicts that we can meet "current demand" until 2030, but of course demand is increasing as India and China industrialize.

However, two IAE whistleblowers have both claimed that the IAE is hiding how dire the actual situation is.

Their estimates are exactly in line with the predictions of geophysicist Glenn Morton, who works in the oil industry and has been calling the recent oil ructions with surprising accuracy. When he started his web page, we were paying $1.60 or so for a gallon and Peak Oil was not a fashionable concept. His site gives you an extremely sobering insider's look at the highly precarious global oil and gas situation.

I don't care if you listen or not, but you can't say you weren't informed.

My father was a mining engineer. As a teenager, I traveled with him when he worked for a few years for a natural gas & oil exploration firm to drilling sites in Western Colorado. My baby sister, too, is a mining engineer, as is a nephew. And I have talked with a number of petroleum engineers, one an old friend of my dad, another was even a UPS driver here for a while. And, one of my favorite "doom-sayers" with whom I agree on much (though not all) of what he says, Dmitry Orlov, also speaks and writes extensively on peak oil.

A few weeks ago, Ambrose Evans-Pritchard (UK Daily Telegraph economics writer) wrote an article entitled—

Energy crisis is postponed as new gas rescues the world
Engineers have performed their magic once again. The world is not going to run short of energy as soon as feared.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/ambroseevans_pritchard/6299291/Energy-crisis-is-postponed-as-new-gas-rescues-the-world.html

And had this excerpt, among others, in it—

"...proven natural gas reserves around the world have risen to 1.2 trillion barrels of oil equivalent, enough for 60 years' supply – and rising fast.

"There has been a revolution in the gas fields of North America. Reserve estimates are rising sharply as technology unlocks unconventional resources,..."

How soon, how well, how universally (or not) transitions and adaptations are made, where they can be, from oil to natural gas, is yet another issue. But that energy reserves, new ones and/or modifications in how they are obtained, used, etc, are things that Malthusians, such as yourself, have been wrong about for some time.

I remember when BP's estimates of their worldwide reserves, a few years ago, was shown to be way high. I know Dmitry Orlov says either 1998 or 2000 or there abouts was when oil reached its peak, supposedly.

However, the prices we have seen on "fossil fuel" extracts have been out of kelter with "supply and demand" for at least 2 - 3 years or more.

Irwin Kellner of MarketWatch wrote in May of this year http://www.marketwatch.com/story/supply-and-demand-picture-dont-justify-gas-prices

"Gas pains - Commentary: Supply and demand picture don't justify gasoline prices" - he then details how the high prices we have seen the past couple of years are simply completely out of kelter with actual supply and actual demand. A WSJ opinion article within the past few weeks reiterated the exact same point. There is a HUGE amount of supply, and yet producers, traders and speculators have successfully been doing their utmost best to make at least Americans pay a hefty price (like we do for prescription drugs), all they can for as long as they can.

If you think you are writing to someone oblivious about what is being reported, you're mistaken. Like stories of Mark Twain's demise, while he was yet living, I take all that I read with a good grain of salt.

So much of what is written in "scientific journals" is shown to be either fabricated or poorly structured (so the claimed results aren't necessarily so, since the problem and/or study was not correctly put together).

But what is for certain is that many nations have arrived at a point where one taxpayer has to sustain him or herself, plus any children, plus retired parents, and sometimes also still living grandparents (when you distribute a population and their "socialized" obligations)!

No wonder the world is awash in debt (which is bondage)! We don't have enough help in the rising (or even risen) generation! We failed to have a sufficient number of children!!!

That you can almost take to the bank (but the bank is being sold to another bank, at a loss, because there isn't enough demand for the houses and businesses it financed, because demand is insufficient, due to babies that weren't born, that might have been 20, 30 & even 40 years ago)!
 

Flipper

New member
My father was a mining engineer. As a teenager, I traveled with him when he worked for a few years for a natural gas & oil exploration firm to drilling sites in Western Colorado. My baby sister, too, is a mining engineer, as is a nephew. And I have talked with a number of petroleum engineers, one an old friend of my dad, another was even a UPS driver here for a while. And, one of my favorite "doom-sayers" with whom I agree on much (though not all) of what he says, Dmitry Orlov, also speaks and writes extensively on peak oil.

A few weeks ago, Ambrose Evans-Pritchard (UK Daily Telegraph economics writer) wrote an article entitled—

Energy crisis is postponed as new gas rescues the world
Engineers have performed their magic once again. The world is not going to run short of energy as soon as feared.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/ambroseevans_pritchard/6299291/Energy-crisis-is-postponed-as-new-gas-rescues-the-world.html

And had this excerpt, among others, in it—

"...proven natural gas reserves around the world have risen to 1.2 trillion barrels of oil equivalent, enough for 60 years' supply – and rising fast.

