Now we know that r (the rate of increase has been modulating downward for the past 40 years) but it is still in the positive range.
What I have tried to explain is that even if r of the set, as a whole, is declining - there are greatly different trends within multiple subsets of that whole.
Because we as need to determine if the species is indeed modulating it's r to the point of 0 and achieving balance with it's environment and not just posting a small dip in a 600 year upward trend - we must examine the data closely.
And as we have been discussing - that data is very mixed.
Some cultures are into negative population growth (think the Czech Republic and some other European countries) while some cultures are expanding rapidly. (think Latin America, the Middle East and Sub-Saharan Africa).
China is at 1.7 and India is at 2.8 in total fertility rates. So even among the most populous countries there is a difference.
And these differences can lead to huge outcomes. With India above the 2.1 replacement rate in fertility and China below the norm it would only take to 2040 for India to be the most populous country on earth.
But again, predicting future growth rates of any population is very risky business - that is why we are taking such pains to be as accurate as possible in our evaluation of that old pesky r = n - m.
J: OK, so if I read this right you are saying that there still might be a case for the “r-selected” behavior to overwhelm the “k-selected” behavior and instead of leveling off either continue expanding or to crash?
MA: You are a very bright young man James.
J: Well it took you an hour to help me get it.
MA: That is an hour well spent.
J: Is there any way to know for sure?
MA: Of course there is, why don’t you come back tomorrow and we will see what we can see - so to speak.
J: Excellent.