Don't Panic: The Truth About Population

,    »  -   89 Comments
870
8.38
12345678910
Ratings: 8.38/10 from 215 users.

Storyline

Don't Panic: The Truth About Population

We live in a world of relentless change. Huge migrations of people to new mega-cities filling soaring skyscrapers and vast slums, ravenous appetites for fuel and food, unpredictable climate change... and all this in a world where the population is still growing. Should we be worried, should we be scared, and how to make sense of it all?

Seven billion people now live on this planet of ours. Isn't it beautiful? When some people think about the world and its future they panic, others prefer not to think about it at all, bit in this documentary Professor Hans Rosling will show you how things really are.

Rosling is statistician and he'll show you the world in a new way. He'll tell you how world's population is changing and what today's data tell us about the future of the world we live in. We undeniably face huge challenges, but the good news is that the future may not be quite as gloom and that mankind already is doing better than many of you think.

Many people think population growth is out of control, some even talk about the population bomb, but are they right? Most of the population growth in recent years has been in Asian countries, like in Bangladesh, where the population has tripled during Rosling's lifetime from 50 to more than a 150 million. It's now one of the most densely populated countries in the world.

However people in Bangladesh, whether in the city or the countryside, are intensely concerned about the size of families. There is a cultural shift away from big families and there is actual success in reducing the fertility rate, which is the number of babies born per woman. In just 40 years Bangladesh has gone from 7 to 2.2 children per family. But is it only in Bangladesh? According to the Rosling's stats the trend is worldwide. In 1963, the average number of babies born per woman in the world was 5... and today the average is 2.5.

More great documentaries

Comments and User Reviews

  • Jeffrey

    To be honest, I was incorrect about the charts shown too.

    A great presentation, really informative. Proving that the world isn't doing that bad.

  • AlphaMale

    damn that guy saved 2 years just to buy a bicycle :-(

  • AJF13

    I agree that population isn't as big a problem as many believe, but when energy runs out, we are going to have a big problem. This huge population increase has a lot to do with the abundance of energy since fossil fuels were harnessed. Population was steady at about a billion, but if we don't invest in alternatives, population is gonna fall and in a horrific manner.

  • Fabien L'Amour

    That is correct but we are far from a fossil fuel shortage. I think the most pressing problem is climate change with so much of the population living close to ocean shores and the possible shortages of food that droughts, floods, acidification of the oceans and changes in marine currents can create. It's quite surprising that statistician didn't account for all the food that comes from the seas when predicting we could increase our food output to feed 10 billion humans.

  • Fabien L'Amour

    Insane indeed, I hope the guys that filmed him gave him enough to buy a few more bikes given they are probably paid each week what he earns in a year and without him, their documentary wouldn't be what it is...

  • Jeffrey

    I know fossil fuels are running out, but there is a promising alternative. Solar panels are evolving very fast with an efficiency increase of 80% in 2 years time. Eventually the world has to switch and I think solar panels are the solution.

  • Dave

    This is pretty delusional. We're already rapidly depleting the health of the planet so dropping the first world's level of consumption just enough for the total consumption of all humans to remain the same as the third world increases their consumption is not good enough. It's the total human consumption that has to change, and drastically. If anyone wants statistics that actually matter look into the amount of people per acre that can be sustained with permaculture gardens (not just food but also building materials, clothing, firewood, etc.), the number of acres we can use without further encroaching on what little nature is left (basically just existing farmland, lawns, etc.) and how many people are actually considering living that way. No high-tech "green" technologies will ever be able to sustain more than self-sufficient eco-village type settlements can, and even with that lifestyle our current population size is questionable. We absolutely should be worried right now.

  • jaberwokky

    That was fairly enlightening. Good timing considering we recently had the "No sex please, We're Japanese" doc added which looks at the population issue from another angle. I'm on to you TDF, I know your game :P

  • http://1iotofoto.wix.com/otofoto oQ

    what is the patch on the baby at 2 min? a removable chip card?

  • James Hunt

    One of the best presentations I have ever see!

  • englishjakes

    This guy is r*tarded we need less than 3 billion for all people on this world to live the modern day life yet he seems to think that 11 billion can exist perfectly happy in a average american life style and there is no need to worry. He said himself that the top 1 billion produce 50% of total fossil fuel use yet no problem if everyone on the world does the same lol. He also left out alot of information like how many children are born to single mothers / abandoned at birth, or that agribusiness produces way more fossil fuel emissions than personal transportation. this documentary further proves to me that we are in big trouble the next 100 years is going to be rough.

  • jaberwokky

    You've got me curious now too. After reading your post earlier the question is still bouncing around in the back of my head.

    A nicotine patch maybe.

  • aga

    This is a very interesting documentary. It's very nice to see someone offering these kinds of arguments about overpopulation (which in my view will be our downfall, as a species) when I've only hear the other side of the story: "we are overpopulating our planet and we need to stop". But I will take it with a grain of salt, like any other information and filter it through my own knowledge and experience, as I advice you to do as well.
    His arguments are very convincing and calming, but something didn't fit for me in his arguments about the planet being able to sustain 11 bilion people. I, in my opinion, think that it can't. The amount of energy required for 11 bilion to live on this planet is huge, and if we make it till 11, it'll be tough. Already dams are suffocating many rivers and flooding terrains, solar panels aren't enough, wind turbines require a lot of space, harvesting the energy of the waves is very expensive and fossil fuels...we keep talking about how we'll run out of them. So then I'm asking: how can we survive in a world with 4 billion more people when food shortages are hitting closer to "home", like in the US, riots are breaking because personal and conflicting views, species are dying never to be reborn and the gap between the civilized and the poor will deepen because it's beneficial for the rich to keep the work-class where it is, heat waves and many other problems are stretching us already like a rubber band, how long 'till we break?
    Overpopulation is not only a problem for the environment, but it's also a problem for society.