"There has been a revolution in the gas fields of North America. Reserve estimates are rising sharply as technology unlocks unconventional resources,..."

How soon, how well, how universally (or not) transitions and adaptations are made, where they can be, from oil to natural gas, is yet another issue. But that energy reserves, new ones and/or modifications in how they are obtained, used, etc, are things that Malthusians, such as yourself, have been wrong about for some time.

Well I sure hope you are right and Malthusians like me continue to be wrong, I really do.

But it still appears that we're running up against it for a whole range of critical resources and I'm not confident that we can innovate our way out. Maybe we'll find astounding mineral wealth under the arctic circle or maybe we'll reach some Kurzweilian inflection point and all these problems will be moot. But for now, it looks like we're running on a knife edge.

If we can solve all these problems, the world will sustain a continued rise in population. If we can't, things will get ugly.
 

The Berean

Well-known member
Well I sure hope you are right and Malthusians like me continue to be wrong, I really do.
I would think that after about 140 years of being wrong Mathusians would give up the jig. :chuckle:

But it still appears that we're running up against it for a whole range of critical resources and I'm not confident that we can innovate our way out. Maybe we'll find astounding mineral wealth under the arctic circle or maybe we'll reach some Kurzweilian inflection point and all these problems will be moot. But for now, it looks like we're running on a knife edge.

If we can solve all these problems, the world will sustain a continued rise in population. If we can't, things will get ugly.
You know we do have this huge "rock" orbiting the Earth about 240,000 miles away that contains substantial amount of natural resources.
 

King David

New member
Right and Wrong

Right and Wrong

Well I sure hope you are right and Malthusians like me continue to be wrong, I really do.

But it still appears that we're running up against it for a whole range of critical resources and I'm not confident that we can innovate our way out. Maybe we'll find astounding mineral wealth under the arctic circle or maybe we'll reach some Kurzweilian inflection point and all these problems will be moot. But for now, it looks like we're running on a knife edge.

If we can solve all these problems, the world will sustain a continued rise in population. If we can't, things will get ugly.

Flipper,

Thank you for your gracious response!

I wish that we were not in the predicament we are in. Did you know that Israel and Saudi Arabia are the only two developed nations that have anything much above a mere replacement rate? And Israel has a high growth rate because of the Palestinians, and to a lesser extent, Orthodox Jews.

Regarding Saudi Arabia, I'm not sure if it is the indigenous people, or the "guest workers" (likely the latter) who are having all the babies.

Check out the numbers and maps here on Total Fertility Rates per nation for most ALL nations—

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_territories_by_fertility_rate
 

elected4ever

New member
The TheologyOnline.com TOPIC OF THE DAY for November 17th, 2009 10:36 AM


toldailytopic: Overpopulation. Is the world really over populated as some assert? And if so, what steps should be taken to unpopulate it?






Take the topic above and run with it! Slice it, dice it, give us your general thoughts about it. Everyday there will be a new TOL Topic of the Day.
If you want to make suggestions for the Topic of the Day send a Tweet to @toldailytopic or @theologyonline or send it to us via Facebook.
line all the liberals up like cord wood and then cut them down like the dead wood they really are.
 

fool

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
Yes, we're over populated or more accuratly "under resourced" as Flipper has illustrated.
What to do?
Knock it off with the consumption.
Work with nature instead of against it.
Colonize the solar system.

Consumption;
I read somewhere that 20% of the electricity generated by mankind is used to make aluminum, to make aluminum you throw bauxite and stuff into an ecectric arc furnace.
Melting down aluminum you already have only uses 5% if the power needed to produce it from ore, in Michigan an empty beer can is worth 10 cents, in some states they simply throw their cans away.
Future generations will mine our landfills for the stuff we threw away.

Working with nature;
In the summer the sun beats down on my roof making it hot, it destroys my shingles and I have to run air conditioners to keep the house cool, at the same time I'm paying the gas company to sell me gas to run a water heater which makes water hot so I can shower, wash dishes, and (with a family of six) wash clothes, lots and lots of clothes towls bedding ect.

That's stupid, our buildings need to capture energy passivly, do you have a lawn? Ornemental plant beds? Can you eat the ornemental plants? No? Maybe rethink that.

Colonize the solar system;
If six billion is straining the resources what's 100 billion going to do?
Some people want to reduce the number of humans and to them I ask "Who's side are you on?" our sun will eventually nova so we may as well get working on that problem right now.
 

