O/T The things people do to make the world a better place.

[John2]

Just as an illustration of John's selective dishonesty here is another study that suggests a rise in global population of between 11.2b and 19.3b by 2100. It all depends on fertility rates which can only be assumed.

LOL.

I clearly expressed an opinion. It was an honest one.

Of course the future can only be projected, but we can be compelled by the methodology.

I used to be rather concerned about overpopulation, but I've seen lots of research that suggests the fertility rate round the world is falling and after 2064 the global population is expected to start coming down quite quickly (which is scaring some economists).

"I used to be rather concerned about overpopulation" - I used to be more expecting/scared of the exponential growth numbers, and it used to be such a concern to the point if I ever have children it would have been a major consideration.

I am still concerned about overpopulation, but much less so, and would likely give the number of children I had less concern because I do see the economic argument that countries like ours with a rate below 2.1 could see all sorts of problems with an ageing population.

I believe technology may help out with the burden of an aging population, but by the same token, I believe mass scale carbon extraction from air and other technologies will help with climate change. I believe technology will solve most of our problems in time, but not with enough confidence that we shouldn't take reasonable steps until these potential solutions are proven.

I'm glad you looked into my numbers and confirmed for yourself that I hadn't just made them up. That's your style, must have been quite a disappointment for you.

Here's another study to prove you wrong that there is only the one study (though I must admit, I read lots of articles that in hindsight were probably using the same data, but still seemingly well researched enough to compel me of the case)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4255510/

[howdydoo]

LOL.

I clearly expressed an opinion. It was an honest one.

Of course the future can only be projected, but we can be compelled by the methodology.



"I used to be rather concerned about overpopulation" - I used to be more expecting/scared of the exponential growth numbers, and it used to be such a concern to the point if I ever have children it would have been a major consideration.

I am still concerned about overpopulation, but much less so, and would likely give the number of children I had less concern because I do see the economic argument that countries like ours with a rate below 2.1 could see all sorts of problems with an ageing population.

I believe technology may help out with the burden of an aging population, but by the same token, I believe mass scale carbon extraction from air and other technologies will help with climate change. I believe technology will solve most of our problems in time, but not with enough confidence that we shouldn't take reasonable steps until these potential solutions are proven.

I'm glad you looked into my numbers and confirmed for yourself that I hadn't just made them up. That's your style, must have been quite a disappointment for you.

Here's another study to prove you wrong that there is only the one study (though I must admit, I read lots of articles that in hindsight were probably using the same data, but still seemingly well researched enough to compel me of the case)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4255510/

All well and good John. I believe a little matter of euthanasia might assist with an ageing population.

Personally, I have no concerns about overpopulation. I’ll be dead before it gets worse.

Other than, don’t you think it’s a little bit cruel to allow children to be born into famine, poverty and worse? We can do something about it now but let’s do it your way and wait a few decades for fertility rates to come down.

How’s your mum BTW?

[wendun]

John, you didn't just "express an opinion" and it wasn't "honest". You presented dubious evidence to support a position. laughably, you tried to bolster this by claiming a Damascene Conversion as someone who had previously had concerns over population growth. No you hadn't. You have always been smugly sanguine about the topic.

[John2]

John, you didn't just "express an opinion" and it wasn't "honest".

Yes I did, and it was. You are clearly delusional, it's there in black and white.

You presented dubious evidence to support a position.

What exactly about the Washington University research in the Lancet is dubious?

You're just bitter my evidence can actually be verified as existing.

[wendun]

John, this used to be a board that prided itself on reasoned and respectful debate. You seem incapable of arguing without resorting to nastiness, threats, bullying, misquotes, distortions and evasions. I suppose it's to be expected from a self-confessed currency speculator. I take comfort that the comments of several worthy posters on this thread show they have sussed you out as a blaggard and bounder. Do grow up and take care on the piste.

[John2]

John, this used to be a board that prided itself on reasoned and respectful debate. You seem incapable of arguing without resorting to nastiness, threats, bullying, misquotes, distortions and evasions. I suppose it's to be expected from a self-confessed currency speculator. I take comfort that the comments of several worthy posters on this thread show they have sussed you out as a blaggard and bounder. Do grow up and take care on the piste.

I engage in reasoned debate. I ask for a reason the Lancet report is dubious and instead I get this irrelevant attempt to distract from the inadequacies of your argument.

[rolymiller]

... You seem incapable of arguing without resorting to nastiness, threats, bullying, misquotes, distortions and evasions.

Flippin eck Monts. I thought someone was describing you there! I was gonna say don't be too harsh on yourself nobody is perfect!

[wendun]

Flippin eck Monts. I thought someone was describing you there! I was gonna say don't be too harsh on yourself nobody is perfect!

rolex, I'd hate to think you find me harsh. I never read John's stuff as life's too short. I just use my generic response to sh*t brain currency speculating playboys.

[John2]

rolex, I'd hate to think you find me harsh. I never read John's stuff as life's too short. I just use my generic response to sh*t brain currency speculating playboys.

haha, you've done Grist's old play of typing lots and lots of posts to try and persuade me how little you care and that you're ignoring me. Now he's gone thanks for taking on that mantle for my amusement.