  • Anti

    you are assuming the Zionist Banksters still will be running the show, he was NOT..

  • Unfolding Universe

    Really? You care for the planet, but it never occurs to you to think about lives of those live under 1$ a day? What the world need is redistribution of global incomes so that all people can benefit.

  • Unfolding Universe

    Don 't create a strawman argument. Most of the world is highly to the point that is genocidal. The poorest of the world need to be more rich, and the richest in the world need to be more poorer.

  • Unfolding Universe

    No, we do not. The world is capable of sustaining everyone, and from the looks of it, population of 11 billion will stabilize in the next 100 years.. The problem is The west fear to lose power. What we need is to design a financial system that benefits the rest of the planet.

  • Bozman419

    I like docs that debunk the de-bunkers, like "here comes the sun". Remember that guy that started to cry about the world hitting peak oil? LMAO.

  • http://oldfox.info/ Terry "OldFox" Seale

    This is silly with the sound effects and animation. I can't stand it anymore, even though I would be curious to hear how the zero-population crowd proposes to provide shelter, health care, and nutrition to the elderly in less developed countries without reliance on the income and contributions of their families' offspring.

  • Dan Courtney

    Very good documentary. It's great to see that population will level off, although at the end of the presentation there is at least some acknowledgement that we have already exceeded the capacity of the planet. The challenge is to help the wealthiest understand that it is in their interest to dramatically reduce CO2 emissions. Considering that there is a well funded effort to keep people ignorant of their own best interests, this will be a huge challenge.

  • Fabien L'Amour

    I don't remember anyone in the documentary mentioning banks and he certainly didn't mention Zionist Banksters. Feel free to point where in the documentary that was mentioned if I am wrong... I think you are the one assuming the documentary intentions.

  • englishjakes

    hey man im just saying we are screwed we have at least 400 years worth of coal in reserve you think they are just going to throw that away? its just funny cos the documentary didnt say anything about the rich getting more poor just that he wants more people to be rich its just silly to think we can sustain 11 billion humans all of them richer than they are now. I hope we can get a good balance with nature and im a huge supporter in green energy (im currently off the grid well except for internet) but we have known about climate change for 30-40 years already and not much has changed. Oh yea did i mention that our economic system is based on growth if the top 1 billion made less money the world would plunge into a depression hundreds of times greater than the great depression. stupid right? We have dug a very big hole for ourselves and it will be really hard to get out now

  • $54737469

    Anyone with half a brain knows the very, very wealthy of the world must be concerned about future mayhem caused by over population. And these folks aren't simply thinking 25 or 50 years ahead, but more like 100 or 200 years ahead. So how can they begin the process of speeding up the elimination of billions of people down to a manageable level where their power and wealth is not threatened by mass revolt?
    Repressive regimes never work in the long haul because people finally reach a stage where rational thought and safety don't matter anymore.
    So how can it be accomplished in such a way that we "just don't get it" and therefore blithely go through our daily lives unaware of the conspiracy?
    Well, for one thing, it must be subtle, stealthy and over the long haul, without any visible connection to what's really going on.
    Secondly, there can be no visible violence by any government through military, security or police intervention.
    Thirdly, there must be absolutely no connection to the source and those involved.
    So how will they do it?
    They will do it over four or five generations (or more) through the application of GMO foods, air, soil and water pollution and all the myriad of chemicals used in the agriculture and food industry.
    I believe it's already happening. The obesity problem in western society is rapidly becoming acute with all the associated health problems and the costs involved. Our government health regulators are turning a blind eye and simply caving in to Big Pharma, Big Ag and the processed food industry. New research outside the influence of Monsanto, Dupont and others has proven that GMO foods are far more dangerous than originally believed.

    Anyway, that's my rant. Whether you believe it or not is not my concern because I'm 80 years old and I'm simply going to hunker down, do some fishing and gardening once in awhile and probably croak in the next few years.
    Enjoy while you can.

  • Unfolding Universe

    The reason there is so many is because it s on the backs of the poor. Again, the problem is not resource, but redistribution of income from the richest to the poorest.

  • Dave

    Well, you're right about the need to change the economic system at least. Charles Eisenstein has some ideas worth looking at if you're interested in that topic. You have to actually do the math though when it comes to how much land and resources people need to all acquire their necessities. Since lifestyle is a bigger issue it probably is possible to sustain our current population but only if everyone lives extremely austere lifestyles and all get their resources directly from the land they live on and are all smart enough to steward that land perfectly. What you seem to be supporting isn't even close.

  • 1concept1

    Rich people think about now and how much money they have in their pocket -

    I'm a Liberal by nature -

    While I am totally against "Factory Farming" - but i don't think that people who go to all the trouble to feed people are bad in nature -

    again i am against number one the right to patten a life form like one would patten a gizmo -

    I believe that every school from preschool through the highest graduate level school should maintain an organic garden - so as to feed all the people that attend that school and their family's - This is real education - of real value - to everyone bar none -

    If we program into our next generation the need to work the garden daily that would be the best gift we could leave them!

