Human Overpopulation
This page will explain the uncertain future of Earth from human overpopulation.
WARNING: Some content on this page might be extremely offensive toward humanitarian especially the one who donate to the poor and pro-life'ers. I'm a pro-choice and pro advocate for human population control.
Our numbers can be controlled the NON LETHAL WAY!!!!!! Don't call me an anti-human because I'm not.
People not issuing about overpopulation are anti-human because the consequences WILL threaten our existence.

Related source: (HERE)
Related source: (HERE)

Overpopulation is a condition where an organism's numbers exceed the carrying capacity of its habitat. The term often refers to the relationship between the human population and its environment, the Earth. Steve Jones, head of the biology department at University College London, has said, "Humans are 10,000 times more common than we should be, according to the rules of the animal kingdom, and we have agriculture to thank for that. Without farming, the world population would probably have reached half a million by now." The world’s population has significantly increased in the last 50 years, mainly due to medical advancements and substantial increases in agricultural productivity.

The recent rapid increase in human population over the past two centuries has raised concerns that humans are beginning to overpopulate the Earth, and that the planet may not be able to sustain present or larger numbers of inhabitants. The population has been growing continuously since the end of the Black Death, around the year 1400; at the beginning of the 19th century, it had reached roughly 1,000,000,000 (1 billion). Increases in life expectancy and resource availability during the industrial and green revolutions led to rapid population growth on a worldwide level. By 1960, the world population had reached 3 billion; it doubled to 6 billion over the next four decades. As of 2009, the estimated annual growth rate was 1.10%, down from a peak of 2.2% in 1963, and the world population stood at roughly 6.7 billion. Current projections show a steady decline in the population growth rate, with the population expected to reach between 8 and 10.5 billion between the year 2040 and 2050.

The scientific consensus is that the current population expansion and accompanying increase in usage of resources is linked to threats to the ecosystem. The InterAcademy Panel Statement on Population Growth, which was ratified by 58 member national academies in 1994, called the growth in human numbers "unprecedented", and stated that many environmental problems, such as rising levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide, global warming, and pollution, were aggravated by the population expansion. At the time, the world population stood at 5.5 billion, and optimistic scenarios predicted a peak of 7.8 billion by 2050, a number that current estimates show will be reached around 2022. (Source)

Effects from human overpopulation

Some problems associated with or exacerbated by human overpopulation:

  • Inadequate fresh water for drinking water use as well as sewage treatment and effluent discharge. Some countries, like Saudi Arabia , use energy-expensive desalination to solve the problem of water shortages.
  • Depletion of natural resources , especially fossil fuels .

    World energy consumption & predictions, 1970–2025.
  • Increased levels of air pollution, water pollution , soil contamination and noise pollution . Once a country has industrialized and become wealthy, a combination of government regulation and technological innovation causes pollution to decline substantially, even as the population continues to grow.
  • Deforestation and loss of ecosystems that sustain global atmospheric oxygen and carbon dioxide balance; about eight million hectares of forest are lost each year.
  • Changes in atmospheric composition and consequent global warming .
  • Irreversible loss of arable land and increases in desertification . Deforestation and desertification can be reversed by adopting property rights, and this policy is successful even while the human population continues to grow.
  • Mass species extinctions from reduced habitat in tropical forests due to slash-and-burn techniques that sometimes are practiced by shifting cultivators , especially in countries with rapidly expanding rural populations; present extinction rates may be as high as 140,000 species lost per year. As of February 2011, the IUCN Red List lists a total of 801 animal species having gone extinct during recorded human history.
  • High infant and child mortality . High rates of infant mortality are caused by poverty. Rich countries with high population densities have low rates of infant mortality.
  • Intensive factory farming to support large populations. It results in human threats including the evolution and spread of antibiotic resistant bacteria diseases, excessive air and water pollution, and new viruses that infect humans.

