• The Forums are now open to new registrations, adverts are also being de-tuned.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

We can't always be right all the time. As you say, a totally different view on things.
 
We drivers in the UK must give cyclists a cars width when passing, and cyclists must also keep a car width distance when passing us?
Basically driving along and a cyclist whizzes by my passenger side with not even a rulers distance.

....

What we need is for the whole world to get their fertility rates below 2.1....

Well, reducing the population size will help with the cyclists issue to some extent.......
 
Here’s some real data to fuel the argument. It’s from 2014 and there may be newer data, but the fundamentals won’t have changed. It’s looks at population growth in more detail than just the headline figures and is very interesting as it shows the underlying reasons for growth/reduction in different geographical areas as well as time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 190
,,,looks at population growth in more detail than just the headline figures and is very interesting as it shows the underlying reasons for growth/reduction

Thank you very much for the inut, although fwiw I had read that article, back around the time it was released.

I can only applaud your positivity DrNick.:
If we take that (rather optimistically biased, relative to other similar studies) as being correct. Then we are to understand that for the coming decades the population will continue to increase until it stabilises next century at "only 10.9 billion".
That is "only five times more humans" than they calculate our planet can actually sustain.
Thank the heavens for that, we're saved.??????? :(

All their statistics, no matter ho positively presented, show we are no where near reaching any leveling out point.
Even if global population stabilised overnight, our planet is screaming at us that it already can not cope with our paltry 7.8 billion (even with 80% subsisting in famine & destitution).

Anyway, I'm off for a bicycle ride.!
 
  • Like
Reactions: m80
uSING
Sooooo glad to be moving onto our 60ft narrow boat soon, car stored at marina ready for the France trip, and fold up leci bike in the well deck for leisurely rides on the toll path for shopping. Only 20mins to shops by boat (running on red of course) for the big shop. 😇
Using the red for heating only, not propulsion we assume ;)
 
uSING

Using the red for heating only, not propulsion we assume ;)

"In Great Britain, a private pleasure craft may continue to use rebated (red) diesel, including rebated sulphur-free diesel and rebated bioblend (a mix of diesel and biodiesel) however, an amount equal to the rebate must be paid on the fuel used for propelling the boat."

From:

 
Here’s some real data to fuel the argument. It’s from 2014 and there may be newer data, but the fundamentals won’t have changed. It’s looks at population growth in more detail than just the headline figures and is very interesting as it shows the underlying reasons for growth/reduction in different geographical areas as well as time.

A good article in the way it explains the underlying reasons for the population reaching a peak then falling. The UN's forecast hasn't changed since 2014 which seems a little worrying. I said above that the UN is the most pessimistic of the forecasters. In reality world population may peak sooner and at a lower figure. The big thing to take away from any of the forecasts is that Africa is the problem. If we could do something to control Africa's population, we will easily better the UN forecast.

When you look around at the development pf LGBT+ in developed nations, it uncannily feels like mankind was destined to produce it's own natural self control mechanism for population growth. Perhaps we could introduce Africa to the modern notion of gender identity choice. That would solve the problem at a stroke,
 
In reality world population may peak sooner and at a lower figure.
Sadly (as always seems to happen) we are distracting ourselves by being preoccupied by details aren't we?
Whether the population explosion pauses in 80 years or even the (statistically implausible) figure of 30 is irrelevant, when we are already living more than threefold "beyond our means".

We already have a disproportionate percentage of the world's population who never can (or will) have any chance of enjoying a life that you or I would consider fulfilled.
We already have natural resources terminally eroded.
We are already seeing political unrest as a direct result of people affected by those pressures.
We have already lost over 70% of global wildlife.
We are already seeing the effects of global warming.
Etc etc etc.....
And every single pressure we place on the planet can only get worse. Simply "slowing down the increase of worse" does not seem an adequate response.?

This is when our species has managed incredible developments in knowledge & technology, that (imho) should ensure that every human could live a productive and fulfilling life without harm to our planet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: m80
.....we are already living more than threefold "beyond our means"....

Surely the simple answer is that the largest consumers of resources, should moderate their resource consumption?

Of, course, no one wants to give-up a convenience that they have gotten accustomed to. But this doesn't mean it's not the right solution.
 
