10-26-2007, 06:22 PM
|
#21
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by FireFly
What a load of BS. First of all, what about the average looking people? We all just die out? Secondly, like we're going to see the year 3000 with the rate the population is going. Science can't keep up to population and we'll kill the planet off MUCH sooner than that. I can't even see the worl hitting the year 2500, let alone 3000.
|
The population is expected to stabilize rather than grow exponentially as more countries become industrialized.
There was a detailed report issued by the UN three years ago outlining population growth for the next 300 years.
Around 2300 the population is expected to have stabilized at around 9 billion.
That said, their scenarios give a range of between 2.3 billion and 36.4 billion but about 9 billion is expected.
I believe that that would be a sustainable level given if technology continues to advance our ability to survive and produce resources.
CBC Story
UN Report (.PDF)
__________________
Huge thanks to Dion for the signature!
Last edited by Nehkara; 10-26-2007 at 06:32 PM.
|
|
|
|
10-26-2007, 06:34 PM
|
#22
|
|
#1 Goaltender
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: An all-inclusive.
|
This is pretty much the plot of H.G. Wells "Time Machine".
Edit: I should've read the last sentence there hehe.
Last edited by Kybosh; 10-26-2007 at 06:41 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
10-26-2007, 06:41 PM
|
#23
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nehkara
The population is expected to stabilize rather than grow exponentially as more countries become industrialized.
There was a detailed report issued by the UN three years ago outlining population growth for the next 300 years.
Around 2300 the population is expected to have stabilized at around 9 billion.
That said, their scenarios give a range of between 2.3 billion and 36.4 billion but about 9 billion is expected.
I believe that that would be a sustainable level given if technology continues to advance our ability to survive and produce resources.
CBC Story
UN Report (.PDF)
|
So we're at 6.5 Billion now and it's only supposed to stabilize at 9 billion in 300 years?  Who wrote the report?
Do remember that our technology will also advance human life expectancy and wipe out diseases, which actually help to control population...
Anyhew, I don't believe it, but then, I won't be around to see whatever happens...
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimbl420
I can wash my penis without taking my pants off.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moneyhands23
If edmonton wins the cup in the next decade I will buy everyone on CP a bottle of vodka.
|
|
|
|
|
|
10-26-2007, 06:56 PM
|
#24
|
|
Franchise Player
|
2 pages in and no comments about Edmoton....hmmm you guys are slippin'!
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by henriksedin33
Not at all, as I've said, I would rather start with LA over any of the other WC playoff teams. Bunch of underachievers who look good on paper but don't even deserve to be in the playoffs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
10-26-2007, 07:01 PM
|
#25
|
|
Ate 100 Treadmills
|
This report is ridiculous. Genes that make a man attractive are not the same as those that make a woman attractive. All this guy did was rip of the plot from "The Time Machine." What's next a report on how machines will eventually gain self-awareness and take over the world. Although..... Britain did recently name their military satellite skynet
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6434773.stm
|
|
|
|
|
10-26-2007, 09:30 PM
|
#26
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Calgary, Alberta
|
I don't buy this for a second. We all know that no matter how hot these people appear there are going to be a bunch of them who have a fetish for the goblins!
|
|
|
|
|
10-26-2007, 09:57 PM
|
#27
|
|
Scoring Winger
|
Did we all just read an evolutionary theory from this guy who is in a school of economics? No offense to the economists here, but there are other people I'd go to first for advice on evolution and genetics.
__________________
Everyone knows scientists insist on using complex terminology to make it harder for True Christians to refute their claims.
Deoxyribonucleic Acid, for example... sounds impressive, right? But have you ever seen what happens if you put something in acid? It dissolves! If we had all this acid in our cells, we'd all dissolve! So much for the Theory of Evolution, Check MATE! 
|
|
|
|
|
10-27-2007, 01:30 AM
|
#28
|
|
Scoring Winger
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by blankall
This report is ridiculous. Genes that make a man attractive are not the same as those that make a woman attractive. All this guy did was rip of the plot from "The Time Machine."
|
Not to mention the fact that he screwed up the plot of the book. I'm pretty sure the underground monster people (Morlocks?) were harvesting the good looking people (Eloi?) like cattle...
|
|
|
|
|
10-27-2007, 10:52 AM
|
#29
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Rebiggling, Alberta
|
The 9 billion population might actually be high. right now there are declining birth rates around the world, including all of the places that normally supply immigrants to Canada. So while the population isn't shrinking, it isn't growing at the same pace as in the past. So said a seminar that i was at in September...FWIW.
