The Limits to Growth vol. possible global collapse by 2030

[mo matik]

[h1]Looking Back on the Limits of Growth[/h1][h2]Forty years after the release of the groundbreaking study, were the concerns about overpopulation and the environment correct?[/h2]
Recent research supports the conclusions of a controversial environmental study released 40 years ago: The world is on track for disaster. So says Australian physicist Graham Turner, who revisited perhaps the most groundbreaking academic work of the 1970s,The Limits to Growth.

Written by MIT researchers for an international think tank, the Club of Rome, the study used computers to model several possible future scenarios. The business-as-usual scenario estimated that if human beings continued to consume more than nature was capable of providing, global economic collapse and precipitous population decline could occur by 2030.

However, the study also noted that unlimited economic growth was possible, if governments forged policies and invested in technologies to regulate the expansion of humanity’s ecological footprint. Prominent economists disagreed with the report’s methodology and conclusions. Yale’s Henry Wallich opposed active intervention, declaring that limiting economic growth too soon would be “consigning billions to permanent poverty.

 

[mo matik]

Bump.

Cliffs:

-1970: People predict that if trends continue at the same rate, it will lead to a collapse by 2030 (countdown: 60 years).
-Today: 40 years later, we have confirmed we are following the very same trend towards collapse (countdown: 20 years)

 

[milestailsprowe]

I've been saying this for years now. Though war and nature will correct it self or science will hopefully fix this.

Its hard for this to really be calculated due to constant changes in science

 

[1chainz]

People already know the Earth is being eaten up. They don't care.

 

[teamjordan79]

owning land + a shotty = essential

 

[atlien seeko]

Science already has plans...

Georgia Guidestones

1. MAINTAIN HUMANITY UNDER 500,000,000 IN PERPETUAL BALANCE WITH NATURE


2. GUIDE REPRODUCTION WISELY - IMPROVING FITNESS AND DIVERSITY

3. UNITE HUMANITY WITH A LIVING NEW LANGUAGE

4. RULE PASSION - FAITH - TRADITION - AND ALL THINGS WITH TEMPERED REASON

5. PROTECT PEOPLE AND NATIONS WITH FAIR LAWS AND JUST COURTS

6. LET ALL NATIONS RULE INTERNALLY RESOLVING EXTERNAL DISPUTES IN A WORLD COURT


7. AVOID PETTY LAWS AND USELESS OFFICIALS


8. BALANCE PERSONAL RIGHTS WITH SOCIAL DUTIES


9. PRIZE TRUTH - BEAUTY - LOVE- SEEKING HARMONY WITH THE INFINITE

10. BE NOT A CANCER ON THE EARTH - LEAVE ROOM FOR NATURE - LEAVE ROOM FOR NATURE

 

[ricky409]

hopefully, i'll be too old to care.

 

[703 hwy]

Only the strong survive..

 

[twizzi]

Damm.... I hope there is a resolve scientifically

 

[mr kuter]

Originally Posted by twizzi

Damm.... I hope there is a resolve scientifically

In a way I hope it doesnt happen. A scientific resolution will just leave the same poor people suffering. I dont know what I want. I do actually, well I know what I don't want anyway, I dont want a band-aid as suicidal as it may be

 

[vendetta]

A collapse is inevitable. All science can do is delay it another decade or two, but eventually we will run out of resources. Most important of which being fossil fuels. Honestly the only way this can be avoided is if we invent a miracle energy source like you see used in Star Trek or other sci-fi movies. I haven't heard about anything like that on the horizon nor do I think it's theoretically possible. I'm not looking forward to the year 2040.

 

[kilojules64]

No one is willing to do anything about it and there is no scientific solution to overpopulation.
I think about it this way: industrialized nations keep sending food and aid to countries that can never EVER reach sustainability. They couldn't even reach sustainability with their numbers 50 years ago, and they continue to grow in population. Where do we draw the line between a country in need and a country that is growing in numbers at a rate so fast that it will never be able to support itself?

 

[ecruteakcityboy]

We need to move to mars... Ugh my body is not ready

 

[bostonthreeparty]

social darwinism will rise in developing nations, trimming here and there.

 

[thunderchunk69]

Originally Posted by ricky409

hopefully, i'll be too old to care.

do the math 

saw this a while back

[h1]the world is running out of helium[/h1]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/why-the-world-is-running-out-of-helium-2059357.html

 

[jking0821]

I don't know about the food/water supply, but eventually we will need to make a switch off fossil fuels.  This will only happen if the people making all the money off oil decide its ok.....which won't ever happen.

I think eventually we will have nuclear energy.  All cars can be electric etc.  But it is a systematic problem that will only be fixed once we hit extremely dire circumstances which i am not looking forward to.

But maybe it will end with the strong survive.  Or nature will rebel and there will be a ton of natural disasters that minimize the population.  Or we ourselves will start to limit the population.  This won't happen until religion is off the table (put on earth to procreate would need to be taken out of the human conscious)

 

[solegit08til]

saw this a while back

[h1]the world is running out of helium[/h1]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/why-the-world-is-running-out-of-helium-2059357.html

No more balloons? 

 

[dirtylicious]

so basically...

 

[milestailsprowe]

Originally Posted by kilojules64

No one is willing to do anything about it and there is no scientific solution to overpopulation.
I think about it this way: industrialized nations keep sending food and aid to countries that can never EVER reach sustainability. They couldn't even reach sustainability with their numbers 50 years ago, and they continue to grow in population. Where do we draw the line between a country in need and a country that is growing in numbers at a rate so fast that it will never be able to support itself?

The scientific solution sadly is to let the country collapse and starve to a self sustaining population sadly. 

 

[maldonado]

INB4Collapse..

 

[boogie bwoy]

there is no scientific solution to overpopulation.  

  

 

[flacobey]

wow this sucks


guess i'll have to yolo it up till then

 

[mo matik]

[h1][/h1]

[h1]Change the Story — Change the System[/h1]

[h5]Change the Story — Change the System[/h5]
A Club of Rome Blog contribution, written by David Korten*

Forty years ago the Club of Rome’s report Limits to Growth drew world attention to the imperative to bring the human species into “system equilibrium

 

[odog24]

this seeems interesting

 

[kramer]

There is also trends for another mass extinction event to occur