Europa's Ocean is Oxygen Rich

[DontSayBanana]

Developed, not developing. In Europe it's well below the replacement rate.

My point is that we'll be able to keep using this planet for the forseeable future.

China and India are both huge-pop developed countries with birth rates well above the replacement rate.

[Neil]

China and India are both huge-pop developed countries with birth rates well above the replacement rate.

No they aren't.

[Eddie Teach]

That's rather a stretch in both cases, to call those countries "developed." They each have a smallish educated middle class and a billion paupers living in slums or traditional villages.

[Grallon]

That's rather a stretch in both cases, to call those countries "developed." They each have a smallish educated middle class and a billion paupers living in slums or traditional villages.

India and China's emerging middle classes number in the tens if not the hundreds of millions.   And while their standard of living isn't as high (or wasteful depending) as that of western-europeans or north-americans, it represents a significant impact that simply wasn't a factor before the beginning of globalization.  And it will keep on increasing. 

This planet does not have the resources to sustain a western lifestyle for everyone.  Period.  So either we decrease our living conditions or we decrease the population in general...  Either road leads to unpalatable choices.




G.

[DontSayBanana]

That's rather a stretch in both cases, to call those countries "developed." They each have a smallish educated middle class and a billion paupers living in slums or traditional villages.

I said developed, not well-developed.  Regardless, you're talking about 2 billion paupers, nearly a third of the world's population, without either means or wherewithal to use contraception.  In particular, India's suffering from the same kind of rural population explosion that China had issues with not so long ago, with the government trying all kinds of incentive programs to curb the birth rate.

[grumbler]

Exactly.

It was human level intelligence that was the stumbling block, civilization followed pretty quick.

Actually, no.  Civilization has only occupied the last 5 percent or so of time since the emergence of the human-level intelligence (and that is allowing for civilization in about 8,000 BC, or about 3,000 years before anything we have found to date).

[Eddie Teach]

I don't think we'll ever get to a point where immigration to other planets is an effective population control measure. And even assuming we do have catastrophic environmental problems due to overpopulation(which current trends suggest will work itself out), they won't make the planet completely unlivable, they'll just cut population growth or cull the numbers at worst. So the massive spaceship won't be necessary to save humanity either.

[grumbler]

Regardless, you're talking about 2 billion paupers, nearly a third of the world's population, without either means or wherewithal to use contraception.

Not sure what the difference is between means and wherewithal, but that isn't the problem (contraception is probably available to them for free).  The problem is that their culture emphasizes a high birth rate.

In particular, India's suffering from the same kind of rural population explosion that China had issues with not so long ago, with the government trying all kinds of incentive programs to curb the birth rate.

The answer to high birth rates is the education (and most particularly education of females).  Every country, as it encountered advanced medicine which dropped infant mortality and farming technology that expanded food supply, had a population explosion like that of India recently.  The population growth rate of india is slowing, with (unsurprisingly) Kerala being the best-educated state and the one with the lowest population growth.

[Eddie Teach]

Actually, no.  Civilization has only occupied the last 5 percent or so of time since the emergence of the human-level intelligence (and that is allowing for civilization in about 8,000 BC, or about 3,000 years before anything we have found to date).

That's about 1000 times the ratio for the period of human intelligence divided by life of the planet.

[grumbler]

I don't think we'll ever get to a point where immigration to other planets is an effective population control measure. And even assuming we do have catastrophic environmental problems due to overpopulation(which current trends suggest will work itself out), they won't make the planet completely unlivable, they'll just cut population growth or cull the numbers at worst. So the massive spaceship won't be necessary to save humanity either.

Agreed.  I don't see any conceivable way in which transportation can reduce human population growth if such growth is high enough to be a problem.

And I agree that, just as the Malthusians have been wrong to date, they will continue to be wrong for the foreseeable future.  The solution to our population "problem" is right in front of us.

[grumbler]

Actually, no.  Civilization has only occupied the last 5 percent or so of time since the emergence of the human-level intelligence (and that is allowing for civilization in about 8,000 BC, or about 3,000 years before anything we have found to date).

That's about 1000 times the ratio for the period of human intelligence divided by life of the planet.

And about 1/20 the ratio of the earth's diameter to the earth's diameter.

[DisturbedPervert]

China and India are both huge-pop developed countries with birth rates well above the replacement rate.

That's not true.  China and India are completely different.  India's fertility rate is well above replacement level, China's is below it.  China's is lower than many Western countries.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_territories_by_fertility_rate

[Eddie Teach]

Yeah but if you scroll back, my comment(and I believe Tamas implied it as well) was a comparison of the difficulty of intelligence evolving vs. civilization evolving from that intelligence. From an evolutionary standpoint, thinking animals are highly likely to eventually come up with civilization if they're not killed off. Development of those brains is a lot more problematic.

[DontSayBanana]

That's not true.  China and India are completely different.  India's fertility rate is well above replacement level, China's is below it.  China's is lower than many Western countries.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_territories_by_fertility_rate

China is 150th of 220 in terms of birth rate[1], and its birth rate has increased every year since 2003[2].  India's is 87th, but it's showing signs of slowing[3].

[DisturbedPervert]

China is 150th of 220 in terms of birth rate[1], and its birth rate has increased every year since 2003[2].  India's is 87th, but it's showing signs of slowing[3].

Replacement level fertility rate is roughly 2.1 children per female.  According to the CIA World Factbook China's rate in 2000 was 1.82, in 2008 1.77.  Rates vary slightly depending on source, but they are all about at the 1.7-1.8 mark, and they are all unanimous that the rate is below replacement level, not well above.  Many Western countries have roughly the same rate and few even higher.