Topic: Humans keep increasing what will happen? - page 2. (Read 662 times)

To my own view nothing is going to happen if things continue like this, because people die everyday and also new babies are also born as well and that's how the life cycle is going to be like.

Harms to the following:
- Reserve of resources quickly depleted.
- Deforestation to expand agricultural land leads to ecological imbalances.
- Generate concentrated sources of waste that exceed the capacity of self-degradation of the natural environment in urban areas, agricultural and industrial areas.
- The gap in the rate of population growth between industrialized and developing countries is rising, leading to poverty in developing countries and excess consumption in industrialized countries. The growing disparity between urban and rural areas, between developed industrial and least developed countries, leads to the immigration of all kinds.
- The rise of the urban population and the formation of big cities - megacities make the urban environment at risk of severe degradation. The supply of clean water, houses and trees can not meet the population growth. Pollution of air and water increased. Social evils and the problem of social management in urban areas are increasingly difficult.

i think the western world will become a growing one again.

there is no threat, i mean curoscant in star wars had several thrillion inhabitants, you would have to build such a planetary urban society, nature and other stuff would be something only for those that traveled or colonised there.

(humanist perspective)

Man has always found a way to improvise. I don't think increase in population should be a problem so far there are provisions in terms of economy to cater for it. There are so many uninhabited places on earth e.g. in Russia and Canada.
We should't also forget that life expectancy is increasing which means more people on earth.
I think uniting and working on issues like global warming and climate change should cater for the next generation.

What do you mean by that? How could we possibly use the available resources of 1.5 earths? Is that not physically impossible? I don't think you can use more resources than exist. I think one of our biggest problems is that we don't actually know how many resources are available. Capitalism requires scarcity to work. It it is in private companies' best interest to make people think that their product is scarce. Then they can charge more.

Like with everything there has to be a limit as to how many people the Earth can hold, and that point will come one day. If there's not enough food to go around, you're going to see the same old conflicts but at much higher scale, war, scapegoating, people fighting among each other because they have no other choice, else they will not survive. Everything will go down hill. Perhaps the government around the world will suggest to people to do like China, you can only have one or two kids. And many of people will not care and have 10.

At the rate we’re going, we are already using up the available resources of 1 ½ Earths, even though this planet is all we have at the moment. Unless we can find another Earth where we can move half of our 7 billion population, it’s very obvious that we are using up our finite supply of resources. The effect of growing population will be an increased demand for resources and space. Both of which we are running out of. The Earth just can’t keep up with us and our habit of wastage is not helping.

The world population is keep on increasing exponentially. Hence, there will come a time that we will be dealling problems regarding its effect to us. But, what are these problems that we are about to face? What will be the possible effect of this? Well, I think that if it is the case, then the government will mandatorily require a specific number of children within the family. Then, the supply and distribution of food will be strictly facilitated by the government as scarcity and shortage will possibly happen. Next is, most of the lands will soon be occupy by many. And then, if the population will still grow insanely, then more or less, there will be killings --- as part of nature of survival.

Why would you say that survival behavior is unnatural? I think that's just about the most natural behavior you can have. I think you're right when you use the word "animal". These are the same instincts that animals have to reproduce. I don't think the huge boom in world population is due to people suddenly deciding to turn on their survival instinct. The difference is that people actually started surviving. Modern medicine and vaccinations have reduced out mortality rate greatly. Life expectancy is also going up. I suggest not only looking at the history population, but also look at the birth rates. They are going down all over the world. Some projections even predict that world population will start going down again the future.

Various contraceptives are still controlling the population meanwhile there are still many young people are not educated well about our various contraceptives and maybe that is the reason why our population keeps ballooning. We can't really stop their lust and a lot of young people now are having sex and not educated well.

Small growth still growth and we can't keep growing forever.  I recommend watching this amazing talk about population growth and the math behind growth.

Arithmetic, Population and Energy - a talk by Al Bartlett

we suffer world wide food shortage. if our population is keeping larger and larger. and thats not good. the government need to educate people about family planning not family planting. educate about the cause and effect use of contraceptive to avoid prenancy and our polulation will not keep rising.

the day when the population will grow into as much as 50 billion may be a few thousand years away, and by then there would have been several world wars, catastrophes, natural calamities, earthquakes, global warming, and floods to reduce the population, perhaps to even a lower value than 0.5 billion.

If climate change caused by global warming continues as currently projected, the global human population will probably peak and then decline.

As the human population grows, many new problems arise: from environmental issues; Social Security; economy; society's vices..
It will be a difficult question to ask the government and the people to work together to think and change their behavior

Humans are actively spreading in numbers as of now. What will happen in this society will eventually be chaotic and full of conflicts regarding survival. Even if the government takes lead to starting a new changed world, humans are still humans. No one can ever be a hindrance to this growing population, not even political leaders and officials.  It is human's nature. So therefore, the world is more likely to suffer.

These ideas were proposed by Paul Erich in the 1970s, virtually identically. None of the dire consequences he predicted have came true, and the world, and the welfare of people, is far, far superior to the 1970s. In spite of great increases in population.

Overpopulation will surely have it's toll on the natural resources on our planet.
Pollution and depletion of the natural resources will surely make things harder
for the generations to come. If we don't find alternative solutions to the growing
number of problems, human civilization is at risk. There's always a price to pay.

But...

It's so TASTY!!!

1. A frugivore is a type of omnivore which is what I stated.
2. When did I say 100kg of meat per year was a normal healthy diet? Thats the equivalent of roughly 2kg per week...
3. When did I compare human teeth to wolves?

Our closest relatives are Chimpanzees and although they have a mainly plant based diet, there is plenty evidence of that shows they spend a large portion of their foraging time fishing for termites and ant dipping. Heres a scientific study that you can read that states exactly this http://www.cnr.berkeley.edu/miltonlab/pdfs/meateating.pdf. Go straight to the conclusions if you don't want to read the whole thing. Furthermore, although primates are our closest relatives, the eating habits of each individual species varies. Evidence in that report also shows strong support for the role of animal based micronutrients being critical in human infant development.


If we aren't designed to digest animal fats, how do babies digest their mother's milk? Surely that's a natural intake of animal fats?

This study https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/71/3/682/4729121 finds that hunter gatherers would have consumed about 50% of animal based food in their diets and even this vegan blog states that humans are not exclusively herbivores. https://veganbiologist.com/2016/01/04/humans-are-not-herbivores/. Although I won't argue the science behind saturated fat being linked to fatty liver disease, saturated fat does not exclusively come from animals and you are cherry picking facts to support your argument.

I may have been a bit short sighted in my original post because after looking into it a bit more its possible out eye position originated to aid us in climbing trees. That doesn't take away from the fact that it aided us in our hunter gatherer lifestyle and it could be a combination of both.

Stop arguing with me about stuff that you clearly have a biased view on. You even said yourself that humans are omnivores, which is exactly what I said.


Apologies if i took this off topic but I guess the whole meat industry thing stems from the sustainability theme of the post