Global Warming & Evolution: WHO are The Scientists?

[Lagboltz]

Lag: I didn't mention this in my last post to you because the 9-Billion Milestone Year wasn't especially important to the discussion. However, the 5-Pt. regression I performed projected that 9-Billion Population would be reached in 2051, versus your Macro-Economic friend's estimate of 2050. I suspect he's using a somewhat similar but more complex methodology than I am, for I don't have a multi-regression software package anymore. Nevertheless, the resulting answers were very close.

I performed a few additional analyses aimed at finding the latest and greatest trends. I began with an assumption that if I narrowed the range of Milestone Years, performing 4 Pt. 3 Pt, and then 2-Pt. data, I might discover a continuing extension of the projected Milestone Years in which each Billion-Pop’ Milestone was reached. The analysis I performed earlier consisted of 5 Milestone-Year data points, those being the Year and World Population data for 1927, 1960, 1974, 1987, and 1999. The follow-up regressions I performed included only the 4 most-recent Milestone Years, then the 3 most-recent Milestone Years, and finally the 2 most-recent Milestone Years.

What I thought I’d find when I started was a consistent extension of each regression’s projection of the future Milestone Years in which the Billion-Population increases occur. I was surprised by what the outputs of each progression were. Here they are:

Regression
R2 = 95.7%100% 100% n/a
Milestone Year
Billion POP 5 Pts.4 Pts.3 Pts.2 Pts.

8 2035 2025 2025 2025
9 2051 2035 2035 2035
10 2068 2051 2051 2051
11 2085 2068 2068 2068
12 2102 2085 2085 2085
13 2118 2090 2090 2090
14 2135 2102 2102 2102

As you see, although I rounded the Years, the Billion-Pop’ Milestones for each regression occurred in the Year shown +/- months, and the 4, 3, and 2-Pt. regressions each projected the Same Milestone Years for the Billion-Pop’ Increases. Any thoughts???

The way I would approach the computation is to plot population against time and do a linear regression on the logarithms of the population. Since population growth is an exponential increase, the logs will be a linear increase of population vs time., so the linear regression on logs would be quite appropriate and would allow you to directly get the exponential coefficient. The reason your 5 pt regression is different is probably because the growth isn't exponential, for the last point, but is leveling off as stated in the article.

One problem with the article is that it used linear math on an exponential data and made a wrong conclusion that the population would head toward zero.

Nevertheless the problem the world has to face is how to eventually stop the exponential growth dead in its tracks before the infestation of humans on earth depletes the resources that are needed for humans to survive.

 

[Lagboltz]

I will take that bet too.

Laggie....or Pockets.....or Open.....are any of you willing to take the bet?

Funny....remember how leftists really went after W over the Patriot Act (I agreed with them then), but now if BO & Friends want to take our guns, lefties will go along with this unconstitutional tyranny, but not the tyranny of the progressive W. Weird.....

My take is that we have a lot of leeway in gun control that is constitutionally very sound. The second amendment starts out "A well regulated Militia being necessary ... "

The civilians who have guns are not "well regulated" by a long shot. So Biden has free run to make regulations consistent with the constitution. In fact I would say we are in violation of the constitution by not having meaningful regulations against assault rifles.

 

[Hobo1]

Nevertheless the problem the world has to face is how to eventually stop the exponential growth dead in its tracks before the infestation of humans on earth depletes the resources that are needed for humans to survive.

The planet Earth has problems that humans can solve, including a lot of environmental problems, energy problems, etc. On the other hand, an array of problems are beyond our ability to solve. One of them is to modify population growth trends. All the education programs, all the contraceptive programs, etc. cannot modify the attitude/habits that the human race has towards making babies.

Yes, population growth is exponential, the question is "what is the exponent". You can have negative exponential growth, as is the case in Europe. Clearly, in each country feel differently about their environment - which in turn reflects the number of children a woman will bear in her lifetime. The mindset of a men and a women with regard to children has so many variables, it is impossible to make accurate projections on a micro scale.