    But again I don't believe or want to believe that the people who run and control "Monsanto" are evil people out to get us but simply to capitalize and control a major food supply

    I feel all natural resources and or food should be non profit and govt, controlled -

    It doesn't make sense that one Money Punk should line their pocket with gold with what belongs to all life forms equally - that's common sense Period (right or left wing) - To allow one Money Punk to sell of our fresh water - coal - etc. and so on to other country's

    Education - Law - Medicine - Natural Resources will not be subject to a supply and demand system - to line some Money Punks pocket with gold - That's Insane - Period -

    The govt. is controlled by "lawyers" The only way to enforce the above law............................................

  • $54737469

    Thank you for your input. In response - two items:
    1. In your first sentence you refer to "rich people." Well, I'm describing very, very, very rich people. There's a difference. Globally we can probably boil it down to about 100.

    2. The solutions you are describing concerns people like you and me and probably a majority of the global population, for that matter.

    Very, very, very rich people think about future survival, not about now. Nor are they concerned about how much money they have in their pocket.

  • 1concept1

    You could be correct - i don't see the logic - lots of money and lots more money is just more of the same -

    I could very well be off on the part i posted about "they care about the money in there pocket" they could think about that in a different way i suppose but still - money is money more or less - pun intended - and of course i assume when you speak of their "future survival" you mean within their own life and life span?

    If you would like to educate me in this matter i am all ears $54737469

  • $54737469

    Future survival to the very, very very rich is all about lineage and the family name maintaining its status quo forever. Sad.

  • Owen

    The real problem is the notion of infinite growth on a finite planet. The fact that we have been encouraged to consume at such an excessive rate for so long, and continue to do so. You know there is a problem when 8yr old kids are demanding smart phones & iPads. All these shinny new items come at cost, especially in a throw away society.

    George Carlin once said two quotes that stuck with me, "where do we get are values from?" And "people don't care about the environment, all they care about is a clean place to live"

    Also how are so many people going to live comfortable with rising sea levels?

  • Fabien L'Amour

    The 100 richest people on the planet aren't worried a bit about their future survival. They have enough money to create their own independent country with their own private army if they wish to. There will be no shortage of people willing to defend them for remuneration if there is a revolt.

  • Guest

    Of course, you're referring to Hubbert and his peak oil revelations. You know what's astonishing? His peak oil predictions have absolutely come true. But you have one thing wrong--he never predicted peak oil of the world; just the US. He predicted that the US would hit its oil production capacity in the 1970s, and it's indisputable that occurred. If you look globally, peak oil happened around 5 years ago. All the global powers in petrochemical production have now seen that peak and are experiencing decline in production, while demand continues to soar. I wonder why everyone's scrambling for their Arctic claim...

  • Imightberiding

    Ah yes, statistics. They are a marvelous, curious thing. Pretty much whatever your point, it can be proven through statistics. Providing of course how those statistics are researched, bent & presented in your argument.

    This looks like it's going to be an entertaining & interesting view full of information & well, err, statistics. I eagerly look forward to this. The fellow presenting/narrating this film reminds me of the doctor (name escapes me) who presented the incredible & wonderfully informative series of videos on dissection of actual human cadavers. Very insightful & that fellow was also very dedicated to sharing his knowledge in an enthusiastic way just as this man appears to be.

  • bluetortilla

    And what would you offer instead of statistics? Do you actually think that we viewers are so naive to believe everything we hear? Or should I ask what percentage of us do you think are that naive?

    Maybe you ought to worry more about Google+

  • bluetortilla

    Well, Rosting may describe himself as a 'possibliist' but he is after all an idealist. And we need another billion idealists like him. It's so easy to be cynical, to hate everything, to rant and be Machiavellian (I know that indulgence well). Everyone loves a tragic ending- just look at the Bible.
    I'll go ahead and blow and my own horn- I got all the quiz questions about birth rates and literacy right. But I also live in a country (PRC) that has a lot of poverty and I have been to the 'poorest parts' of that country. The neighborhood in which I live is grotty and overcrowded. But it's not so poor after all. Surprise.
    The best thing for the world would be if we human beings were all more or less prosperous, and more or less equally so. Because becoming richer and richer has swift diminishing returns, and unbridled consumption is a social neurosis. And what is hard about that for people to understand? It's as though the idea of a rising developing world is threatening, that whole continents must be remained mired in poverty, ignorance, and tragedy. It's a post-imperial mentality that excludes a world of give and take, of economic compromise.
    So if we eventually don't blow ourselves up with nuclear weapons, we'll have a lot of challenges ahead. With billions of creative young minds around, there should be plenty of possibilities of solutions to the problems facing our future planet. I say get on it- and whistle while you work.

  • IndustryOfBlame

    You say you're a liberal by nature, yet you think it's a good idea that governments should control agriculture, education, medicine as well as natural resources? I must be misunderstanding you, or my definition of liberalism is different from yours.

  • bluetortilla

    It might seem that way but the rich only have titles and deeds to back them up (remember how the kings and queens, "chosen by God", fell in Europe).
    In reality the army you hire could turn against you. In our world, power is ultimately enforced by tanks and missiles. Not to say that the military is in charge of the U.S. government or economy at the moment. But a coup d'etat can bury the richest of the rich in a day. We've seen that played out scores of times since the last century.

