Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

A forum for discussion of regional topics including oil depletion but also government, society, and the future.

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby Newfie » Sat 06 Jun 2015, 08:33:54

I wonder why the big dip about 1960?
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 18458
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby dissident » Sat 06 Jun 2015, 09:03:22

radon1 wrote:Interesting graph

Image


Yes, it will be growing at 0.5% by 2050. That means that the population will still be accumulating as seen in the blue curve. The problem is that the agricultural capacity to feed those billions will be collapsing by 2050 and likely earlier.
dissident
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 6458
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 03:00:00

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby ennui2 » Sat 06 Jun 2015, 09:42:55

onlooker wrote:Spot on Ennui. We have been and are continuing in denial mode. See the Archdruid Report as Greer now has some interesting comments about this. :-D


At risk of taking this further off-topic, Greer is just continuing to write in his usual mode, which is to skewer as many sacred cows as he can, in this case presenting a hit-piece against Elon Musk. Despite how wordy his blog is, he shrugs off all of Musk's effort as nothing but a cash-grab of public funds in very few words. You'd think he'd have a few words to say about, let's say, the rescue of Detroit about 5 years ago earlier, but no, he's going to attack someone who actually gives a crap about getting off fossil fuels as nothing but a scam-artist. Why? Because doomers need to be a killjoy, and there's no better target for being a killjoy than to go after anything that might actually be a source of optimism. All the better to go after them than the usual suspects like Big Oil. If a force isn't advocating powering down to oxcarts and scythes, then they are just backing BAU, basically. Which means everyone's a target for ridicule.
"If the oil price crosses above the Etp maximum oil price curve within the next month, I will leave the forum." --SumYunGai (9/21/2016)
User avatar
ennui2
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 3920
Joined: Tue 20 Sep 2011, 10:37:02
Location: Not on Homeworld

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby Pops » Sat 06 Jun 2015, 09:51:11

I think saying "will be" is the eternal problem. Here are 3 UN scenarios

Image


This one is better, showing regional trends

Image

In the world of BAU, increasing population and especially increasing working age population is a great thing. That of course is the conundrum of immigration for conservatives in the US, balancing the Chamber wing (who need young workers/consumers) with the far right or old southern Dem wing who want to build a wall.

This PDF from the UN touts the great possibilities of a young workforce in transitional countries but between the lines seems to push programs more designed to educate girls and get them to the iPhone factory with the actual goal of reducing fertility.
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves -- in their separate, and individual capacities.
-- Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Government (July 1, 1854)
User avatar
Pops
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 19746
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 04:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby dissident » Sat 06 Jun 2015, 12:05:30

Yeah, whatever.

Under no scenario do we get a decline below 7 billion people by 2050. That is the critical point considering the looming agricultural collapse. But some people think global warming and its effects are all a commie hoax. They also think Roundup will save humanity.
dissident
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 6458
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 03:00:00

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby Newfie » Sat 06 Jun 2015, 12:42:35

Dis,
I am tone deaf, can't hold a tune, can't make the radio loud enough for me to sing along. I just don't have it.

Likewise I have done systems integration. Many otherwise good engineers just don't understand it, don't get it, think it's a rip off. The ones that do get it are usually doomers. Not overtly, but after a few beers, yeah. The connection is being able to put disparit pieces together, to understand the ways things link. It's a gift, not all have it. You can't teach it.

It appears to be an unnecessary requirement to be a politician or businessman. Or even for many engineers. Thusrojects over run or fail needlessly.

And there we are here .
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 18458
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby C8 » Sat 06 Jun 2015, 12:49:08

radon1 wrote:Interesting graph

Image


The interesting thing about this graph for me is the red line's variability on the left side- the past is not the future and you just can't project trends out based on past data. Population growth rates have changed greatly in the past. Yet the person who created this graph ignores the past variability on the left and assumes total compliance with the past by projecting the red line out many years into the future. This isn't a scientific chart- its propaganda.
User avatar
C8
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1074
Joined: Sun 14 Apr 2013, 09:02:48

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby ennui2 » Sat 06 Jun 2015, 16:43:54

C8 wrote:This isn't a scientific chart- its propaganda.


Fine. Don't like the chart? Think there's some cabal of scientists trying to brainwash us? Offer your own armchair prediction.
"If the oil price crosses above the Etp maximum oil price curve within the next month, I will leave the forum." --SumYunGai (9/21/2016)
User avatar
ennui2
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 3920
Joined: Tue 20 Sep 2011, 10:37:02
Location: Not on Homeworld

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby Strummer » Sun 07 Jun 2015, 06:07:13

Newfie wrote:I wonder why the big dip about 1960?


1960 minus 18 is 1942. I guess that answers your question.
Strummer
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 691
Joined: Thu 04 Jul 2013, 04:42:14

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby Newfie » Sun 07 Jun 2015, 08:04:31

Dooh!
I was thinking the WWII drop would be in 1942.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 18458
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby Strummer » Sun 07 Jun 2015, 10:05:00

Newfie wrote:Dooh!
I was thinking the WWII drop would be in 1942.


It's important to realize the graph shows the growth rate and the dip in 1960 is only there relative to the growth rate skyrocketing in the postwar years.

