Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Environment & Energy
In reply to the discussion: AGW: a bigger issue than overpopulation? [View all]CRH
(1,553 posts)39. Yeah that is what I am wrestling with, ...
At sixty years of age I have reproduced, my son has reproduced, and now my grandson. OK, I die tomorrow, at the age of sixty years and one day. There are still three people living from my seed in that sixty years, the oldest with another twenty years to live.
It seems to me zero growth would be more in the range of one child per family.
Might be time for me to read up on some studies and their methodology. I still can't see zero growth from a two child family, unless people do not reproduce until very late in their child bearing years.
on edit: corrected the first paragraph.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
53 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
AGW. But then, I've always held nature & wildlife in higher regard than people. nt
raouldukelives
Jan 2013
#18
‘Population Bomb’ scientist: ‘Nobody’ has the right to ‘as many children as they want’
Judi Lynn
Jan 2013
#20
Nope, no special powers. And I'm just as human and illusion-ridden as the next schmoe.
GliderGuider
Jan 2013
#35
Your scenario (roughly double the death rate) would still be 'overpopulation'
muriel_volestrangler
Jan 2013
#23
You said "Climate change will fix that (overpopulation)" is your position
muriel_volestrangler
Jan 2013
#33