However, on a global basis, you don't need a mathematical statistics program to see that rate of growth (second derivative), has come to a halt. The world's population is continuing to grow. But it is rate of growth is slowing.

The interesting (and unknowable) question is "what happens when births = death?, or popultion growth = x^1. Scientists guess that the earth's population will = 10 billion. Nobody knows if the growth exponent will drop below 1, meaning the earth population will drop, or if the growth rate starts to increase again.

 

[Gipper]

My take is that we have a lot of leeway in gun control that is constitutionally very sound. The second amendment starts out "A well regulated Militia being necessary ... "

The civilians who have guns are not "well regulated" by a long shot. So Biden has free run to make regulations consistent with the constitution. In fact I would say we are in violation of the constitution by not having meaningful regulations against assault rifles.

You do not understand the meaning of the Second Amendment. Don't feel bad about your mistaken understanding even though you are of such an advanced age. You see most lefties have been brainwashed about the Second Amendment...along with so many other things. It reads...

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Now the first part of the sentence does not mean that gun owning Americans must be part of a well regulated militia. It does mean that, for Americans to be secure in a free state, they must have the right to keep and bear arms. These quotes might help you....

Alexander Hamilton: "The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed," adding later, "If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no recourse left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government." By the way, Hamilton is referring to what institution when he says "the representatives of the people"?
James Madison: "(The Constitution preserves) the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation ... (where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms."
Thomas Jefferson: "What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms."
George Mason, author of the Virginia Bill of Rights, which inspired our Constitution's Bill of Rights, said, "To disarm the people – that was the best and most effectual way to enslave them." http://www.lewrockwell.com/kreca/kreca9.1.1.html

You also do not understand the Constitution....that a-hole Biden is one man...he is not a dictator, no matter how much you might want him to be. He has no right to impose gun regulations on the American people. America is suppose to be a democratic Constitutional republic right???? But thanks to the left and the elite, it is really a Fascist Kleptocracy or a Socialist/Fascist Oligarchy...whichever you prefer. So anything is possible since we do not have the rule by law, but rule by left wing elitist ideologues.

 

[Lagboltz]

The planet Earth has problems that humans can solve, including a lot of environmental problems, energy problems, etc. On the other hand, an array of problems are beyond our ability to solve. One of them is to modify population growth trends. All the education programs, all the contraceptive programs, etc. cannot modify the attitude/habits that the human race has towards making babies.

Yes, population growth is exponential, the question is "what is the exponent". You can have negative exponential growth, as is the case in Europe. Clearly, in each country feel differently about their environment - which in turn reflects the number of children a woman will bear in her lifetime. The mindset of a men and a women with regard to children has so many variables, it is impossible to make accurate projections on a micro scale.

However, on a global basis, you don't need a mathematical statistics program to see that rate of growth (second derivative), has come to a halt. The world's population is continuing to grow. But it is rate of growth is slowing.

The interesting (and unknowable) question is "what happens when births = death?, or popultion growth = x^1. Scientists guess that the earth's population will = 10 billion. Nobody knows if the growth exponent will drop below 1, meaning the earth population will drop, or if the growth rate starts to increase again.

By resources I wasn't talking about environmental problems, but I was referring to depletion of rare minerals, energy, arable land, fresh water, etc.

In homestead farming two centuries ago they had to grow more calories in energy than they used, otherwise they would starve. Today it is estimated that each calorie of food requires 10 calories of external energy when you include fertilization, pest control, irrigation, refrigeration, transportation, packaging, retailing, etc. So in that sense, food = energy.

We will just have to wait and see which becomes the predominant force of population control -- birth rate, or death rate. If the population levels off naturally with birth control like it is in some places, that would be great. If it doesn't, then it will level off by epidemics, wars, starvation, genocide, and other unpleasant means.