The graph shows a clear decline in growth rate during WWII, and it's exactly that drop which then caused the drop in 1960 (the time when the generations that were supposed to be born during the war were supposed to have kids themselves). And don't forget that the drop during WWII is vastly underestimated on the graph, as hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of the kids born during the war did not survive it.
Strummer
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 691
Joined: Thu 04 Jul 2013, 04:42:14

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby C8 » Sun 07 Jun 2015, 11:04:10

ennui2 wrote:
C8 wrote:This isn't a scientific chart- its propaganda.


Fine. Don't like the chart? Think there's some cabal of scientists trying to brainwash us? Offer your own armchair prediction.


At least I offer reasons for my positions- all you do is slander, your posts are completely uninteresting and devoid of any analysis- your only trick is to slander. Do you feel the projection is scientific? Do you think ignoring past variability is professional? You never add anything to a discussion- only slander. And you seem completely obsessed with whatever I say. Are you well?
User avatar
C8
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1074
Joined: Sun 14 Apr 2013, 09:02:48

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby Newfie » Sun 07 Jun 2015, 15:59:46

Strummer wrote:
Newfie wrote:Dooh!
I was thinking the WWII drop would be in 1942.


It's important to realize the graph shows the growth rate and the dip in 1960 is only there relative to the growth rate skyrocketing in the postwar years.

The graph shows a clear decline in growth rate during WWII, and it's exactly that drop which then caused the drop in 1960 (the time when the generations that were supposed to be born during the war were supposed to have kids themselves). And don't forget that the drop during WWII is vastly underestimated on the graph, as hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of the kids born during the war did not survive it.


It would make sense if you were looking at successful births to define the growth rate. Gotta figure out what occurred 18 years before 1906.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 18458
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby Newfie » Sun 07 Jun 2015, 17:34:26

I can't find a good source for this damn graph.

A denier site credits the 1962 drop to China's Great Leap Forward.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 18458
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby dissident » Sun 07 Jun 2015, 23:35:47

Newfie wrote:I can't find a good source for this damn graph.

A denier site credits the 1962 drop to China's Great Leap Forward.


That would definitely contribute, but it is way too narrow in time and there is a bizarre overshoot like some restoring force was pulling the growth rate back around 1965.

The posted graph looks like it is hand rendered and the dip during WWII is barely noticeable, which is a crock.

I would not take this graph at face value. It's somebody's rough estimate of the growth rate time series.
dissident
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 6458
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 03:00:00

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby Pops » Mon 08 Jun 2015, 10:56:17

Here is a essay on the Great Leap that talks about the dip
http://www.angelfire.com/super/chrisgun ... napop.html
The chart data comes from US Census Bureau, it shows up consistently on a Google image search for pop. rate

I think the left side of the chart shows the world changing unevenly and the right you see a more uniform world.

Maybe the problem for the latecomers to urbanisation and low birth rate, in Africa especially but maybe Asia too, is they get the "benefit" of industrialisation in the form of food and other aid aid but not the structural social change that makes smaller families desireable.

African's mortality rate is still the highest but half what it was 50 years ago, this is infants:

Image

But the fertility rate decline is lagging because industrialization is not widespread?

Image
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves -- in their separate, and individual capacities.
-- Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Government (July 1, 1854)
User avatar
Pops
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 19746
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 04:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby wake » Mon 08 Jun 2015, 11:41:19

Is the drop in 1960 not simply the birth control pill?

Wikipedia has its first use in 1960

Women taking control of fertility for the first time in any species in the history of time is a relatively big deal (yes, Romans and that sylphium herb or whatever)

the big dip I don't know but after that it seems likely to be it, no ?
wake
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon 10 Nov 2014, 17:19:34

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby Ibon » Mon 08 Jun 2015, 12:06:19

ennui2 wrote:[ Why? Because doomers need to be a killjoy, and there's no better target for being a killjoy than to go after anything that might actually be a source of optimism.


Jeez, Ennui, talk about the pot calling the kettle black. My attempts at pointing out silver linings of upcoming consequences or the optimistic potential of cultural adaptation toward self regulation bring about some pretty bleak and killjoy responses from you.
Patiently awaiting the pathogens. Our resiliency resembles an invasive weed. We are the Kudzu Ape
blog: http://blog.mounttotumas.com/
website: http://www.mounttotumas.com
User avatar
Ibon
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 9568
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 04:00:00
Location: Volcan, Panama

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby Newfie » Mon 08 Jun 2015, 12:09:40

Pops,
I see this graph as you describe from 1950 forward. It was the Pre-1950 bit that got me.

Sorry for lack of clarity.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 18458
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: 23 NYT Journalists Declare Overpopulation a Myth

Unread postby Revi » Tue 09 Jun 2015, 13:03:43

It's interesting that 23 NYT Journalists would say that overpopulation is a myth. They probably aren't stuffing themselves into a boat to cross from Libya to Europe or freezing on a mountain in Bulgaria or crawling under a fence on the US/Mexico border in the hopes of a better life. They are probably comfortably housed and fed in suburban or rich urban settings and don't even know what's going on.
Deep in the mud and slime of things, even there, something sings.
User avatar
Revi
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7417
Joined: Mon 25 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Maine

PreviousNext

Return to North America Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests