Eccentric Enigma
If by uncomfortable you mean that with the current growth rate of population in our world it is expected to double to somewhere near 12 billion people in the next 50 years, then yes. It'll be a tad bit cramped. sweatdrop The population growth rates of most first world contries is stable. The United States, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom, France and Japan all have a population growth rate ranging from 0.2 per cent to 1 per cent, and Thailand has a rate of 1.5 per cent. The total population of devolped countries will probably remain steady at around 1.2 billion, It's the 3rd world counrties that cant even suport thier current populations that are growing the fastest, likely to grow from 4.8 to 7.8 billion. It's cruel to say, but when things realy go to s**t there I supose they'll start dieing off wholesale and the population growth will even out.
i'll let Anup Shah from
http://www.globalissues.org/EnvIssues/Population.asp make my point for me.
"Many of us have grown up learning and being told that 6 billion is too much and this "over population" is primarily impacting the planet's ability to cope. But is that really the case? Sure, the planet is facing incredible stress. But how much of that is due to large populations, and how much is based on other factors, such as how we choose to live, how we produce, consume and waste our resources? The poor are numerous, but as we shall see, consume far less resources of the planet, for example."
It's the smaller, stable populations that are causing the most enviromental mayhem.
When i spoke about the world filling with people i was trying to communicate that Katrina wasnt the most damageing storm ever becuase it was the most powerfull, it's becuase there are more people and buildings in that area then ever before. Storms of that magnitude have occured in the past, and will occur in the future. We know this as fact. the only reason people die from them is becuase they live in thier path. I relize It's an overly simplistic view and im not trying to blame the residents. Life isnt that simple. People have deep emotional bonds to the place they live. The point im trying to make is that the destructive power of the storm is not an indication of mans influence on the atmosphereic wheather paterns of the world, but of becuase man has given the storm more things to destroy.
BTW, i found those numbers at
http://www.overpopulation.orgAlso, while i belive that humans are ******** with nature to much, i do not belive Katrina is a side efect of it.