[Coral-List] what agency should list corals

Douglas Fenner douglasfennertassi at gmail.com
Tue Apr 16 03:52:04 EDT 2013

I just took a quick look at the Wikipedia page, "Projections of population
growth."  They say

"According to current *projections of population
*, the world population of humans will continue to grow until at least
2050, with the estimated population, based on current growth trends, to
reach 9 billion in
predictions <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population#Forecasts>putting
the population in 2050 as high as 11 billion.
population passed the 7 billion mark on October 31, 2011.
According to the United Nations<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations>'
World Population Prospects
population <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population> is currently
growing by approximately 74 million people per year. Current United Nations
predictions estimate that the world population will reach 9.0 billion
around 2050, assuming a decrease in average fertility
rate<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertility_rate>from 2.5 down to 2.0.

The Wikipedia page on "Population growth" has some interesting graphs, like
the first one showing world population growth since 10,000 BCE, which shows
how extremely rapidly population has grown in the last few hundred years
compared to earlier, even the logarithmic version of it that which is their
third graph shows that the growth rate has spiked in the last couple
hundred years or so.  Their second graph shows that the rate of population
growth, expressed in percent growth per year, has been decreasing since the
early 1960's, and is projected to continue to decline.

Cheers,  Doug

On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 12:01 AM, frahome at yahoo.com <frahome at yahoo.com>wrote:

> I have not checked the scientific validity of the below link but I can see
> that even in the more "optimistic" curve we will be over 8 billions by 2035
> (population is not dropping, yet) and still as many as 6.2 billions in 2100.
> I do not mean to be negative but maybe in 2100 the population could be
> even less than the "optimistic" estimate of 6.2 billions considering what
> could happen if we do not act now to face the food, environmental,
> economic, poverty, inequity, overpopulation, and climate crises of the
> current and next few decades.
> As many started to say, or we get quickly and voluntarily prepared for a
> smooth transition to a new model or it will be forced on us in a very
> unpleasant way.
> Francesca
> ________________________________
>  From: Eugene Shinn <eugeneshinn at mail.usf.edu>
> To: "coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov" <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 8:35 PM
> Subject: [Coral-List] what agency should list corals
> Looks like the subject of "what agency should list corals" will not go
> away. Probably the best answer is: no agency should list corals. Listing
> them surely will not change Co2 levels in the oceans in time to make a
> difference.
> As for worries about population there is some good news in Science 2.0,
> 5 April 2013
> <
> http://thegwpf.us4.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=c920274f2a364603849bbb505&id=654e4e28f2&e=804bb8caa5
> >.
> It says global population is dropping and will continue until around
> 2090. As for the waste water situation in the Florida Keys which was my
> research baby for more than 10 years, I remind people that everything
> that happened to Keys reefs (centered mainly around 1983) also happened
> to reefs synchronously around small isolated islands in the Bahamas and
> Caribbean at the same time (and don't forget that was when Diadema died
> throughout the Caribbean). It is a real stretch to blame sewage in those
> cases. Remember there are species of bamboos that die off synchronously
> worldwide about every 40 years ( some longer) and the cause is not
> climatic. Here is a quote from an
>  article in Annals of Botany. 82:
> 779-785, 1998. "Bamboos are woody perennials some species of which show
> the peculiar habit of dying after flowering just once, in long life
> cycles of 2 to 120 years (McClure, 1966). Should they be listed?
> Fortunately there there are historic records of their death (and
> resulting Panda demise) that stretch back hundreds of years. We don't
> have long historic observations for corals but do have geologic evidence
> of their demise in the past. Are not natural cycles interesting? Gene
> Reference:
> McClure FA. 1966. The bamboos, a fresh perspective. Cambridge,
> Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. No
> _______________________________________________
> Coral-List mailing list
> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
> _______________________________________________
> Coral-List mailing list
> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list

PO Box 7390
Pago Pago, American Samoa 96799  USA

The views expressed are those of the author alone.

More information about the Coral-List mailing list