Slashdot Mirror
World Population Could Reach Nearly 11 Billion By 2100
vinces99 writes "A new analysis shows that world population could reach nearly 11 billion by the end of this century, according to a United Nations report issued June 13. That's about 800 million, or about 8 percent, more than the previous projection issued in 2011. The change is largely because birth rates in Africa have not declined as quickly as had been expected, according to Adrian Raftery of the University of Washington's Center for Statistics and the Social Sciences. The U.N. estimates use statistical methods developed at the center. The current African population is about 1.1 billion and it is now expected to reach 4.2 billion, nearly a fourfold increase, by 2100, Raftery said."
How the hell is the NSA supposed to keep track of all those people?!?!
Unless we can support that much life with food, water and other resources, war for diminishing resources will wipe out enough population before we even get close to that.
let alone 86+ years
I fully expect this comments section to be full of "but what about all the resources we need for..." fears about "overpopulation". Where there's a will, there's a way. The zero population growth people would have us believe that the numbers are very different from what they really are, but the world can produce a lot more food than we do, and with minimal changes, it could be greatly increased.
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
I wouldn't put much faith in long term predictions. 2100 is 87 years away. 87 years ago, it was 1926. In 1927, the world's population reached 2 billion (up from 1 billion in 1804). Had they made a prediction then, they would have likely guessed that we'd hit 3 billion by 2049. Maybe 4 billion if they thought we were doubling population numbers. In addition, if someone from 1926 tried predicting what the technology of 2013 would be like, I highly doubt they'd be anywhere close.
My prediction? In 87 years, the world will look in many ways the same and in many ways vastly different in ways that I couldn't begin to imagine at this point.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
Selfishness? No, Selfishness is having too many kids, it's rather selfless to not reproduce.
Selfishness is not having kids but expecting that you're going to be cared for by other peoples kids. It's selfishness when it's done by the individual, and it's selfish when it's done as an "immigration" policy. Face it. We, as a culture, transformed sex into a sport, and now we survive by stealing other peoples children. It's worst in North America... this continent is where genetic material comes to die.
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
Exterminate, EXTERMINATE!
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
Free software engineering degrees. The massive increase in geek population will no doubt cause reproduction rates to plummet. Throw in government-subsidized WoW accounts and we'll have negative population growth in 4 years tops!
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
Predictions of Malthusian nightmares rarely seem to take birth control into account. We should keep in mind that effective hormonal birth control has only been widely available in the West since the seventies. In that short (yes, very short) amount of time it had to become both cheap enough and socially acceptable enough to make a demographic dent. We're only beginning to see the effects but even so 48% of the world's population lives in countries with sub-replacement fertility rates. Immigration props up most of the developed world demographically, but even so countries with some of the most advanced economies, like Germany and Japan, are experiencing a contraction of their populations. Indeed the latter, with its aversion to immigration, faces demographic collapse.
There's a lot of reason to be concerned about pressure of resources as the developing world grows and developing economies advance. But much of the increased pressure is caused by people taking on aspects of Western life--consumerism, purchase of electronic conveniences which become apparent necessities (cell phone, computers, etc), and the increasing use of cars. But aside from stable polities, few things make life more comfortable in the West than birth control. If there was a bit of lag time, and indeed a small amount, before widespread adoption of birth control in the West would make a demographic difference, why should we not expect developing countries to follow suit shortly?
Read a headline from the 1890's in the Tribune when they estimated the horse poop would be 6ft deep by 1920 in the streets. Of course then came the automobile. That's the problem with all these long term prediction models. Things change in ways they never can account for.
"The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
I've said for years it won't slow down like they think.
You are already seeing subcultures in the 1st world which are breeding at a higher rate for a variety of reasons (religion is significant).
If you view humans as a virus- those which breed quickly seem plausible to become the dominant group in the population.
Sad, because the earth is a paradise at about 2 to 3 billion.
We are way past the earth's carrying capacity and it's too late to change anything.
I expect that, like deer, we'll do fine until there is a glitch, virus, etc. and then a billion or more will die fairly quickly. Hopefully after I'm dead of natural causes.
We are making a lot of progress on disease so I'm thinking disruption of food delivery or destruction of water supply is more likely-- lots of aquifers being drawn down now.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.