  • bluetortilla

    Aw, I liked the graphics. Weren't those holograms?
    I especially liked the step ladder effect. : D

  • Fabien L'Amour

    And they flee to another country with their money and live in a luxurious Villa by the sea with bodyguards for the rest of their life. How many examples of that you want?

  • 1concept1

    I believe you are referring to "Libertarian" not a Liberal - In any case "words" - I have a middle of the road attitude leaning to the left -

    Certain things I posted in my original comment seem to me common sense - like govt. control over natural resources etc and so on - things in this area should not and do not belong under "capitalism" right or left wing thinking - (of course from my point of view) -

  • IndustryOfBlame

    No, I wasn't referring to libertarianism. I was just pointing out that there may be a rift between your common sense and your preferred ideology, but that's true for almost everyone I guess.

  • bluetortilla

    Yeah, well. They got their reward. You don't take your yacht with you when you die.

  • bluetortilla

    Don't worry. History shows that all dynasties end up as commoners just like everyone else.
    But I see something different. An emergent world where the billions of literate and educated people will shrivel the royalty. We'll embark on a new system that they'll have no place in.
    Dare to dream.

  • NX2

    Always interested in another presentation by Hans Rosling, offering an alternative view to what many of us consider common knowledge, like the one over at TED where he tackled the perception that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer (on a global view).

  • Gwayne Li

    He just didn'T take into consideration a few very important factors,
    which is the ecological impact. I'm not referring to ''CO2'' or carbon
    emissions, which is another matter altogether that goes in line with
    energy consumption.

    Rather, i'm talking about Food. How can we
    sustain food industry in the case of 11 billions? Farm yields? crop and
    soil empoverishment, overfishing and fish collapse. 11 billions mouths
    to feed. I just don't quite see that happen in the way we look at
    things, at least not in the conventional way of consumption.

    Using
    some personal experiences and anecdotes as basis for a global argument
    is quite numbing. Yes probably, and many and more specialists do say 11
    billions is the human peak population. Now how to manage it ? there's nothing optimistic to feel jolly about, despite the ''lighthearted animations'' he used. IT's not optimistic. a self-righteous, feel good argument might help you sleep well, but it ain't gonna help you think about the problem.

  • Gwayne Li

    and to people addressing the graphs, saying that ''wealth inequality has diminished somewhat''

    You have to read the graph carefully. The area below the curve do not show wealth distribution, but people and wages. Therefore the extremely wealthy do not show their wealth, rather their number of population. Now I'd like to see capital wealth in% Capital wealth on the Y axis, Population in the X axis..

  • leighatkins22

    If there was a redistribution of global incomes, it wouldn't take long for the money to end up precisely where it is now because the system is designed to syphon all the money and assets from the poor to those who know how to manipulate the system - the rich.
    What the world REALLY needs is a new monetary & income system and education about the system for all, so that it cannot be manipulated & therefore broken...

  • bluetortilla

    It's the age old hoarding mentality that keeps the common folk oppressed and distressed. As good education rises, so will equity. What the rich are doing is fairly transparent actually. If enough people smoke 'em out they won't be able to stash away or squander all of our resources anymore, though it won't be easy.
    We live on a beautiful mesmerizing little blue planet. You don't need a whole lot actually to be comfortable. My life has gotten tons better since I quit working all the time to buy crap I didn't need and started enjoying the benefits of eating well and getting out into the woods more.
    Our habits are based on our acquiescence to a construct, a sort of abstract contract that says if we serve we'll survive and fear of wandering out of that safety zone keeps people ignorant and obedient. If we are going to change things we need new ideas from many people. Good, practical ideas that will work.

  • shafawn

    There are plenty of researchers who are publishing findings now that the United States, Europe and Russia have slowed down population growth. Asia/India region and Africa are the 2 continents that are still rising sharply. Education and medical advancement on these two extremely poor continents would help their situation.

  • shafawn

    Estimated at 7 billion currently 2014 not 11 billion.

  • anna miller

    too little, too late. There is a price to pay for refusing to acknowledge the obvious.

  • Moncy Varghese

    Whatever may be the statistics we the greedy population consume all the natural resources available within few years.
    Then there will be a rebirth.

  • Toy Pupanbai

    I keep going back to, "1984"!

  • bluetortilla

    Some ways in which we can start:
    -eat less in general
    -eat far, far less meat or none
    -eat more legumes
    -incorporate easier grown grains such as millet and quinoa into our diets
    -get off high demanding grass grains like wheat and rice, which only give us empty carbs anyway
    -garden-grow crops vertically in cities
    -grow high yield/high nutrition/marginal demanding crops
    -eat food from local sources (boycott Chiquita!)
    -develop tastier sea vegetable hybrids
    -don't shun protein sources like plankton (preparation goes a long way)
    -improve fish and fresh water crustacean farming (easy to breed crayfish over shrimp!), develop hardier hybrids
    -turn nonproductive lawns and fields into orchards
    -forget about things like steak
    -stop eating fast food and use VERY LiTTLE processed foods, preferably none
    -don't eat junk food
    -substitute nostalgic foods like whipped cream with alternatives
    -find tasty and appealing ways to harvest and eat insects (we'll not only get used to them, but prize them)
    -divert livestock grain to human grain
    There are thousands of possibilities to feed our population, we don't need to die of starvation anymore (unless there is ecological disaster which there could be). Twenty years ago people said we'd never feed a population of 7 billion, but we're far better off now than we are then.
    Questions like these are rhetorical- the population is growing and that is the fact. What are we going to do? Euthanize people? Sterilize them? In the absence of any plausible method of stemming the tide, we need to look to other answers. Educating our children now is no doubt the best investment we can make.

  • bluetortilla

    I presume you mean the novel. It took living in oppression for Orwell to write a book of extreme total oppression.
    However, you notice the majority of humans in the novel's world, the proles, are 'free'; it's the intellectuals under constant surveillance. This pretty accurately described Stalinism and Maoism mid 20th C. The people who think freely, who have new ideas and are a threat to the status quo- these are the dangerous people who always be under the gaze of Big Brother. Speak out now while you still can! :D

  • bringmeredwine

    So you watched the aforementioned dissection videos?
    I really enjoy your comments.

  • bringmeredwine

    I don't trust Stephen Harper controlling our natural resources.
    Maybe if I knew we had a more transparent government I'd agree with you on that one.

  • bringmeredwine

    And girls in the developing world should have the right to be educated. They need to have control over their own bodies, and the right to gain knowledge that will help their communities.

  • 1concept1

    I am just speaking in general - you might be right on that one?

  • boudy

    Perhaps some of the "naked apes" (Desmond Moriis' moniker for homo sapiens) believe there is no cause for immediate panic, but what about every other living thing, and the biosphere itself?
    I encourage anyone that thinks current (or near future) population numbers are "sustainable" to read The Sixth Extinction by Elizabeth Kolbert, A Short History Of Progress by Ronald Wright and Countdown by Alan Weisman. Reading them should wipe the smug smile off the face of human achievement (unless you are of the "Dominian of man over nature" religious folk) and sober up the deniers. The gross overpopulation of the planet by the ultimate invasive species is as real as the holocaust was.

  • Shadowblur

    ....Yep, a planet only this size with 7 billion people and growing, a recipe for disaster.

  • bringmeredwine

    I know where you're coming from and I respect your opinions.
    I fear very much for the future of my country's resources and the way things are being handled in Alberta.
    I love my country so much! I hate seeing what's happening to it!

  • 1concept1

    I have never been to Canada - I have a daughter in law from British Columbia - I lived in California many years and i believe i would like Canada's west coast over the east coast

  • bringmeredwine

    During my first attempt to reply again, my computer froze!
    I have family in Minneapolis and my favorite aunt (she was a zoologist/biologist and extremely eccentric) worked for the US government and lived in MD.
    The Maritimes are beautiful and the people I've met are very genuine and warm.
    I've been all over your great land but regrettably, haven't made it to California. :)

  • 1concept1

    I live in the NC mountains now and have for the last five years - I have lived a lot of places over a life time - i was born and raised in Wash. DC proper - I left there at a young age - I am very familiar with Maryland -

    I haven't been following the news lately and it really helps - I configured my computer so as not to automatically pop up "news" -

  • bringmeredwine

    My auntie (picture Auntie Mame) took me on fun-filled spontaneous road trips all over the place.
    Very nice to know you:)

  • bluetortilla

    Where do laypeople always come up with this Machiavellian certainty? When I was boy all the grownups were saying that there is no way the earth could support 5 billion, but here we are. The fact is that scientists don't know how many people the earth can support. For all you and I know the earth may be able to support 30 million. Where's your data that says we can't?
    Now I'm not an advocate of 'go forth and multiply' but we must be prepared and realistic for handling the upcoming generations with the inevitable surge in human numbers; we must be smart in our strategies for flattening the curve and eventually bringing it down. Just by curbing unnecessary and excess consumption alone we could give a buffer for 2 billion- and we could do that tomorrow simply by lowering our individual consumption. No-brainer. With education and changing lifestyles, along with developing and refining technologies, I wager we can fare well. It's a cause well worth fighting for- with glee. I assume we all love kids don't we?
    There's no sense in not being an optimist in regards to overpopulation and population growth. The only alternative is to envision a gloomy if not outright hellish future with everyone choking on the air and eating poisonous food, if they are eating at all. It's to say, 'hell on earth is a certainty and it's coming-bummer.' That will lower population too; but I don't think any of us want to go out that way. I don't see how this prevalent attitude of just giving up helps us in the least to work on a better future and a better standard of living for all. Start solving the existing problems today and you'll be preventing many of the future ones.

  • bluetortilla

    Easy to say, hard to do. So what is the price exactly and what is the obvious that is not acknowledged? And where do you go from there?

  • bluetortilla

    I wish there were more documentaries on the current massive extinction. It's a good point well taken, co-coccurant to the population problem. Obviously, this documentary isn't 'advocating' overpopulation or intentionally being pollyanish about it but rather encouraging us to look squarely at the problem instead of flipping out over it (statistics for better or worse we need to know what we're dealing with). And obviously I think too, it is essential that the population problem get under control if we are to have any hope at all of slowing the 'slaughter rate' (150 species extinct per/day now) of living species of all shapes, sizes, and forms.
    One thing that comes to my mind is the total unnecessary and extremely destructive deforestation going on (and on and on and on). Can't we as a naked ape species slap a law on that and end it today? No? Why not?

  • anna miller

    I think bluetortilla, the price we will all collectively pay for refusing to understand that we live on a finite planet with finite resources spells a price of species extinction. Easter Island is a past microcosm for our global situation. At present we have Fukushima, and the fire at WIPP, exponential methane release from global warming, yet with these facts staring humanity in the face, we continue business as usual. It is a hard pill to swallow. That does not mean we are free from working for justice. For me it means a certain detachment from the insanity of our world.

  • bluetortilla

    Yes, and not to mention the fact that we've been sitting on the verge of a nuclear holocaust (the ICBM kind) for over 60 years now. It would seem that we are hell bent on self-annhiliation, and no one knows why. Most people just seemed too dazed from overwork the drama of life to do anything about it even if they know.
    For myself, I can't bear the despair of contemplating all these consequences so I look to the people and organizations in this world (and reformers within the established world) for hope and inspiration. Because humans are also capable of such wonderful advances and empathy is big part of our nature. For me anyway, it helps to focus on who's doing good things today.

  • anna miller

    I appreciate your passion bluetortilla. Yes, there is just enough good about life that makes me want to keep trying. I keep looking for good, such as the grand gathering of our nation's youth this past weekend to protest the Keystone Tar Sands pipeline. And people fighting and stalling the TPP, At least people seem to be getting more aware. But will it be in time? I want to see justice. If our species is going to go down, I would love to see humans at least trying to understand harmony with nature.

  • http://batman-news.com Adrian Barker

    The very, very, very rich don't seem to be giving a damn about the poisoning of the entire planet by the hundreds of tons of highly radioactive water seeping out of Fukushima into the sea every day (with no end in sight). This seepage contains very long lived radionuclides (cesium, strontium, etc.) that are being bio-magnified (because they are similar to potassium and calcium - like a wolf in sheep's clothing) into the entire earth's ecosystem. Everyone and everything is slowly being poisoned, the very, very, very rich and their offspring will be affected yet they are doing nothing. Why? This matter is urgent for the planet. It doesn't matter if you are pro or anti nuclear. The mainstream media no longer reports it, the Japanese Gov't have recently made it a criminal offense to release information about it, Tepco who is still in charge of Fukushima is a for profit organization running the cleanup on a shoestring (eg. allowing the Yakusa (mafia) to employ homeless men for very little wages) have proven themselves entirely inept and compulsive lairs, people are being financially forced to move back into highly radioactive areas, govts are not monitoring the levels of radioactivity in the ocean or the food, acceptable radiation levels are being raised to unacceptable levels. There are more than a thousand tanks on site storing an incredibly massive amount of highly radioactive water all of which could and probably would burst or leak during the next large inevitable earthquake. The various atomic agencies and the Japanese govt want to dump it into the ocean since they realize that they cannot keep building thousands of tanks on site. Their proposed ALPS filtering system has failed and even if it did work would still not remove all the radiation from the water before it is to be released into the ocean. Dilution is not the solution because these radionuclides don't dilute. There is no end in sight with no technology or proven plan to stop the site from bleeding poison into the environment forever. Unit 4 is still at risk of toppling over during the next big quake causing a huge release of radioactivity. They have to manually remove 1500 damaged fuel rods (200 of these are unused and especially hot) which is fraught with danger of a major accident. Unit 3's spent fuel pool is so badly damaged that it is probably impossible to ever empty it and requiring constant cooling for decades to come. All the while three nuclear cores have melted through their containment's into their building's basements that are coming into direct contact with hundreds of tons of underground water from the nearby mountain seeping through cracks in the building caused by the earthquake which is then flowing out to sea uninhibited. Their intended underground ice-wall which is many years away has never been tried on such a large scale and there are many unknowns. Why doesn't every nation in the world (and the few very, very, very rich) drop what they are doing and make a concerted effort to stop this genocide of the planet?

  • http://batman-news.com Adrian Barker

    The future population is unpredictable. Currently, the earth is being poisoning daily by the hundreds of tons of highly radioactive water seeping out of Fukushima into the sea with no end in sight. This seepage contains very long lived radionuclides (cesium, strontium, etc.) that are being bio-magnified (because they are similar to potassium and calcium - like a wolf in sheep's clothing) into the entire earth's ecosystem. Everyone and everything is slowly
    being poisoned, the very, very, very rich and their offspring will be
    affected yet they are doing nothing. Why? This matter is urgent for the planet. It doesn't matter if you are pro or anti nuclear. The mainstream media no longer reports it, the Japanese Gov't have recently made it a criminal offense to release information about it, Tepco who is still in charge of Fukushima is a for profit organization running the cleanup on a shoestring (eg. allowing the Yakusa (mafia) to employ homeless men for very little wages) have proven themselves entirely inept and compulsive lairs, people are being financially forced to move back into highly radioactive areas, govts are not monitoring the levels of radioactivity in the ocean or the food, acceptable radiation levels are being raised to unacceptable levels. There are more than a thousand tanks on site storing an incredibly massive amount of highly radioactive water all of
    which could and probably would burst or leak during the next large
    inevitable earthquake. The various atomic agencies and the Japanese govt want to dump it into the ocean since they realize that they cannot keep building thousands of tanks on site. Their proposed ALPS filtering system has failed and even if it did work would still not remove all the radiation from the water before it is to be released into the ocean. Dilution is not the solution because these radionuclides don't dilute. There is no end in sight with no technology or proven plan to stop the site from bleeding poison into the environment forever. Of the four nuclear power plants Unit 4 is still at risk of toppling over during the next big quake causing a huge release of radioactivity. They have to manually remove 1500 damaged fuel rods (200 of these are unused and especially hot) which is fraught with danger of a major accident. Unit 3's spent fuel pool is so badly damaged that it is probably impossible to ever empty it and requiring constant cooling for decades to come. All the while three nuclear cores have melted through their containment's into their building's basements that are coming into direct contact with hundreds of tons of underground water from the nearby mountain seeping through cracks in the building caused by the earthquake which is then flowing out to sea uninhibited. Their intended underground ice-wall which is many years away has never been tried on such a large scale and there are many unknowns. Why doesn't every nation in the world (and the few very, very, very rich) drop what they are doing and make a concerted effort to stop this genocide of the planet? (Go to the Fairewinds website for reliable up to date information).