    A child suffering extreme malnutrition in India, 1972
  • Increased chance of the emergence of new epidemics and pandemics .For many environmental and social reasons, including overcrowded living conditions, malnutrition and inadequate, inaccessible, or non-existent health care, the poor are more likely to be exposed to infectious diseases .
  • Starvation , malnutrition or poor diet with ill health and diet-deficiency diseases (e.g. rickets ). However, rich countries with high population densities do not have famine.
  • Poverty coupled with inflation in some regions and a resulting low level of capital formation. Poverty and inflation are aggravated by bad government and bad economic policies. Many countries with high population densities have eliminated absolute poverty and keep their inflation rates very low.
  • Low life expectancy in countries with fastest growing populations.
  • Unhygienic living conditions for many based upon water resource depletion, discharge of raw sewage and solid waste disposal. However, this problem can be reduced with the adoption of sewers. For example, after Karachi, Pakistan installed sewers, its infant mortality rate fell substantially.
  • Elevated crime rate due to drug cartels and increased theft by people stealing resources to survive.
  • Conflict over scarce resources and crowding, leading to increased levels of warfare .
  • Less personal freedom and more restrictive laws. Laws regulate interactions between humans. Law "serves as a primary social mediator of relations between people." The higher the population density, the more frequent such interactions become, and thus there develops a need for more laws and/or more restrictive laws to regulate these interactions. It was even speculated by Aldous Huxley in 1958 that democracy is threatened due to overpopulation, and could give rise to totalitarian style governments.

Many of these problems are addressed in the science fiction film Soylent Green .

Some economists, such as Thomas Sowell and Walter E. Williams argue that third world poverty and famine are caused in part by bad government and bad economic policies. Most biologists and sociologists see overpopulation as a serious threat to the quality of human life.

People ignoring the upcoming consequences of human overpopulation are IGNORANTS and anti-human because overpopulation will reduce quality of life. Cause more famine, poverty, disease spreading and DEATH.
We are self-genociding ourselves. Known as WE ARE BREEDING OURSELVES TO OBLIVION..
If we keep growing we will be obligated to start human sacrifices or otherwise we all die, go extinct.

(Note this timer doesn't guarantee if is real or not. But it can be close to the real one since we don't gather the resource at the same speed and or rate).
(you can get one in that link). (POSSIBLY OBSOLETE APPLET but you get the point)...

If you were to take a standard sheet of writing paper .1mm thick and cut it into two sheets, placing one atop the other, it would then be .2mm thick. Cutting the stack of two and making a stack of 4 sheets, it would then be .4mm thick. Believe it or not, if you continued to do this just one hundred times, doubling the size of the stack each time, the thickness of the stack would be 1.334 x 10 12 light-years. This is an example of exponential or geometric growth, where the rate of growth is always proportional to it's present size. For more goto source link, (Source).

Planet could be 'unrecognizable' by 2050, experts say

A growing, more affluent population competing for ever scarcer resources could make for an "unrecognizable" world by 2050, researchers warned at a major US science conference Sunday.

The United Nations has predicted the global population will reach seven billion this year, and climb to nine billion by 2050, "with almost all of the growth occurring in poor countries, particularly Africa and South Asia," said John Bongaarts of the non-profit Population Council .

To feed all those mouths, "we will need to produce as much food in the next 40 years as we have in the last 8,000," said Jason Clay of the World Wildlife Fund at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS).

"By 2050 we will not have a planet left that is recognizable" if current trends continue, Clay said.

The swelling population will exacerbate problems, such as resource depletion , said John Casterline, director of the Initiative in Population Research at Ohio State University .

But incomes are also expected to rise over the next 40 years -- tripling globally and quintupling in developing nations -- and add more strain to global food supplies.

People tend to move up the food chain as their incomes rise, consuming more meat than they might have when they made less money, the experts said.

It takes around seven pounds (3.4 kilograms) of grain to produce a pound of meat, and around three to four pounds of grain to produce a pound of cheese or eggs, experts told AFP.

"More people, more money, more consumption, but the same planet," Clay told AFP, urging scientists and governments to start making changes now to how food is produced.

Population experts, meanwhile, called for more funding for family planning programs to help control the growth in the number of humans, especially in developing nations.

"For 20 years, there's been very little investment in family planning, but there's a return of interest now, partly because of the environmental factors like global warming and food prices," said Bongaarts.

"We want to minimize population growth , and the only viable way to do that is through more effective family planning," said Casterline. (Source)

Earth Carrying Capacity?
In my theories and what I saw on the net the maximum safety for a healthy human population is 2, 2.3 to 2.5 billions people on this planet.

Like in people mental views we are the only species on Earth and wiping out other species to expand is nothing but in my views and realistic views it is totally unacceptable. Every species has the right to exist and prosper.

Why there is poverty, famine, starvation, diseases and death?
Because we're too numbered and exceeding the habitat capacity and over-exploiting the resource.
Earth is NOT infinite like the mental instinct of humans thinks. Not mine because I am more aware than most people and I refuse to reproduce or have children.

