3 ms·
That's a 108% increase in a century, which is a relatively short time in historical terms. Imagine the damage to the planet with double the current human popula
by vfc1 7y ago
That's a 108% increase in a century, which is a relatively short time in historical terms. Imagine the damage to the planet with double the current human population. This could be around the corner, historically speaking.
- NeedMoreTea 7y agoErr, no it isn't, it's 100% in approximately 66 years. It's compounded growth. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_72 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_72
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- keanzu 7y agoThe source I provided shows that the growth rate has been consistently dropping. In 2015,2016,2017,2018 it was 1.19,1.14,1.12,1.10 Not sure you can extrapolate out 100 (or 66) years when there's been a 0.11% (1.19 -> 1.08) change in the growth rate in just the last 5 years.
- vfc1 7y agoIt still sounds pretty bad, like doubling the current population or close to that in 100 years. If not 100, make it 150 or 200 it's still not much on historical terms. With modern medicine, modern agriculture and the tendency to reduce warfare around the world, there is no reason to believe the growth will stop, by the contrary.
- keanzu 7y agoI think you've misunderstood the change in growth rate. It has dropped from 1.19% to 1.08% growth in the last five years or down 0.11%. If this trend held in the next five years it would drop to 0.97% growth by 2024 and in ~50 years it would be 0% growth, ie the population would stabilize.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]