  • bluetortilla

    Most of this thread seems to blame the 'very, very rich' for everything, portrays them as monolithic and permanent, un-defeatable, and unfortunately like it or not does this blaming without offering any solutions for fighting back. Now, I'm the last to defend their policies and actions of the very rich, but I think the situation is being grossly oversimplified. The world is not going to change overnight and radiation from Fukushima that has already seeped out into the ocean with obey the laws of physics concerning its afterlife. That is sad indeed but from another perspective is the reality that any of here can do little things right here and now, today, that make huge differences in the economy that the very rich depend on. You can stop eating ANY kind of processed food. You can stop buying ANYTHING from ANY big chain- Uniqlo, the Gap, Starbucks, and Walmart et al infinitum, and you can start growing a garden and getting your vegetables locally. If that means cellar squash and dried berries then so be it. Most of all, you can propagate the knowledge you have gained about inequity, inequality, and slavery in the world and the disastrous effect that OUR OWN consumer culture is having on the world. The same culture that is giving the 'very, very rich' the carte blanche it enjoys. An individual has a lot of boycott power.
    @adrian_barker:disqus The Yakuza are hiring the homeless?? Come on, you can't just throw stuff like that out there without a previous source of documentation, even though it may be true. 'I read it on the Internet' is poor way of describing where we get our information unless its sourced. So where did you hear that? Well, you do write with passion but your observations here on poor Fukushima just come off as a rant. I think it would be much better if you organized your facts and posted them in more topical place. Or left it more succinct. Indeed, Fukushima is an ongoing hellish nightmare that has been recklessly mismanaged, but doesn't that imply (as far as overpopulation is concerned) the urgent need to both- consume less energy, and two, develop alternative energy source- right now?
    In the end, my feeling is this: I don't give a (four letter word) less what the rich are doing or where the very very rich are going to hobnob. I don't wanna join that club. It's up to us to stop drinking at their watering troughs, jump their pasture fences and stop being suckered into taking their loans. Nature provides and nature is (mortgaged or not) right in your own back yard (we've been taught that 'Knotsberry Farm' 'Chiquita,' or 'Pevely' or some stupid name like are the ones who provide but it's not true. Change your lifestyle and you change the world. Through education, one person at a time, we can each of us rob the rich and give to the world.
    Are we ladies and gentlemen or little squeaky mice?

  • Frank Kling

    I would like to share a revelation I had during my time among
    the human race. It came to me when I tried to classify your species. I realized
    that you are not true mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively
    develops a natural equilibrium- a symbiotic relationship- with the surrounding
    environment, but you humans do not. You move to an area and replicate without
    any natural limits to population growth until every natural resource is
    consumed and all other life is extinguished. There is another organism on this
    planet that follows the same destructive pattern- a virus. Human beings are a
    pernicious disease- a metastasizing cancer of the Earth. You are a plague and
    we are the cure.~~The Matrix

  • http://batman-news.com Adrian Barker

    Fukushima can only be fixed with money and lots of it. There is nothing we as individuals can do except make others aware and put pressure on those that can do something. However, it seems that governments and atomic agencies are just sitting on their hands probably because their owners the corporations tell them to be silent. We are all like the frog in water that's getting hotter and hotter without noticing but next we are all dead. No, we won't all die tomorrow because of Fukushima but is it nice to know that your grandchildren will have lower IQ, birth defects and incurable diseases directly because of it. What part of biomagnify don't you understand? Do a little research into man made cesium and strontium. There still is no end insight for Fukushima because the situation is being downplayed and is not fully understood by the vast majority. Chernobyl was better managed than what Fukushima is today! What about the next inevitable nuclear disaster in any of the 500 (fast increasing) nuke plants in the world? Will it/they be downplayed and ignored more than Fukushima? Have you heard of the recent accident at "WIPP" which has now contaminted the surrounding area with Plutonium-242 among many other isotopes for 3,733,000 million years (half life of Pu-242 x 10 ). Plutonium is among the most lethal of all substances know and is flowing freely into the Pacific everyday for the past three years - not a happy anniversary today.
    @ bluetortilla - google "fukushima yakusa" for 700+ news links.
    Suggesting that we consume less and growing our own vegetables won't fix Fukushima but the Fukushima's in the world will fix the population of the planet eventually.

  • tkurnas

    Excellent presentation. Please watch. You will not be disapointed.