This stuff about genetic supremacy isn't so far fetched...this was the "sweet little nothings" that I whispered into my wife's ear back when she wanted nothing to do with me! somebody has just stolen my best dating lines and put them into a book!
__________________
Franchise > Team > Player
Future historians will celebrate June 24, 2024 as the date when the timeline corrected itself.
|
|
|
|
|
10-27-2007, 11:04 AM
|
#30
|
|
Norm!
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by FireFly
What a load of BS. First of all, what about the average looking people? We all just die out? Secondly, like we're going to see the year 3000 with the rate the population is going. Science can't keep up to population and we'll kill the planet off MUCH sooner than that. I can't even see the worl hitting the year 2500, let alone 3000.
|
Average looking people will be the food source for their uber-humans, treated like cattle, fattened up for Christmas, served by the ugly ones.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
|
|
|
|
|
10-27-2007, 12:29 PM
|
#32
|
|
n00b!
|
^ Back from the dead!
|
|
|
|
|
10-27-2007, 09:19 PM
|
#33
|
|
Self Imposed Retirement
|
This is a joke. Evolutionary progress is impossible to predict. Silly, silly.
|
|
|
|
|
10-28-2007, 12:47 AM
|
#34
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Calgary
|
Anyone who has ever witnessed a weekend NASCAR event will agreed that the evolution split started a good while ago, and is thriving as we speak. 
|
|
|
|
|
10-28-2007, 02:31 AM
|
#35
|
|
Retired
|
Speaking on behalf of those of us who have big willies already, we look forward to welcoming the rest of you to the club in several hundred years' time. For those who don't make it, we'll be sure to name your holy underground shrine "Edmonton".
On a more serious note, if humanity is dumb enough to believe this report, we're likely not smart enough to endure the next 50 year anyway.
In the meantime, I'm going to wrap a towel around my head and become invisible.
Last edited by Kjesse; 10-28-2007 at 02:34 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
10-28-2007, 04:43 PM
|
#36
|
|
#1 Goaltender
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by FireFly
What a load of BS. First of all, what about the average looking people? We all just die out? Secondly, like we're going to see the year 3000 with the rate the population is going. Science can't keep up to population and we'll kill the planet off MUCH sooner than that. I can't even see the worl hitting the year 2500, let alone 3000.
|
We will reach a point where we have the technology to be eco netrual. Not to mention the ability to establish outposts on other planets and the moon.
|
|
|
|
|
10-28-2007, 04:46 PM
|
#37
|
|
#1 Goaltender
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by HOOT
2 pages in and no comments about Edmoton....hmmm you guys are slippin'!
|
Post #14 
|
|
|
|
|
10-28-2007, 07:09 PM
|
#38
|
|
Powerplay Quarterback
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Bentley, Alberta
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cube Inmate
Sensationalistic hogwash that will be long forgotten by the time that any of the predicted effects could ever be evaluated. The report's author might be a scientist, but that doesn't mean his report is science. It's conjecture.
|
Indeed. The media is more apt to jump on a scientists speculation and conjecture, than the actual scientific work of another scientist, because the scientist enganging in conjecture (which of course is not the scientific method), says things that sell more newsprint.
|
|
|
|
|
10-28-2007, 07:36 PM
|
#39
|
|
#1 Goaltender
|
I don't know what is sensationalistic about it. It's not a very developed science to begin with, and that means that a number of hypothesis are developed, and maybe this one is not probable but at the least interesting to think about. It's certainly plausable, we are seeing haves and have nots diverge at an increasing rate, and the way some people are raising their kids (5X as many obese elementary aged kids vs what I remember, less access to quality education etc) it wouldn't surprise me too much.
|
|
|
|
|
10-28-2007, 07:42 PM
|
#40
|
|
I believe in the Pony Power
|
They were talking about this topic on Coast to Coast AM this morning.
Speaking of that - and totally off topic - I was on my way to work at 4 AM yesterday listening to Coast to Coast and they had one of their programs where the play audio tapes where you can hear "ghosts" supposedly talking.
Played one with a kid saying "I can't see".
Fart. Did that ever wig me out.
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:36 AM.
|
|
