Feeding 9 bln people by 2050

[begood]

My bet still is that not even a handful of people have watched the video. If you did; what do you think about the points raised?

[begood]

"A world population that
is growing at 2 % will double every 36 years.

For your point, I don't think world population is necessary growing
exponentially but more linearly".

Your reply adds to the discussion charles. But with linear growth there should be 2% more for each of 36 years and end up with a 72% increase. You agree that we are looking at doubling numbers in 36 years and that is a logarithmic rate; not a linear one. (the difference between 72% and 100% growth) That what gets us into trouble in the long run.
Here's proof in a simple example. You agree to work for a farmer for one month. The first day he will pay you 1 cent. Each following day for the month he will pay you twice as much as the previous day ie. two cents for the second days work and 4 cents for the third day etc. Sounds like its going to be a bargain for the employer. You will be suprised to find the astronomical sum that is owed for that month's work. That's the power of doubling and any growth rate above zero percent. It isn't sustainable in the long run.
And growth is insane once you have reached the point where growth is already causing problems that aren't currently able to be adequately handled.

[begood]

Charlie The only time the growth looks "linear" is when you plot the data on logarithmic paper and get a near straight line fit to the data. That "Straight line" doesn't have anything to do with linear growth.
I certainly stand to be corrected; but if correct then it would be helpful to not have to keep arguing this important basis of fact.

[charliep]

When I look at a population graph, the growth line looks fairly stable. Haven't done the math but I suspect that world population is growing at a decreasing rate - not exponential or compounded. An example for 20 % of the world population is China's one child policy. The professor talks about this in his presentation. As others have highlighted, you also have to do the analysis of declining birth rates and reduced mortality/an aging population.

Regardless, more food is needed. Add in the non food uses of crops (biofuels, etc.) and the trend is the need to produce more.

[charliep]

"But there are so few humans that can comprehend those facts".
No actually evryone gets it.Warren Buffet explained this to me along time ago.I watched the first two videos and I'm not objecting to the idea of exponential growth,rather you inserting your humanist world view on your fist post.Is there something in video 3-8 that I must see?

[cottonpicken]

One way of looking at things is the question what is
the stocking rate of the globe(sort of like how many
cows can you fit into a section of land)

If i remember correctly we are at 125 people per
square mile.Thats all the land above water.

Take off the
deserts,tundra,jungles,mountains,etc,etc and your
left with not much.

My logic tells me we are going to have very,very big
problems and planning now is probably a good
idea.

[cottonpicken]

Sorry guys my last post was directed more a Begood.

[charliep]

A quick web tool that calculates population in the future based on current growth rates.

Current world population about 7.1 bln people. From the calculator, world population will be about 8.2 bln people on June 10, 2011. Don't know if accurate but a way of looking at it.

[URL="http://www.ibiblio.org/lunarbin/worldpop"]world population[/URL]

[charliep]

Oops. Population on June 10, 2021 - 8.2 bln.

[begood]

NFU You probably wouldn't get any more out of the other 6 videos rthan you did from the first two. How much of the first two did you comprehend anyway.
One thing you could get over is your hangup over aethism. Funny how an aethist might tolerate your religious beliefs; but a religious zealot like yourself is not capable of the same experience. If there is a heaven for you; then I hope that attitude doesn't gain you any points.