(December 14, 2014 at 6:37 pm)lifesagift Wrote: you look at the charts, in the last 300 years, population has gone from a billion to 7 billion.

but homonids have been around about 200,000 years... why did population levels stay so flat for so long?

It did not stay flat. It grew slowly. The reason it grew slowly was because most people died before reaching the age of reproduction. It took off when we figured out how to live longer and more healthier lives.

(December 14, 2014 at 8:15 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote:

(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?

yeah you patronising idiot.. thanks for making me fell like I missed something !

tut!

(December 14, 2014 at 8:23 pm)lifesagift Wrote:

(December 14, 2014 at 8:15 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: Is there something unclear in the reasons you've been given for this?

yeah you patronising idiot.. thanks for making me fell like I missed something !

tut!

Seriously, you post the same goddamned question on page 3 as in your OP and I ask if there's something unclear about the answers you've been given, and you call me the idiot.

Seriously, go fuck yourself. Remind me not to try and answer your questions in the future.

(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.

Except that doesn't explain the explosive population growth in countries like Niger, which have huge offspring rates yet high mortality rates as well.

(December 14, 2014 at 8:31 pm)Tartarus Sauce 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.

Except that doesn't explain the explosive population growth in countries like Niger, which have huge offspring rates yet high mortality rates as well.

Clearly, either the fertility rates are far in excess of mortality, or there is some external factor (such as immigration). I was thinking of global rates that aren't constrained by political boundaries, and thus are not subject to external influences such as immigration.

(December 14, 2014 at 8:23 pm)lifesagift Wrote:

(December 14, 2014 at 8:15 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: Is there something unclear in the reasons you've been given for this?

yeah you patronising idiot.. thanks for making me fell like I missed something !

tut!

Yeah, bit of advice, take it or not, as you please: It is almost never a good idea to refer to one of the moderators as an idiot.

Boru

(December 14, 2014 at 9:41 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(December 14, 2014 at 8:23 pm)lifesagift Wrote: yeah you patronising idiot.. thanks for making me fell like I missed something !

tut!

Yeah, bit of advice, take it or not, as you please: It is almost never a good idea to refer to one of the moderators as an idiot.

Boru

Unless you have an impressive set of tits.

(December 14, 2014 at 9:41 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Yeah, bit of advice, take it or not, as you please: It is almost never a good idea to refer to one of the moderators as an idiot.

Meh, I've been called far, far worse here.

(December 14, 2014 at 9:42 pm)Beccs Wrote: Unless you have an impressive set of tits.

Do moobs count?

Quote:Unless you have an impressive set of tits.

Not having seen lifesagift's tits, I offer the above advice with the best of intentions.

Boru

(December 14, 2014 at 9:46 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote:

(December 14, 2014 at 9:41 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Yeah, bit of advice, take it or not, as you please: It is almost never a good idea to refer to one of the moderators as an idiot.

Meh, I've been called far, far worse here.

(December 14, 2014 at 9:42 pm)Beccs Wrote: Unless you have an impressive set of tits.

Do moobs count?

You're the admin. That's up to you to say.