How Can The World Control The Growth Of Population?

[ToraToraTora]

6bn to 7bn took only 12 years, numbers are growing out of control, how can we get this under control before nature does it for us?

[emmie]

and those people keep on having babies, for more to die of the same diseases, that is also the problem, they have more children, those they cannot feed, where does that stop.. Education is surely the key, not just about birth control, but that the people get a good education and can then become educators themselves, teachers, doctors, so why don't these countries and aid that is given go towards more schools, and hospitals.

[modeller]

LG // Sorry. Its not a notion that you can back up with solid evidence - and even were it true, you can offer no humanitarian alternative. //

Just because I believe our gene pool is weakening doesn't mean I know
the answer. Just plain logic dictates that if we perpetuate a weakness that weakness will be passed on. We know that as a fact with inbreeding . However just look at the history of very premature babies , as an example. . Many of them suffer lifelong disabilities.
//http://www.patient.co.uk/doctor/premature-babies-and-their-problems//

We also know older parents have a higher chance of having children with disabilities. This all adds to the gene pool.
No I'm not offering an alternative. ! Even screening out genetic weaknesses is considered unethical but the fact it is recognised proves
it a known fact .

[goodlife]

In recent years much has been said about man’s destruction of the environment. Although Jesus did not specifically mention this in his prophecy, Revelation 11:18 indicates that prior to the coming destruction, man would be ruining the earth.

[Old_Geezer]

If there is no destruction one claims the time is not yet, if there is one claims it is imminent. Sounds like a winning strategy to me.

[LazyGun]

@Modeller. Older parents have a higher chance of babies with disabilities. Maybe, but that does not of itself contribute to a weakening of the gene pool, as represented by 6-7 billion individuals.

And if you are going to measure this weakening of the gene pool - what measure are you going to use as the yardstick? Remember also that in addition to having a gold standard against which to compare, you would also need to provide a target destination - but evolution does not work that way...

Humans are more than the sum of their individual phenotypes, and to attempt to measure the development of humanity or the strength of its gene pool by such yardsticks is invidious and potentially dangerous and divisive. It was this kind of thinking, in part, that lead to the notion of social darwinism and eugenics...

There is no gold standard, no yardstick, by which we measure humanity and therefore pass judgement upon whether humanities gene pool is being weakened.

A man with glasses comes up with a workable theory for cold fusion. Has this mans physical impairment done more to weaken the gene pool or advance humanity?

It could be argued that humanity would be better off overall if they were smaller - take up less room, use less resource, etcetc. Unyet generation upon generation, mankind has grown slightly larger. Can this be seen as a weakening or strengthening of the gene pool?