  • http://batman-news.com Adrian Barker

    Fukushima can only be fixed with money and lots of it. There is nothing
    we as individuals can do except make others aware and put pressure on
    those that can do something. However, it seems that governments and
    atomic agencies are just sitting on their hands probably because their
    owners the corporations tell them to be silent. We are all like the frog
    in water that's getting hotter and hotter without noticing but next we
    are all dead. No, we won't all die tomorrow because of Fukushima but is
    it nice to know that your grandchildren will have lower IQ, birth
    defects and incurable diseases directly because of it. What part of
    biomagnify don't you understand? Do a little research into man made
    cesium and strontium. There still is no end insight for Fukushima
    because the situation is being downplayed and is not fully understood by
    the vast majority. Chernobyl was better managed than what Fukushima is
    today! What about the next inevitable nuclear disaster in any of the 500
    (fast increasing) nuke plants in the world? Will it/they be downplayed
    and ignored more than Fukushima? Have you heard of the recent accident
    at "WIPP" which has now contaminted the surrounding area with
    Plutonium-242 among many other isotopes for 3,733,000 million years
    (half life of Pu-242 x 10 ). Plutonium is among the most lethal of all
    substances know and is flowing freely into the Pacific everyday for the
    past three years - not a happy anniversary today.
    @bluetortilla:disqus bluetortilla - google "fukushima yakusa" for 700+ news links.
    Suggesting
    that we consume less and growing our own vegetables won't fix Fukushima
    but the Fukushima's in the world will fix the population of the planet
    eventually.

  • Hardik Panjwani

    Broadly there are two issues here:

    1) Tackling the problems related to population growth is certainly possible technologically. It would require having sensible policies on energy, food, economics, etc working in tandem on a global scale. I don't see how that could happen within the current system of globalization that is highly predatory without major shakeups in economic theory and geopolitical power structure.

    2) Stats are always dangerous. Its always possible to play with data to get it roughly pointing towards where you want it to point.

    Overall I think that the problem is acute enough even if there is hyperbole around it largely because of the dual difficulties of softening the predatory nature of globalization and getting appropriate polices into place.

  • http://batman-news.com Adrian Barker

    see my full reply above yours.
    @ bluetortilla - google "fukushima yakusa" for 700+ news links.
    Suggesting
    that we consume less and growing our own vegetables won't fix Fukushima
    but the Fukushima's in the world will fix the population of the planet
    eventually.

  • bluetortilla

    I think anyone who takes statistics at face value would be very naive. Every presenter an agenda, and it stands to reason that they will use statistics to support their case. It's important that the statistics are based on current trends and facts. The opposition will always be there to present theirs.
    The host gave his presentation on the basis that things might not be as bad as we think. I think the presentation was a great boost to a troubled world. It's better to be an optimist than a pessimist.
    If we did not have statistics what would we use instead to forecast changes?

  • bluetortilla

    I sure don't advocate nuclear power either and I am very distraught over the current circumstances surrounding Fukushima, the terrible loss of life and disease, and the poisoning. However, while I understand that people get off topic in threads, I felt it misleading to get too deep in the topic without a video that we have all watched and can refer to.
    Thanks for the link. I'll check it out.

  • numberwang

    If this man is a statistician he should be struck off. Almost every graph has been misinterpreted. At first I thought I'd clicked the wrong link, as I wanted to watch the perfect vagina. I soon realized the link was correct. What a c**t!

  • buttercup123456

    I'm impressed with the work this man has done. For those that can only find issues with his work, maybe if you take a back seat and watch it a second time. He is the first I've seen that has taken the time to analyze the numbers and put them into simple terms for all to understand. He's not pointing fingers at anyone, just showing where we are and where we are headed. He shows both the positive and the negatives with hope for all. After watching his program, my thought is that if only we could all help by providing bicycles to those who are the poorest, the world could be a better place. I find that its sad that something so simple and affordable to most of us could help so many. I applaud his work and thank him for sending his message to the rest of us. Why anyone would take issue with a few graphs and numbers is beyond me. The message is what is important. I doubt that even half of those who are critical of a few graphs and numbers have even a fraction of this mans education and experience. If a bicycle could improve the lives in the poorest of the poor, its sad that we are buying them faster than we eat M&M's. In fact, I doubt these poor have even seen an M & M! Why take issue with the numbers, when it's the message this man has to offer? This is an outstanding documentary with a great message. Thanks

  • Andreas Luneborg

    Anyone who refutes that a phenomena would occur in X out of Y times, given a proper sample size and temporally observed patterns projected or not, is a fool. How can one refute a science that helped to put us on the moon, gives us satellites, internet, computers, etc. Yes statistics can be used for a lot of bad research, but so can other things. One just always and always needs to look critically at the empirical evidence presented and one must self-reflect upon its value. No data is ever presented for anyone completely a priori; and as such one can even fool oneself, just by observing the data. As you have obviously already done by refuting statistics.

    Hans Roslig rocks!

  • bluetortilla

    Andreas, I think you are replying to Hardik not to me as I (or at least it was my intention to have) supported the use of statistics.
    Like anything else, statistics can be misused though. For example, using statistics selectively to deliberately distort the truth. In another sense, that's called 'withholding evidence.' But that's not what's going on in this documentary.
    Hans rocks! I quite agree!

  • BiznatchRuler

    Well i can say that I would be shocked if you have any mathematics education beyond algebra and that's being nice.

  • 666

    There is no such thing as poor country.There are countries kept in dark by corporations and banks (implicitly by the governments of rich counties). And the first step in finding a solution to poverty is the abolition of Fiat money.