The world’s population is expected to hit seven billion in the next few weeks. After growing very slowly for most of human history, the number of people on Earth has more than doubled in the last 50 years.

Click below to find out where you fit into this story of human life?

The World At Seven Billion
BBC, October 26, 2011

Category: Philosophy, Science

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

12 Responses to “The World At Seven Billion”

  1. Jojo says:

    You were the:
    person alive on Earth
    person to have lived since history began

    Cool! So 75 billion people have lived and died since “history” began? That number doesn’t seem too big at all…

  2. darth beta says:

    I would love to know how accurate the year 1500 data is. All these studies tend to be based on estimates from western european sources. The N. American indian population might have been as high as 100-300 million.

    From wiki- The population debate has often had ideological underpinnings.[12] Low estimates were sometimes reflective of European notions of cultural and racial superiority. Historian Francis Jennings argued, “Scholarly wisdom long held that Indians were so inferior in mind and works that they could not possibly have created or sustained large populations.”[13] On the other hand, some have argued that contemporary estimates of a high pre-Columbian indigenous population are rooted in a bias against Western civilization and/or Christianity. Robert Royal writes that “estimates of pre-Columbian population figures have become heavily politicized with some scholars, who are particularly critical of Europe, often favoring wildly higher figures.”[14]

  3. jaykimball says:

    Talk of the Nation had some good guests on today, talking about population. Even if the population stopped growing today, there is a massive challenge facing us – The exponential growth in consumption. As developing nations move up the per capita income curve, they want to live “the good life.” I put together some charts that help reveal the trends and implications. For those interested in learning more, see:

    Jay Kimball
    8020 Vision

  4. Takeyourfinger says:

    … and all 7 billion alive today will eventually die. The question is, do we all die peacefully in our sleep at old age, or do we fight endless wars over dwindling resources to keep from starving to death?

    Professor emeritus Albert Bartlett has some interesting presentations on population growth. There are some links here:

  5. JohnnyVee says:

    Reversion to the mean is going to be fugly. Stay tuned.

  6. Kris Dannon says:

    The quality of life on earth is eroding significantly for human beings with the demand for energy and resources fast outgrowing the supply and more dramatic and potentially destructive climate changes looming ahead. We have gone well beyond depletion levels of our major fisheries (almost all seas and oceans have been drastically affected) from Mediterranean to the Pacific, as the world’s animal and plant species are likewise increasingly decimated by land development and eco-ravaging. The amount of coal being burned around the globe just to supply electricity now is causing coral reefs to die off and toxic metals to show up in our food supply.

    Any who haven’t take the opportunity to view Chris Martenson’s videos should do so, ten short videos that are cogent and compelling:

    34 years ago I read Ehrlich’s “The Population Bomb” and oddly enough I recall it being widely criticized as too alarmist. Amazing… it turns out to have been too optimistic, even lacking in warning of additional issues that were imperiling but soon to make their appearance.

    Human numbers had better enter the debate fairly quickly or we are going to inhabit a wasteland — and one that really may not be worth doing much at all about if we’re so insouciant to ignore it for another few years.

    I have a idea of my own that some may perhaps not like, but I’m afraid we’re going to have to see this accepted as a worldwide ordinance in one form or another or face something even more intrusive and draconian:

    Every country would offer support (if necessary) to assist a woman’s first child through tax breaks and child assistance subsidies as is common in most countries. A woman’s second child would grant the family access to 50% increase in child birth subsidies and support aside from vaccinations and emergency care. The third child would require the family to face increased taxes with no free support from the social system, aside from basic emergency medical care, vaccines. etc. In addition, the third child would be required to be neutered at birth prior to being released from the hospital. This would require a birth database that identified the mother and accurately enumerating all prior births. But it would be the most humane way to limit exponential population growth and bring us quickly to the 2.1 child per family statistical replacement level. I know it sounds Orwellian, but in all honesty something like this must be implemented – sooner rather than later.

  7. jaymaster says:

    Looks like the growth curve of many biological organisms prospering in a beneficial environment.

    Thank God the US money supply can grow to keep up!

  8. Futuredome says:

    Asia needs a 1 billion person cut

  9. JerseyCynic says:

    Kris – something tells me that population growth (here in the US anyway) will slow down as more and more young adults today face fertility issues stemming from all the chemicals their bodies have be exposed to these last two decades, along with the effects of electronics – computer screens, monitors, cell phones, tv; ASPARTAME, hormone exposure from just about everything they have eaten since birth– milk, chicken, meat; hormone disruption from the plastic incubators they were housed in from birth…and on and on and on

    enjoy the pictures

    Thanks for this fun link. I love numbers!

  10. JerseyCynic,

    it is, a lot, like that..

    also, effecting Fish & Wildlife..

    USGS Release: Endocrine Disrupters Found in Fish and Water in …
    Editors: The report, A Reconnaissance for Emerging Contaminants in the South Branch Potomac River, Cacapon River, and Williams River Basins, West Virginia, April …

    and, the ‘fun one’..

  11. JerseyCynic says:

    ENDOCRINE disrupters — that’s the word I was looking for

    thank you MEH.

    Even if our kids do reproduce, it will definitely be their kids with the “issues”. There are already warnings out to parents about not letting their kids be in front of any kind of media screen whatsoever until the age of…um…..I’m to lazy to look it up….. I think it’s no viewing under the age of 1 or maybe 2.

    and if the above issues don’t thin the herd, this will:
    YIKES! a lot of shaking over 5+ the past few days.