UN says world population will reach 9.8 billion in 2050

India’s population is expected to surpass China’s in about seven years and Nigeria is projected to overtake the United States and become the third most populous country in the world shortly before 2050, a U.N. report said Wednesday.

The report by the Department of Economic and Social Affairs’ Population Division forecasts that the current world population of nearly 7.6 billion will increase to 8.6 billion by 2030, 9.8 billion in 2050 and 11.2 billion in 2100. It said roughly 83 million people are added to the world’s population every year and the upward trend is expected to continue even with a continuing decline in fertility rates, which have fallen steadily since the 1960s.

John Wilmoth, director of the Population Division, said at a news conference that the report includes information on the populations of 233 countries or areas of the world. “The population in Africa is notable for its rapid rate of growth, and it is anticipated that over half of global population growth between now and 2050 will take place in that region,” he said. “At the other extreme, it is expected that the population of Europe will, in fact, decline somewhat in the coming decades.” …

“You really think God’s going to let them win like that?”

It won’t be winning. Only the fat cats in thier heavily guarded compounds will have “won”.

If the Book of Revelation is really unfolding before our eyes, things will go from bad to worse to hell as godless fools pull everything down around our ears, and then the judgements are poured out on all of that. This so man can suffer the consequences of his war on God. Oops, I used “man” and “his”.

It seems to me that God has removed His lamp from the countries of Western civilization, in response to the depraved hard-heartedness of these nations. The scourge of the Islamic invasions, along with the godless foolishness of our leaders are all major clues. The enemy is through the gates.

The western nations turned on God, and an ancient enemy has risen up. Depravity prevails in culture, government, education, the courts, the destruction of family life, the brainwashing of our children, etc.

The coming years are going to be increasingly difficult, to say the least.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Population_Bomb

The Population Bomb is a best-selling book written by Stanford University Professor Paul R. Ehrlich and his wife, Anne Ehrlich (who was uncredited), in 1968.[1][2] It warned of the mass starvation of humans in the 1970s and 1980s due to overpopulation, as well as other major societal upheavals, and advocated immediate action to limit population growth. Fears of a “population explosion” were widespread in the 1950s and 1960s, but the book and its author brought the idea to an even wider audience.[3][4]

The book has been criticized since its publishing for its alarmist tone, and in recent decades for its inaccurate predictions. The Ehrlichs stand by the basic ideas in the book, stating in 2009 that “perhaps the most serious flaw in The Bomb was that it was much too optimistic about the future” and believe that it achieved their goals because “it alerted people to the importance of environmental issues and brought human numbers into the debate on the human future.”[2]

...”What needs to be done?” he wrote, “We must rapidly bring the world population under control, reducing the growth rate to zero or making it negative. Conscious regulation of human numbers must be achieved. Simultaneously we must, at least temporarily, greatly increase our food production.” Ehrlich described a number of “ideas on how these goals might be reached.”[6] He believed that the United States should take a leading role in population control, both because it was already consuming much more than the rest of the world, and therefore had a moral duty to reduce its impact, and because the US would have to lead international efforts due to its prominence in the world. In order to avoid charges of hypocrisy or racism it would have to take the lead in population reduction efforts.[7] Ehrlich floats the idea of adding “temporary sterilants” to the water supply or staple foods. However, he rejects the idea as unpractical due to “criminal inadequacy of biomedical research in this area.”[8] He suggests a tax scheme in which additional children would add to a family’s tax burden at increasing rates for more children, as well as luxury taxes on childcare goods. He suggests incentives for men who agree to permanent sterilization before they have two children, as well as a variety of other monetary incentives. He proposes a powerful Department of Population and Environment which “should be set up with the power to take whatever steps are necessary to establish a reasonable population size in the United States and to put an end to the steady deterioration of our environment.”[9] The department should support research into population control, such as better contraceptives, mass sterilizing agents, and prenatal sex discernment (because families often continue to have children until a male is born. Ehrlich suggested that if they could choose a male child this would reduce the birthrate). Legislation should be enacted guaranteeing the right to an abortion, and sex education should be expanded.

...

More leftist prophecy.

““it alerted people to the importance of environmental issues and brought human numbers into the debate on the human future.”[2]”

A good boss once explained how politics worked and why sane, reasonable high profile changes were loudly decried. He said, for them, fighting your proposal is a win/win. You have a large and important audience. You gathered it and the audience wants to hear what you have to say. The Nay-sayer comes in and argues with you, using your glory to highlight himself. He points out all of the possible negative consequences of this sane, reasonable thing. Then, if it succeeds, it succeeded because their nay-saying made you do it right. If it fails they warned you. Either way, they win.

Nay-sayers are all over politics. As far as liberals are concerned everything, from climate to wheat (example GMO) is really politics.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.