 

[Lagboltz]

You do not understand the meaning of the Second Amendment. Don't feel bad about your mistaken understanding even though you are of such an advanced age. You see most lefties have been brainwashed about the Second Amendment...along with so many other things. It reads...

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Now the first part of the sentence does not mean that gun owning Americans must be part of a well regulated militia. It does mean that, for Americans to be secure in a free state, they must have the right to keep and bear arms. These quotes might help you....

Alexander Hamilton: "The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed," adding later, "If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no recourse left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government." By the way, Hamilton is referring to what institution when he says "the representatives of the people"?
James Madison: "(The Constitution preserves) the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation ... (where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms."
Thomas Jefferson: "What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms."
George Mason, author of the Virginia Bill of Rights, which inspired our Constitution's Bill of Rights, said, "To disarm the people – that was the best and most effectual way to enslave them." http://www.lewrockwell.com/kreca/kreca9.1.1.html

You also do not understand the Constitution....that a-hole Biden is one man...he is not a dictator, no matter how much you might want him to be. He has no right to impose gun regulations on the American people. America is suppose to be a democratic Constitutional republic right???? But thanks to the left and the elite, it is really a Fascist Kleptocracy or a Socialist/Fascist Oligarchy...whichever you prefer. So anything is possible since we do not have the rule by law, but rule by left wing elitist ideologues.

You do not understand the meaning of the Second Amendment. Don't feel bad about your mistaken understanding. You see most righties have been brainwashed by Fox News about the Second Amendment...along with the NRA..... See, I can be just as dogmatic as you.

I certainly don't want Biden to be a dictator as much as you. He has a full right to press the matter according to the phrasing of the second amendment. I believe that the second amendment will be defended by the Supreme Court, and not Hamilton, Madison, etc. The amazing thing is that the quotes that you cite can't be used in an argument to the Supreme Court. It would be tantamount to arguing that assault weapons are needed to threaten an overthrow the US government in a bloody revolution.

 

[Gipper]

You do not understand the meaning of the Second Amendment. Don't feel bad about your mistaken understanding. You see most righties have been brainwashed by Fox News about the Second Amendment...along with the NRA..... See, I can be just as dogmatic as you.

I certainly don't want Biden to be a dictator as much as you. He has a full right to press the matter according to the phrasing of the second amendment. I believe that the second amendment will be defended by the Supreme Court, and not Hamilton, Madison, etc. The amazing thing is that the quotes that you cite can't be used in an argument to the Supreme Court. It would be tantamount to arguing that assault weapons are needed to threaten an overthrow the US government in a bloody revolution.

Sorry to disappoint you, but I seldom watch any tv news and I am not an NRA member. And my point about that jackass Biden was you stated he could make regulations...he can't as he has no authority to do so, if we are to follow the rule of law. He can propose them of course.

I don't believe you know what an assault weapon is. And can you tell me how many murders are committed in the US with an assault weapon? BINGO....duped again....

 

[Lagboltz]

Sorry to disappoint you, but I seldom watch any tv news and I am not an NRA member. And my point about that jackass Biden was you stated he could make regulations...he can't as he has no authority to do so, if we are to follow the rule of law. He can propose them of course.

I don't believe you know what an assault weapon is. And can you tell me how many murders are committed in the US with an assault weapon? BINGO....duped again....

I said Biden has the right to press the matter, I didn't say he would actually make the regulations.

Don't be silly I know the statistics. You seem to be saying govment actions should be made on the basis of body counts. That's not true. It is often made on the basis of rage. A prime example is that the rage of 9/11 lead to an attack on Iraq which had nothing to do with 9/11. Compare the body count in 9/11 to the body count of the war that resulted. You guys may not like the way the rage has affected 2nd amendment weapons control. But many of us don't like the way rage has caused a useless Iraq war.

