Posts: 30626
Threads: 204
Joined: July 19, 2011
Reputation:
141
RE: Population boom
December 14, 2014 at 7:34 pm
(December 14, 2014 at 7:22 pm)Beccs Wrote: (December 14, 2014 at 7:10 pm)lifesagift Wrote: But there were so many violent wars... is that the reason?
55 million people died in WW2, by somewhat conservative estimates. That's a tiny percentage of the human population, even 70 years ago.
And those numbers were easily replaced by the boom after the war.
And even with 55 million fatalities, better than 90% were from disease rather than a direct result of warfare.
The Black Death killed 75-200 million people in the mid-1300's - 30-60% of the human population on the planet.
As it turns out, compared to disease, war has been a pretty inefficient killer.
Posts: 44145
Threads: 530
Joined: July 24, 2013
Reputation:
109
RE: Population boom
December 14, 2014 at 7:35 pm
(December 14, 2014 at 7:27 pm)lifesagift Wrote: Surely life expectancy is key? and number of offspring?
Yes to both. As life expectancy increases - due to getting a handle on what vorlon mentioned above (among other things) - the number of children who survive long enough to have offspring themselves is going to increase, creating a sort of snowball effect.
Humanity has gotten itself into a position where the limiting factors for populations of other organisms (predation, loss of habitat, food shortages, diseases, etc) really don't matter all that much.
Yet.
Boru
‘But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods or no gods. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.’ - Thomas Jefferson
Posts: 30626
Threads: 204
Joined: July 19, 2011
Reputation:
141
RE: Population boom
December 14, 2014 at 7:39 pm
(December 14, 2014 at 7:27 pm)lifesagift Wrote: Surely life expectancy is key? and number of offspring?
Well, yeah - population grows when the birth rate > death rate. That's kind of tautological.
Number of offspring isn't directly a factor, not as much as you might think. Every couple could have 15 kids, and if only three reached reproductive age, your population growth would be slower than if every couple had four that all reached reproductive age. All else being equal, of course.
It seems to me that mortality is the more important factor, all else being equal.
Posts: 542
Threads: 95
Joined: August 28, 2014
Reputation:
4
RE: Population boom
December 14, 2014 at 8:01 pm
(December 14, 2014 at 7:39 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: (December 14, 2014 at 7:27 pm)lifesagift Wrote: Surely life expectancy is key? and number of offspring?
Well, yeah - population grows when the birth rate > death rate. That's kind of tautological.
Number of offspring isn't directly a factor, not as much as you might think. Every couple could have 15 kids, and if only three reached reproductive age, your population growth would be slower than if every couple had four that all reached reproductive age. All else being equal, of course.
It seems to me that mortality is the more important factor, all else being equal.
but if they had only one child!?
PS if you're about to post a reply and your response is going to be negative, improper, average, odd, obtuse, irrational, an argument, might change the focus, going off at a tangent or just mean ... go and find a maths forum to post on instead, they'll love you !!
Posts: 34754
Threads: 200
Joined: August 13, 2012
Reputation:
145
RE: Population boom
December 14, 2014 at 8:05 pm
(December 14, 2014 at 8:01 pm)lifesagift Wrote: (December 14, 2014 at 7:39 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: Well, yeah - population grows when the birth rate > death rate. That's kind of tautological.
Number of offspring isn't directly a factor, not as much as you might think. Every couple could have 15 kids, and if only three reached reproductive age, your population growth would be slower than if every couple had four that all reached reproductive age. All else being equal, of course.
It seems to me that mortality is the more important factor, all else being equal.
but if they had only one child!?
Look at China.
Dying to live, living to die.
Posts: 30626
Threads: 204
Joined: July 19, 2011
Reputation:
141
RE: Population boom
December 14, 2014 at 8:07 pm
(December 14, 2014 at 8:01 pm)lifesagift Wrote: but if they had only one child!?
Then population isn't going to grow unless we discover immortality.
Posts: 542
Threads: 95
Joined: August 28, 2014
Reputation:
4
RE: Population boom
December 14, 2014 at 8:07 pm
But look at world population... 1 billion to 7 billion in the blink of an eye !
PS if you're about to post a reply and your response is going to be negative, improper, average, odd, obtuse, irrational, an argument, might change the focus, going off at a tangent or just mean ... go and find a maths forum to post on instead, they'll love you !!
Posts: 455
Threads: 14
Joined: December 2, 2014
Reputation:
21
RE: Population boom
December 14, 2014 at 8:12 pm
(December 14, 2014 at 8:07 pm)lifesagift Wrote: But look at world population... 1 billion to 7 billion in the blink of an eye ! An astounding level of technological and scientific innovation has occurred just as quickly and account for much of that increase.
"We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid." ~ Benjamin Franklin
Posts: 30626
Threads: 204
Joined: July 19, 2011
Reputation:
141
RE: Population boom
December 14, 2014 at 8:13 pm
(December 14, 2014 at 8:05 pm)Beccs Wrote: (December 14, 2014 at 8:01 pm)lifesagift Wrote: but if they had only one child!?
Look at China.
China has never had a universal policy of one-child-per couple. There are so many exceptions that only about a third of the population is subject to the policy.
However, had they done so, their population would shrink. 1 child for every female is not enough to maintain population levels, much less grow them. It's estimated that the population replacement rate in developed countries is ~2.1 children per female (that is, on average, each female would have to have, on average, 2.1 children to maintain population levels).
Posts: 30626
Threads: 204
Joined: July 19, 2011
Reputation:
141
RE: Population boom
December 14, 2014 at 8:15 pm
(December 14, 2014 at 8:07 pm)lifesagift Wrote: But look at world population... 1 billion to 7 billion in the blink of an eye !
Is there something unclear in the reasons you've been given for this?
|