Well I think we should deal with it, but we're an animal, and I think that in the future nearly every human will die for some reason, but a few of us will survive, and then we start from zero again.

The strongest will survive, and the strongest humans will survive, the giraffes with short necks didn't survive but the one with long necks did.

Biology sort of solves this problem.

We've had an increase in the percentage of homosexual-births.

China has had a 1-child policy since 1979. Now the policy is if both the father and mother are single-childs, they can have a 2nd 1.

Sooner or later, I predict, homosexuality will be completely normal (in terms of legality). Not all countries in the world recognize gay marriage yet (the religious folks will be the burden).

Yeah, we also need to think about the gasprice and all, and I think that's when we need something else to use, but I don't know what.

I'm waiting for the day that a biological control develops in nature (or via human intervention) and just wipes out like 3/4 of the worlds population. Leaving the strongest, most genetically rigid people to repopulate the planet. Sure, it'll be devastating, but something has to occur for all of this to happen. There is not enough ground space on Earth to support 20 billion people (in 2100) and supply enough food to all of those people.

But assuming that by 2100 we have advanced technology that allows food to be instantaneously created, then we won't have that problem, will we!?

Now, somebody should get to work on that instantaneous food idea of mine.

Beyod our control, but I'm sure it'll balance out, I mean, contraception is only getting better.

I shall do my best to increase it as much as possible

I'd be ashamed if I only got 50

China is already over populated with more than 1 billion people.. did you know its against the law to have more than 1 child, and if u do they can force u to do abortion.. and 63 crimes carry the death penalty in China.. police are allowed to kill on the streets, so u can see how china is tackling this problem.. not the best though, and i wouldnt want it happening any where else..

That's the chinese for you though

The majority of uncontrolled population growth is occurring in the underdeveloped regions of the globe, and those with substantial populations but low birthrates. China is the example of the latter. India one of the many examples of the former. The poverty of these nations coupled with the social-development stagnation creates an environment where children are seen as an asset, to keep the elderly, to provide labor for the family, to barter, to sell to provide a means of survival. Even preference for one sex means more pregnancies, in order to attain that one boy the family has always wanted. In the majority of developed countries, as those in Europe, populations are almost at a standstill in terms of growth. Italy and Spain, two examples, have almost zero population growth. This is the result of the affluence and the social development of those nations. Children are no longer a nessesity to ensure a family's future, they are not needed to procure food or to act as an financial boon. On the contrary, to raise a child would be a burden, and thus sizes are more limited than in the underdeveloped world, one or two compared to 5 or 10. People also have children at a later period in their life and increase pervasiveness of contraception, family planning resources and abortion is further stabilizing these rates, if not reversing them in some places. Countries that are exceptions, such as the US, are ones where certain social forces demand the ignorance of methods which prevent potentially damaging growth trends. Opposition to abortion, to sex education, to contraception means higher crude birthrates and a greater population growth in a world already dangerously populated. The stemming and reversal of such trends means an education of the populace, in countries such as the US and those which are underdeveloped, and an alleviation of the poverty, in underdeveloped countries prone to such population booms. The nessesity for such measures, or some semblance of global cooperation, is evident. More people means less resources for the average person, and despite the often cited economic growth of certain nations and the worship of money, a single world of limited resources cannot provide for a limitlessly increasing population. Continuing such a trend would not only be counterproductive, less resources for every man, it would also be suicidal. The nonrenewable resources, such as coal and oil and fissionable materials, once depleted cannot be recovered.. ever. Soil erosion as well, which will only be exacerbated by larger populations, is another problem since topsoil, the soil needed to grow crops, is a result of long periods of erosion and deposition. If it is washed into the oceans, agricultural lands will be damaged or even reduced to barren fields. Additionally, the environmental degradation resulting from more people inhabiting the earth will damage biospheres, threaten natural wildlife and destabilize the natural cycles which support the current global environment. Global warming is already the most well known of these destabilizations.
The current state of human civilization is not entirely conducive to pure evolutionary competition. Often, it is the wealthy, despite any innate biological advantages or disadvantages, that live long, healthy lives, and it is the poor, regardless of their advantages in physical prowess or immunity, which die quickly and in greater numbers. It is too late to simply say survival of the fittest, because currently that will always be those born in wealth. The competition for survival stated by Darwin no longer applies to the overall state of humanity. It can be said on a local scale, in a village, but not on a global scale, where the disparity of wealth distribution shields the wealthier countries from the natural forces which ravage the poor.
It is likely that, barring any real initiative by humanity itself, not nesseserily its governing bodies, wars will erupt over increasingly scares resources. These wars, and the following devastation, will undoubtedly claim a great many lives, and the casualties will certainly overshadow any previous conflicts. As is over 40 million die of starvation every year.

^ care to paragraph?

Soon India will overtake China in population because of the 1 child rule.

But soon people will be forced to live on terrain they're not supposed to. Well it's already started happening.

What happens when we run out of space?

Fuckin Quiverfull bullshit is totally cramping my style.

LovetoLive wrote:

Soon India will overtake China in population because of the 1 child rule.

But soon people will be forced to live on terrain they're not supposed to. Well it's already started happening.

What happens when we run out of space?

We'll live on the moon like martians :p

I am sure something will happen that will decrease the population, where only the strongest will survive. Survival of the fittest.

I myself am a firm believer in the whole 2012 thing.

More girls to choose from, all the better :).