Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 12 submissions in the queue.
posted by martyb on Tuesday February 05 2019, @12:39AM   Printer-friendly
from the Betteridge-says-maybe dept.

By 2050 there will be 9 billion carbon-burning, plastic-polluting, calorie-consuming people on the planet. By 2100, that number will balloon to 11 billion, pushing society into a Soylent Green scenario. Such dire population predictions aren't the stuff of sci-fi; those numbers come from one of the most trusted world authorities, the United Nations.

But what if they're wrong? Not like, off by a rounding error, but like totally, completely goofed?

That's the conclusion Canadian journalist John Ibbitson and political scientist Darrel Bricker come to in their newest book, Empty Planet, due out February 5th. After painstakingly breaking down the numbers for themselves, the pair arrived at a drastically different prediction for the future of the human species. "In roughly three decades, the global population will begin to decline," they write. "Once that decline begins, it will never end."

The World Might Actually Run Out of People (archive)

Empty Planet

Who do you think is right ? The United Nations or Darrel Bricker/John Ibbitson ?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday February 05 2019, @03:52AM (4 children)

    by JoeMerchant (3937) on Tuesday February 05 2019, @03:52AM (#796477)

    he current median extrapolation was always, and I mean always, the same as 5-10 years ago's pessimistic extrapolation. i.e. they kept making the same mistake year after year after year, and never adjusted their models to try and make the "pessimistic" one the expected one.

    It isn't just since the 90s, I've been hearing this story and reading about historical predictions since the 1960s that all continue to paint rosy pictures with one scary worst case scenario that continues to come true, but the rosier picture has to happen sooner or later, just keep waiting while we enjoy the ride...

    Now I hear that China's "One Child" was never intended to stop population growth, just slow it down, and it was a great success... How in the hell can you call a program that produced millions of men without wives, while limiting couples to a single child for generations, yet population still increased at a rather strong rate (but slower than before the program) a success?

    --
    🌻🌻 [google.com]
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 05 2019, @04:03AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 05 2019, @04:03AM (#796483)

    Except that's not true. Those missing women are there, they just aren't registered. And you see similar issues in the U.S. where there are significant numbers of men in excess of women in most of the Western states and some shortfalls in parts of the East and South. This is largely an issue of internal migration and declines in the numbers of men dying prematurely.

  • (Score: 3, Informative) by FatPhil on Tuesday February 05 2019, @08:56AM (2 children)

    by FatPhil (863) <pc-soylentNO@SPAMasdf.fi> on Tuesday February 05 2019, @08:56AM (#796559) Homepage
    I can confirm that - the main reason I started collecting the data (in about 2000, but their website did have old docs available) was that I had detected a long-standing pattern of bullshit already, and was sick of it. I think I was hoping to collect many many decades of data about either deliberate or incompetent misprediction (where repeatedly using incompetent people to build the models and perform the projections is in itself a deliberate act - this ain't no accident either way), and then present my findings in an earth-shattering report some time when I was in my cranky old age (which is getting closer). Unfortunately, I fricken lost all those files a few years back, so I've kinda screwed the pooch. I guess a library search could find newspapers reporting on their old reports, but I've become too lazy now.
    --
    Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
    • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday February 05 2019, @02:26PM (1 child)

      by JoeMerchant (3937) on Tuesday February 05 2019, @02:26PM (#796667)

      I fricken lost all those files a few years back

      Did you lose them, or did the mind control ray make you destroy them ;-P

      I guess a library search could find newspapers reporting on their old reports, but I've become too lazy now.

      Sounds like a job for an eager kid, you know: somebody young enough to actually be affected by the BS in a seriously bad way. Jokes aside, I don't think the propaganda machine is strong enough to go destroying old newspaper microfilm/microfiche, but I do think it is strong enough to severely bias the historical information that's available online. The "Wayback Machine" is pretty good for what it covers, but it only reaches back about 25 years now.

      --
      🌻🌻 [google.com]