The world most certainly is overpopulated, as humans are using natural resources faster than they can be replenished, and our behavior is degrading our environment. I mean, yeah, we have space on the planet for everyone to have a house, but that's hardly the only parameter measuring overpopulation.
And I agree with Mitch, curing everyone of cancer wouldn't make the population spike to a significant degree.
The world will probably never be truly "over-populated." If everyone in the world lived like they do in Tokyo, then the entire world population could live in California and Nevada. We got plenty of room.
Most scientists believe that we hit that mark a while ago. Pretty soon, something will lower our population(disease, disaster). You learn this in science very thouroughly. Go google it or something because we ARE overpopulated. No doubt about it.
That's really sad, I hope she gets better. I have had multiple close family members die of cancer also. And notice that I put "It wouldn't be bad if we found the cure to cancer..." at the start of my post.
33 939 682.1
That's the number of cancer patients in 2010 (assuming a few things, of course) worldwide. Dead or alive, that isn't very many people, let alone enough to significantly influence overpopulation on a global scale. If every one of those people died at once, it would take less than half of a year for the population to return to the previous level.
But remember, people across the world are dying for other reasons too. Plus, if everyone with cancer died at once, thats a few million less kids those guys could have in the coming years
ok I read your entire comment but I have no idea what it said because I couldn't get over the number it ended in .1. How is there .1 of a cancer patient? Lol
The world most certainly is overpopulated, as humans are using natural resources faster than they can be replenished, and our behavior is degrading our environment. I mean, yeah, we have space on the planet for everyone to have a house, but that's hardly the only parameter measuring overpopulation.
And I agree with Mitch, curing everyone of cancer wouldn't make the population spike to a significant degree.
The world will probably never be truly "over-populated." If everyone in the world lived like they do in Tokyo, then the entire world population could live in California and Nevada. We got plenty of room.
There may be enough ROOM for people to live on Earth, but are there enough RESOURCES?
I'd say so since 2/3 of Americans eat enough for 3 people.
The world isn't overpopulated. Not yet anyways, and probably not any time in the near future.
Most scientists believe that we hit that mark a while ago. Pretty soon, something will lower our population(disease, disaster). You learn this in science very thouroughly. Go google it or something because we ARE overpopulated. No doubt about it.
People always think the only way to solve overpopulation is killing people. But you can just put a rubber on it!
who the hell fucking cares. i, as the sister of a six year old with an inoperable brain tumor, do not.
Oh my God! That's so sad! :(
My grandfather just died of cancer two days ago. I wish they did have a cure.
That's really sad, I hope she gets better. I have had multiple close family members die of cancer also. And notice that I put "It wouldn't be bad if we found the cure to cancer..." at the start of my post.
People die either way.
33 939 682.1
That's the number of cancer patients in 2010 (assuming a few things, of course) worldwide. Dead or alive, that isn't very many people, let alone enough to significantly influence overpopulation on a global scale. If every one of those people died at once, it would take less than half of a year for the population to return to the previous level.
But remember, people across the world are dying for other reasons too. Plus, if everyone with cancer died at once, thats a few million less kids those guys could have in the coming years
And yet 2009's natural increase in population was a net 82,866,000. That figure has all deaths included. The population wouldn't be lowered for long.
ok I read your entire comment but I have no idea what it said because I couldn't get over the number it ended in .1. How is there .1 of a cancer patient? Lol
Mathematical averaging.
I think the word cancer should be changed to AIDS and then I'll agree.