Surely the simple answer is that the largest consumers of resources, should moderate their resource consumption?

Of, course, no one wants to give-up a convenience that they have gotten accustomed to. But this doesn't mean it's not the right solution.
So, if I got this right, you are suggesting that the answer is for;
Too many humans all smothering and polluting mother earth, but changing things so all subsist (akin to the 80% suffering today) instead of 20% living technologically obtainable full & enjoyable lives.
Apart from the fact that those "moderations in consumption" can only fall far short of what is needed to rectify things,,,
Apart from that,,,
Why, please, is that better than; A 1970's global population level all living full, enjoyable and unfettered lives.?
 
So, if I got this right, you are suggesting that the answer is for;
Too many humans all smothering and polluting mother earth, but changing things so all subsist (akin to the 80% suffering today) instead of 20% living technologically obtainable full & enjoyable lives.
Apart from the fact that those "moderations in consumption" can only fall far short of what is needed to rectify things,,,
Apart from that,,,
Why, please, is that better than; A 1970's global population level all living full, enjoyable and unfettered lives.?

I would find a way to tax waste in affluent societies, for example.

I recon (though I have no data to support it) that only about half the food produced in wealthy countries actually gets eaten.

Yes it's great to have breakfast at that little Caffè that always have fresh pastries, where the owner is very proud that all the unsold food at the end of the day gets thrown away.

But is this a reason to not allow more people to be born?

It goes across the board. IT kit, cars, TVs, phones, etc. I worked in West Africa and have witnessed first-hand cultures that generate near-zero non-organic waste. Empty water bottles are re-sold in the market. Car parts are repaired and refurbished again and again and rarely get thrown away. Food expires when it goes rotten, not when the 'expiry' date is reached.

Yes, we all want stuff that's new and fresh. But if there's not enough for everyone... can we not moderate our consumption, or at least to reduce waste?
 
Yes of course, not my fault its all in the same tank 😇


Great info 😴
Same tank or not as long as you pay the % duty on it you are in the clear to use it for propulsion. Just like jetting back from from an overseas holiday with 3000 cigarettes in your suitcase. Declare them , pay the duty and puff away !
 
Same tank or not as long as you pay the % duty on it you are in the clear to use it for propulsion. Just like jetting back from from an overseas holiday with 3000 cigarettes in your suitcase. Declare them , pay the duty and puff away !

Add to that 3,000 bottles of vintage French wine..... a recipe for longevity :D
 
A good article in the way it explains the underlying reasons for the population reaching a peak then falling. The UN's forecast hasn't changed since 2014 which seems a little worrying. I said above that the UN is the most pessimistic of the forecasters. In reality world population may peak sooner and at a lower figure. The big thing to take away from any of the forecasts is that Africa is the problem. If we could do something to control Africa's population, we will easily better the UN forecast.

When you look around at the development pf LGBT+ in developed nations, it uncannily feels like mankind was destined to produce it's own natural self control mechanism for population growth. Perhaps we could introduce Africa to the modern notion of gender identity choice. That would solve the problem at a stroke,
"When you look around at the development pf LGBT+ in developed nations, it uncannily feels like mankind was destined to produce it's own natural self control mechanism for population growth."

Many (most?) still want children and they are a tiny fraction of the population (with more rights than the rest of us ;)).
 
A good article in the way it explains the underlying reasons for the population reaching a peak then falling. The UN's forecast hasn't changed since 2014 which seems a little worrying. I said above that the UN is the most pessimistic of the forecasters. In reality world population may peak sooner and at a lower figure. The big thing to take away from any of the forecasts is that Africa is the problem.If we could do something to control Africa's population, we will easily better the UN forecast.
The UK funded family planning clinics in Africa which provided contraception but that programme was axed when the international development fund was reduced. You get what you vote for.
When you look around at the development pf LGBT+ in developed nations, it uncannily feels like mankind was destined to produce it's own natural self control mechanism for population growth. Perhaps we could introduce Africa to the modern notion of gender identity choice. That would solve the problem at a stroke,
Perhaps we could un-introduce Africa to the illegality of gender identity choice imposed on them by countries that colonised it.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom