logo
Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

The most accurate population clock
Val
#1 Posted : Thursday, August 18, 2011 11:15:59 AM(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered, Approved
Joined: 8/18/2011(UTC)
Posts: 136
Location: NW Kansas

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
Here is what I think is the most accurate population clock. Others show a lower than real population IMHO.

http://www.cosmosmith.co...n_population_crisis.htm

karengaia
#3 Posted : Friday, August 26, 2011 11:07:58 AM(UTC)
Rank: Member

Groups: Approved, Registered
Joined: 8/26/2011(UTC)
Posts: 19
Location: Sacramento

Was thanked: 2 time(s) in 2 post(s)
Which population clock?

http://www.cosmosmith.com/population_clock.htm - There are three of them on this page, all different.

I use U.S. Census Bureau figures for my clock at overpopulation.org, but who is to say which agency is more accurate? I'm curious there cosmosmith.com got its figures.
Val
#4 Posted : Friday, August 26, 2011 5:37:34 PM(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered, Approved
Joined: 8/18/2011(UTC)
Posts: 136
Location: NW Kansas

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
You can't miss it in the upper left corner. World population 7.002 Billion. I wouldn't trust the US Census Bureau, they are lowballers just like most other places.
This page and the one you found with the error in the center, both have the correct clock in the upper left corner.

http://www.cosmosmith.co...n_population_crisis.htm

The main error at the site is the population predictor with its "easy let down" population reduction. It will be a crash with a minimum of an 8 billion drop in 30 years from a peak of less than 8.5 billion around 2045.
karengaia
#5 Posted : Friday, August 26, 2011 7:50:48 PM(UTC)
Rank: Member

Groups: Approved, Registered
Joined: 8/26/2011(UTC)
Posts: 19
Location: Sacramento

Was thanked: 2 time(s) in 2 post(s)
The U.N. did previously underestimate its date for 7 billion. I expect it will underestimate the number of years it takes to reach 8 billion as well.
Val
#6 Posted : Monday, September 26, 2011 9:41:22 AM(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered, Approved
Joined: 8/18/2011(UTC)
Posts: 136
Location: NW Kansas

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
Those who have studied population science in advanced biology/ecology and exponential math, know that the population increase will slow down a lot. Economics are already affected greatly, migrations from really overpopulation of homelands has gone on 30 years, and eco-collapses are apparent in oceanic dead zones, desertified soils, 6 giant oceanic trash gyres, nearly complete soil organics loss in great areas, and a worse than worst case scenario for climate change. Death rates are increasing as birth rates go down, and eventually it will really hit average longevity. Unlike the cosmosmith site's population projector, it will not be an easy let down. In nature, it is usually a very rapid decline to a low number around 1 to 5% of the high point. The world is for humanity a series of interconnected ecological niches. I think much of this inter-connectivity will vanish as oil depletes. Some countries and areas may not have the half-bell shaped curve of the mammalian stimulated population decline. It will happen at different times in different places, too. I envision a cascading effect, but the general world curve will follow the half bell. I know that I do not want to witness it much more than I already have. The horror will be immense. Water and other resource wars, extreme lawlessness and thievery, to cannibalism on a large scale. Starvation and diseases with so many dying that they can't be taken care of and the smell in some areas is overwhelming. It will start well before the peak. Perhaps it has started in Somalia, and we have had the migrations. The world economy is in dire straights and could continue to world depression 4 times worse than the 1930s.
http://postgrowth.org/?s=overpopulation
Val
#7 Posted : Saturday, December 17, 2011 9:42:10 AM(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered, Approved
Joined: 8/18/2011(UTC)
Posts: 136
Location: NW Kansas

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
It took a minute to come up, but today it is a 7.03 billion and rising. I think the tombstone for humanity at the bottom, with the end date of 2030, is off by about two decades. There will be 1 to 10% of the population surviving by the late 2000s. With unstopped fossil fuel burning until then, the tundra then oceanic methane releases will be a self-sustaining phenomenon, reaching thermal max 2300 to 3500AD. This could be the real end of humanity with the probable extinction of 85% of species from inability to adapt in the time involved. People just may be able to survive in small numbers, but would have to do so for the 200,000 years it takes to re-sequester the carbon and return to "normal" climactic conditions, and another 2 or 3 million years before the Earth has the biodiversity of the beginning of this inter-glacial epoch, which has become the "Anthropocene Epoch". The interrupted glacial cycle will return, and the long bottleneck over. We won't know in this life, if our ancestors survive, or if they go extinct. Their chances are not good. A bottleneck near that long has not occurred during human existence. The one 52-55 million years ago is our only reference, and it took about ten times longer to reach thermal max from "normal", so more species could adapt. We can only hope for a miracle that humans will make it through the bottleneck, wiser, and sustainably living. No tombstone until closer to when the sun turns nova, and perhaps some have escaped to colonize other planets sustainably.
Val
#8 Posted : Friday, June 22, 2012 4:46:51 AM(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered, Approved
Joined: 8/18/2011(UTC)
Posts: 136
Location: NW Kansas

