TED Conversations

Jeffrey Fadness

This conversation is closed.

Are we as a species like a viral infection that will eventually destroy its host...?

Modern man can trace its origins back some 200,000 years, at least anatomically, and 50,000 years back in behavioral modernity. Yet in just 211 years, from 1800 to 2011, human population grew from 1 billion to 7 billion souls. In the year 2011 alone, it's estimate that 135 million human beings were born, 57 million died, resulting in a net population increase of 78 million people in just one year! That's an average increase of nearly 214 thousand people daily, or ~8,900 per hour.

Assuming the rate of population growth stays constant, at this pace global population will double to more than 14 billion people in just the next 10 years. And then what? Do we double once again to 30 billion+ by the year 2033?

And will population growth actually continue to accelerate, with less attrition from continued gains in life expectancy through better health care and medical science?

Clearly, all these folks are going to need food, shelter, and things to do. More cars, streets, shopping and entertainment centers, business centers, government centers, learning centers, clothing, homes and the list goes on and on!

We as a species have been incredibly successful; much of which has come at the expense and impact upon other species, and our environment.

The Earth is a finite space with finite resources. How does this all play out? Do we eventually deplete and destroy our Host -- Mother Earth? What are the implications and what are the solutions...?

Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Mar 8 2013: Although i dont currently have the evidence,

    We, and our ability to procreate will be culled by several methods during the next 10-30 years, resulting in a 'sustainable' population for the earth to support, this began some time ago, and it has many supporters.

    If we were to reproduce at will, then i think yes the resources of the planet required to sustain life would be depleted to an extent that, the populations with the means to, would destroy all others, thus ensuring their own survival, either way its being planned as we type, and either way its not such a pretty picture.

    I think soon we will hear and read the terms "Doesn't have the right to procreate/reproduce", and "Is being charged with unlawful procreation" .

    all this is good for the planet yeah?, but not so good for those who get culled., so whats more important?

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.