 

[TheJPRD]

The way I would approach the computation is to plot population against time and do a linear regression on the logarithms of the population. Since population growth is an exponential increase, the logs will be a linear increase of population vs time., so the linear regression on logs would be quite appropriate and would allow you to directly get the exponential coefficient. The reason your 5 pt regression is different is probably because the growth isn't exponential, for the last point, but is leveling off as stated in the article.

One problem with the article is that it used linear math on an exponential data and made a wrong conclusion that the population would head toward zero.

Nevertheless the problem the world has to face is how to eventually stop the exponential growth dead in its tracks before the infestation of humans on earth depletes the resources that are needed for humans to survive.

I performed 2 regressions, the first using the log of Pop' vs. Year, and the second using the logs of both. The first of those regression provided the best r2 with 99.8%, though still lower than those from the earlier regressions at 100%. The first regression projected Milestone Years that were even more near-term than the earlier projections. The smoothed projections from the best earlier projections are used below for comparison to the single-Log projections.

8 Billion Reached in 2025 from earlier analyses, with the log projection being 2020
9 Billion Reached in 2038 from earlier analyses, with the log projection being 2028
10 Billion Reached in 2050 from earlier analyses, with the log projection being 2035
14 Billion (Doubling of Present) 2102 from earlier analyses, with the log projection being 2058!

Any way you look at this it looks bad. As for your comment that we need to "stop the exponential growth dead in its tracks", that can't be done with abortions and birth control alone! The world leaders will have to do away with a lot of people. It's only logical that they'd want the people unarmed when the time comes, and then surprise them!

 

[Hobo1]

Who hijacked this thread to talk about gun control? Read the title... Global Warming and Evolution

 

[Lagboltz]

I performed 2 regressions, the first using the log of Pop' vs. Year, and the second using the logs of both. The first of those regression provided the best r2 with 99.8%, though still lower than those from the earlier regressions at 100%. The first regression projected Milestone Years that were even more near-term than the earlier projections. The smoothed projections from the best earlier projections are used below for comparison to the single-Log projections.

8 Billion Reached in 2025 from earlier analyses, with the log projection being 2020
9 Billion Reached in 2038 from earlier analyses, with the log projection being 2028
10 Billion Reached in 2050 from earlier analyses, with the log projection being 2035
14 Billion (Doubling of Present) 2102 from earlier analyses, with the log projection being 2058!

Any way you look at this it looks bad. As for your comment that we need to "stop the exponential growth dead in its tracks", that can't be done with abortions and birth control alone! The world leaders will have to do away with a lot of people. It's only logical that they'd want the people unarmed when the time comes, and then surprise them!

Right, I wouldn't expect the using log of the year to give much of anything.

Maybe weapons of mass destruction will become popular. I would prefer Medicare death panels.

 

[Lagboltz]

Who hijacked this thread to talk about gun control? Read the title... Global Warming and Evolution

I haven't checked the facts, but my gut tells me it is Gippers fault.

 

[dogtowner]

Right, I wouldn't expect the using log of the year to give much of anything.

Maybe weapons of mass destruction will become popular. I would prefer Medicare death panels.

careful what you wish for Lag... just sayin

 

[Gipper]

Who hijacked this thread to talk about gun control? Read the title... Global Warming and Evolution

I said Biden has the right to press the matter, I didn't say he would actually make the regulations.

Don't be silly I know the statistics. You seem to be saying govment actions should be made on the basis of body counts. That's not true. It is often made on the basis of rage. A prime example is that the rage of 9/11 lead to an attack on Iraq which had nothing to do with 9/11. Compare the body count in 9/11 to the body count of the war that resulted. You guys may not like the way the rage has affected 2nd amendment weapons control. But many of us don't like the way rage has caused a useless Iraq war.

Okay...then please tell me how many Americans have been murdered by assault weapons.

 

[Gipper]

careful what you wish for Lag... just sayin

If I am to blame, sorry about that Hobo1.

Now Laggie...take note how a responsible person takes responsibility for one's actions?