What are the main cause of overpopulation?
1, Poverty, those idiots having 7-10 children when they can't even afford to raise one kid. That is why I am skeptic and against donating to the poor. We're NOT endangered so in my views donating to the poor while there are species truly need donation to protect them from going EXTINCT is just pure greed and anthropocentrism. I am based on the RARITY of the species.

If I'm stuck between donating to billions of starving poor people or saving the endangered tiger which there are only few thousands left I'd rather save the tiger than starving poor people that are OVERPOPULATING and destroying the world in the name of greed and blackmail to nature. I'm not greedy and nor anthropocentrism. I care about all life. Every species has the right exist.

We're not endangered. Donating to the poor is a trap in my views because it will cause them to breed more, spread diseases to the healthy nation. Most people complain about wildlife overpopulation and not our overpopulation because they are hypocrite, speciesism, anthropocentric and greedy. I'm the other way around. I care about all species. There is ENOUGH people on Earth we do NOT need anymore. Extinction must not be slowed down it must be STOPPED!!!.
Having many kids while cannot feed one is child abuse and these people are exceeding habitat capacity.

2. Divorce are also a factor in overpopulation because when someone has let say 1-4 kids or more. When they breakup they tend to have kids (often) with the new wife that probably had kids before maybe and it causes more people to be born.

3. Rape, pro-life nutjobs. They are the source of overpopulation, especially that selfish bitch slut Sarah Palin who would oppose abortion even if her OWN daughter was raped. Even if a 15 years old was raped by her own daddy or some 30 yrs pervert. No wonder why there are soo many inbred hicks out there. Inbreeding is a grave discrimination toward nature. In my view inbred people should be euthanized because they are suffering or will suffer from all kind of horrible diseases from poor gene pool, risk of spreading bad severely genes and causing a serious disaster in the healthy population. But those human hugging
pro-life nutjobs will oppose it because even if someone is brain-deaded or not they have value. Pro life people are hypocrite because they are in favor of the death penalty but oppose abortion when is MORE HUMANE than the death penalty. Well I am in favor of BOTH death penalty and abortion. Death penalty is good to get rid of scum of the Earth such as, Poachers (some countries execute them), Rapists, Murderers and criminals against humanity. Why feed those losers we don't need to waste our food on those sick individuals. Resource is finite NOT infinite.

We should not colonize other planets since we cannot take care of Earth because we will repeat this over and over again.

If the Earth dies we all die and we wont be able to find other habitable planets for at least another
300-1500 years.
Overpopulation and resource overexploitation

Next Great Depression? MIT researchers predict ‘global economic collapse' by 2030

Posted on 04-04-2012 about 1h and 52 mins ago

A new study from researchers at Jay W. Forrester's institute at MIT says that the world could suffer from "global economic collapse" and "precipitous population decline" if people continue to consume the world's resources at the current pace.
Smithsonian Magazine writes that Australian physicist Graham Turner says "the world is on track for disaster" and that current evidence coincides with a famous, and in some quarters, infamous, academic report from 1972 entitled, "The Limits to Growth."
Produced for a group called The Club of Rome, the study's researchers created a computing model to forecast different scenarios based on the current models of population growth and global resource consumption. The study also took into account different levels of agricultural productivity, birth control and environmental protection efforts. Twelve million copies of the report were produced and distributed in 37 different languages.
Most of the computer scenarios found population and economic growth continuing at a steady rate until about 2030. But without "drastic measures for environmental protection," the scenarios predict the likelihood of a population and economic crash.
However, the study said "unlimited economic growth" is still possible if world governments enact policies and invest in green technologies that help limit the expansion of our ecological footprint.
The Smithsonian notes that several experts strongly objected to "The Limit of Growth's" findings, including the late Yale economist Henry Wallich, who for 12 years served as a governor of the Federal Research Board and was its chief international economics expert. At the time, Wallich said attempting to regulate economic growth would be equal to "consigning billions to permanent poverty."
Turner says that perhaps the most startling find from the study is that the results of the computer scenarios were nearly identical to those predicted in similar computer scenarios used as the basis for "The Limits to Growth."
"There is a very clear warning bell being rung here," Turner said. "We are not on a sustainable trajectory."

Conclusion... I am an individualist. I have a mind of my own and I may have more vision to the world than most people have and I am solely not responsible if this page has offended some viewers, I care about Earth's future, having nice forests and wildlife far in the future so I have to express it my ways.