King David

New member
Less Consumption? - Sure - One Version is FASTING

Less Consumption? - Sure - One Version is FASTING

For close to 170 years, Mormons have practiced what is called fasting. In "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints" today (as the 'Mormon Church' is really named), members are asked to fast once a month, missing two meals they would usually eat. The money they would have spent is collected by young boys who are ordained members of the Aaronic Priesthood, at the homes of members. The funds collected are used to both fund what are called "Bishop's Storehouses", as well as thrift stores called "Deseret Industries" where those who have difficulty getting a job are given training. And the funds are dispersed to both members (of the LDS faith), as well as non-members, according to their need, and the local bishop's judgement as to how to best help each supplicant.

I spoke a week ago with a friend of mine who lost his job end of last year. Unemployment funds were available to him until recently. He has both extensive experience in finances and also Oracle. He lost his job when the contractor he worked for lost the bid to continue their work on maintenance of an MX missile system at a local military installation. He has been substitute teaching classes in finance and accounting and such at a community college.

The ward (congregation) 'Relief Society President', a woman, is sent by the bishop of the local ward to the home of these people, and writes up an assessment of their needs. Then things like food orders are made, which those who receive it are expected to do some work somewhere to help compensate for the help they receive. This helps to separate this from just a mere hand-out.

And as a Ward Clerk a few years ago, I saw first-hand how much the bishop of a ward pays out in funds to help both Mormons and "friends of other faiths" (or no faith) with their needs. While the funds can't be used for house payments. They can be used to pay or help pay utility bills, medical bills, and other essentials.a

It is amazing how much a little sacrifice can help.

Of course, those who are able to give more than the value of two meals do so. One business colleague of mine, who, between him and his wife are the parents of 10 children, told me a few years ago, that he finds that the Lord blesses him the more he gives. He intimated that several hundred dollars a month is what he (at least then) tried to give. He felt and believes that the blessings God grants him outweigh the money he gives there.

And then, of course, there is the principle of tithing, giving one-tenth of one's "increase" (income) is another principle LDS Church members are asked to live too. I can tell you that the promise made in Malachi is fulfilled when one fully lives this principle—

8 Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings.

9 Ye are cursed with a curse: for ye have robbed me, even this whole nation.

10 Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the LORD of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it.

11 And I will rebuke the devourer for your sakes, and he shall not destroy the fruits of your ground; neither shall your vine cast her fruit before the time in the field, saith the LORD of hosts.

12 And all nations shall call you blessed: for ye shall be a delightsome land, saith the LORD of hosts.

—(Old Testament | Malachi 3:8 - 12)

You want solutions to shortages? Hey, let me GUARANTEE EVERYONE OF YOU that if you keep this commandment, as an individual, as a family, as a community, yes, even as a nation, God can, will and does bless those who keep this commandment.

I have FAR MORE STUFF than I have room to store it! And it is all due to the blessings that "the man upstairs" gives us!

God has a 'GOSPEL' (literally "good news") plan to Bless and Benefit ALL MANKIND, not only in the world to come, but VERY IMPORTANTLY HERE TOO!

Interestingly, in recent years, scientific/medical evidence has come out that the fasting done by Latter-Day Saints has a health benefit. That of helping to reset their glucose level monthly, which has, according to the study, a cumulative effect over a lifetime!
 

The Horn

BANNED
Banned
I don't know about overpopulated , but there are serious problems which mean that the world cannot afford to allow population to grow unchecked.
Those who say that the entire world population would fit into a tiny area fail to realize that there are vast areas of the world which are totally uninhabitable, or which could only support small
populations. Do they really think that Greenland , for example, could support 300 million people ?
The world does not have unlimited sources of food, energy and other essential things.
Look at pollution . In the middle of the Pacific there is a giant
conglomeration of refuse made up of plastic and other used things which is the size of Texas ! Growing populations require expanding out into previously uninhabited or sparsely inhabited areas which encroach on nature and wildlife , causing firther ecological and demographic problems .
Whether global warming is true or not, the world has grave problems with climate , ecology , pollution and waste .
 

BabyChristian

New member
Someone may have posted this already. You can type an earlier date and it will tell you what the population was at that time (if this is the same clock I'm thinking about)

http://www.poodwaddle.com/clocks2.htm

The population has gone up a lot since I last looked at this clock. It's now 6 billion 7 hundred thousand and growing very fast. Last time I looked, it was 6 billion.

This clock shows how many have died of AIDS and all kinds of things.

I don't believe in global warming but I do assume the population will grow so large that pandemics will take hold and kill off many of the population.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top