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
The present average world TFR is 2.75 and decreasing, albeit far too slowly. Blame it on male machismo, or female feminista, religion, stupidity, culture, habit, or just that a third of births are accidental. It is understanding the math and a wide variety of depletion/pollution data to come to future probabilities. From a previous post:
The population must go down fast enough to prevent a mass die-off event. The maximum food and water for humans that the planet can produce in 2050 will be at least a third less than today and possibly even less than half. >>The cumulative effects of AGW, soil losses, water losses, and oil loss/huge expense, will take a heavy toll on yields.<< If people start to compost more and grow and buy locally more, it will be on the low end. Business as usual until then will be the high end of crop and water loss. The population will be close to 9 billion living on enough food for only 3.5-4.7 billion(at barely above semi-active starvation level). If there was some great leader who could say, and people obey, that we need a moratorium an having kids for 20 years, then the natural death rate would reduce the population by at least 50 million per year. Let's say 60 million per year reduction with almost no births. In 10 years it would reduce .6 billion, in 20 it would reduce 1.2 billion. Then one child families would keep the reduction rate at 20 million per year, so by 2050 there would be roughly 5.4 billion in a world that can only support 4.7 billion in the best case. So 700 million would starve or die of thirst, rather than 8 billion over a period of 20 years or so.
That is if there was such an edict and new morality and it started immediately. That is about the best mitigation we can hope for. Let us say it was an instant going to one child families with education and free forms of birth control and changes to social systems to provide for the disabled and elderly. Then 38 years of 20 million per year net drop would be 6.3 billion in a world that can support a max of 4.7 billion. There would be more deaths from starvation, 1.6 billion in a short period, and a greater chance of warfare over resources. Still, it would be better than the crash of 8 billion or more in around 20 years, in similar fashion to Easter Island 1150 AD. Warfare, theft, cannibalism, diseases, starvation, all too fast to even bury the remains. Even if the crash were "gentler" and the reduction took 50 years, it would include most of the births in that period, maybe 2 billion more humans, total. The bottom will be at most a billion left, and probably less than half that. Glad we won't be around, but you can see that by "reduce quickly", I mean enough to mitigate the crash to something not nearly as bad.
There are other things that could happen to increase death rate. People could "push the buttons" for nuclear war, or manufacture an airborne very deadly disease and spread it. Possibility, maybe remote. Another is a natural event, like a super volcano eruption. Yellowstone could save the planet if it blew soon enough, but it still looks at least 2,000 years from now or so, too late. Earth isn't due for a giant meteor strike for 13 million years(if you go for the Nemesis theory), but it is possible a very large one could hit and also save the biosphere.
Val
#9 Posted : Friday, June 22, 2012 4:50:42 AM(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered, Approved
Joined: 8/18/2011(UTC)
Posts: 136
Location: NW Kansas

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
Moved, as is the above post, from the Theory section at request of Taves:
http://dieoff.org/
when TES started(2003)---population 6.3 billion, and when it ended(2012)----7.1 billion=no progress toward a sustainable future made. Too bad.
[QUOTE=Val;380201]
Quote Originally Posted by Val View Post
http://www.cosmosmith.co...n_population_crisis.htm
7 billion August 2011.....
Add this one, too!! It's great!!!

WOA!! World Ovepopulation Awareness
http://www.dieoff.org/page14.htm
:fyi:
and this one!
http://www.yourmedievalfuture.com/

http://www.worldometers.info/
These are VERY useful links. Plus this factoid:
"Research from Murtaugh and Schlax at Oregon State University shows that a hypothetical American woman who switches to a more fuel-efficient car, drives less, recycles, installs more efficient light bulbs, and replaces her refrigerator and windows with energy-saving models, would increase her carbon legacy by 40 times if she has two children."
And this food for thought; Overpopulation causes poverty, low IQ causes overpopulation and poverty.
overpopulation>too many people for the number of jobs>lower wages/income>poverty.
overpopulation>increased resource demands>increased depletion and increased prices>less money>poverty.
overpopulation>increased pollution and depletion>lower food production and lower pure water per capita>collapse/crash
area collapse/crash/economic hardship>migrations>collapse of host areas.
Higher IQ>thinking ahead>lower breeding rate/knowledge of sustainability and ecology>higher income>population habits within sustainability and pollution/depletion at replenishment/absorption rates(known by increased knowledge for increased IQ).
Lower IQ>easy influence by religions and cultures/lack of understanding ecology and ability to think ahead>high breeding rate>poverty>higher breeding rate>collapse economically and ecologically in one area>migrations>collapse in host areas.
Val
#10 Posted : Saturday, September 21, 2013 11:20:18 AM(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered, Approved
Joined: 8/18/2011(UTC)
Posts: 136
Location: NW Kansas

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
It seems some links are no longer working and you have to copy and paste to go there. Here is a bunch of them to peruse;
http://www.cosmosmith.co...verpopulation_links.htm

Close to 7.2 billion as sustainability is going down to less than .9B for a reasonable standard of living (Euro, 2500 calories per person per day).
Users browsing this topic
Guest
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Powered by YAF 1.9.5.5 | YAF © 2003-2011, Yet Another Forum.NET
This page was generated in 0.128 seconds.