3 ms·

This will only become possible when a couple for important milestones are reached --and they a biggies. First we have to get rid of a lot of the roads. And that

This will only become possible when a couple for important milestones are reached --and they a biggies. First we have to get rid of a lot of the roads. And that can't happen until personal flight becomes common place. Second human population has to stop growing, in fact it needs to shrink even now. We are already reaching upper limits on agricultural and water availability. Unfortunately, while the former is difficult enough, the later is near impossible due to the dominance of infantile religions.

landryraccoon 12y ago
What does religion have to do with it? It's just evolution, isn't it? If you choose not to reproduce, your less conscientious neighbors who choose to have 7 kids will simply replace you. We are all descendants of a long line of individuals that reproduced successfully.
dmritard96 12y ago
"We are already reaching upper limits on agricultural and water availability. " Water availability is a big one although hopefully we can at least handle some of that with clean energy an desal. The economics don't work yet, but water scarcity seems like something that will not stop for economics. Agriculture scarcity - HAH. The only reason we have scarcity is because we consume too much meat, especially in the developed world. If we ate less meat, our spaces dedicated to farm land would feed at least an order of magnitude more people per square meter and would use less water in the process.
ctdonath 12y ago
Human population growth tapers off, even decreases, when a sufficiently advanced level of technology & luxury is reached. We are hardly "reaching upper limits on agricultural and water availability". The problem with food is distribution, not production. Water is an issue, but desalination is very possible once the demand reaches sufficient levels. And your "infantile religion" snipe is a non-sequitur.
- transfire 12y ago
  The two most widely practiced religions in the world, Catholicism and Islam (~3 billion people) are both opposed to birth control. In most nations these institutions hold sway. So it is not a "swipe" nor a "non-sequitur".
seanflyon 12y ago
> human population has to stop growing Nearly all first world nations have a birth rate insufficient to sustain their populations. It seems that a few generations after people are wealthy enough to ensure their children's survival, they stop having more than 1 or 2 kids.
- transfire 12y ago
  Unfortunately that's not exactly true. Even at a measly 1% (about the U.S. rate). It only takes 72 years to double a population. But the bigger problem is 2nd and 3rd world nations. The planet cannot support their reaching the economic levels of 1st world nations in order to achieve this natural population leveling.
  - seanflyon 12y ago
    You are correct to point out that the U.S. population is still growing, but you are incorrect to assume that the birth rate is responsible for the increase. The current U.S. birth rate is 1.88 children per woman, bellow replacement levels. Europe is the same, birth rate insufficient to sustain their population. Many first world nation still have growing populations which is due to 2 causes: 1) Immigration which, because we are talking about global population levels, is another way of saying that developing and third world countries have high birth rates. 2) People are living longer, which unless we solve mortality, is only a temporary factor. So yes, poor areas have high birth rates. Perhaps those areas will stay poor or keep their high birth rates after becoming wealthy; those are valid points to make, but I think that as those area become less poor their birthrates will drop and thus global population will stabilize.

landryraccoon 12y ago

What does religion have to do with it? It's just evolution, isn't it? If you choose not to reproduce, your less conscientious neighbors who choose to have 7 kids will simply replace you. We are all descendants of a long line of individuals that reproduced successfully.

dmritard96 12y ago

"We are already reaching upper limits on agricultural and water availability. " Water availability is a big one although hopefully we can at least handle some of that with clean energy an desal. The economics don't work yet, but water scarcity seems like something that will not stop for economics. Agriculture scarcity - HAH. The only reason we have scarcity is because we consume too much meat, especially in the developed world. If we ate less meat, our spaces dedicated to farm land would feed at least an order of magnitude more people per square meter and would use less water in the process.

ctdonath 12y ago

Human population growth tapers off, even decreases, when a sufficiently advanced level of technology & luxury is reached. We are hardly "reaching upper limits on agricultural and water availability". The problem with food is distribution, not production. Water is an issue, but desalination is very possible once the demand reaches sufficient levels. And your "infantile religion" snipe is a non-sequitur.

transfire 12y ago
The two most widely practiced religions in the world, Catholicism and Islam (~3 billion people) are both opposed to birth control. In most nations these institutions hold sway. So it is not a "swipe" nor a "non-sequitur".

seanflyon 12y ago

> human population has to stop growing Nearly all first world nations have a birth rate insufficient to sustain their populations. It seems that a few generations after people are wealthy enough to ensure their children's survival, they stop having more than 1 or 2 kids.

transfire 12y ago
Unfortunately that's not exactly true. Even at a measly 1% (about the U.S. rate). It only takes 72 years to double a population. But the bigger problem is 2nd and 3rd world nations. The planet cannot support their reaching the economic levels of 1st world nations in order to achieve this natural population leveling.
- seanflyon 12y ago
  You are correct to point out that the U.S. population is still growing, but you are incorrect to assume that the birth rate is responsible for the increase. The current U.S. birth rate is 1.88 children per woman, bellow replacement levels. Europe is the same, birth rate insufficient to sustain their population. Many first world nation still have growing populations which is due to 2 causes: 1) Immigration which, because we are talking about global population levels, is another way of saying that developing and third world countries have high birth rates. 2) People are living longer, which unless we solve mortality, is only a temporary factor. So yes, poor areas have high birth rates. Perhaps those areas will stay poor or keep their high birth rates after becoming wealthy; those are valid points to make, but I think that as those area become less poor their birthrates will drop and thus global population will stabilize.