Future Of The Human Race "Standing Room Only," Scientists Predict

Press, Volume C, Issue 29638, 7 October 1961, Page 8

Future Of The Human Race "Standing Room Only," Scientists Predict

[Speciaitv written for “The Press" bjl COUN S. L. KE AY, Physics Department, University of Canterbury] THE world’s population is increasing so x rapidly that before very long there will be standing room only, according to a forecast made in a recent scientific paper. Population studies have been made many times before, right back to the days of Malthus and even earlier, but few have had the startling impact of “Doomsday: Friday, November 13, A.D. 2026”—a paper by von Foerster, Mora and Amiot, which appeared in the journal “Science” late last year.

The three authors are scientists at the University of Illinois who undertook a detailed theoretical investigation of world population trends under the sponsorship of the American National Institute of Health. The success of their theory appears to be due to the inclusion of a hitherto unrecognised factor in the promotion of population growth: namely, that the increased mutual communication between the peoples of the world has led not only to a vast over-all increase in living standards, but. what is most important, an increase in the productivity factor (fertility minus mortality) of each individual. In other words, the continual improvements in science and technology should ensure that the population of the world will squeeze to death before starving to death. Very briefly, the variation in the individual productivity factor leads mathematically to a population growth curve which either flattens out or sky-rockets upward. If world living standards keep on rising, the growth curve must climb more steeply it is as simple as that.

Vindication Of Hypothesis Before looking for loopholes in the theory it is as well to examine how successfully it agrees with past history. By fitting their growth curve to world-population figures extending back to the time of Christ, von Foerster, Mora and Amiot found that the agreement was near perfect —• an encouraging vindication of their hypothesis. Having proved the correctness of

their growth curve for at least a hundred generations backwards in time, the three authors considered that an extrapolation into the future for three or four generations would not be unreasonable, even though they could see the result would be startling. The curve predicts, quite clearly, that there will be standing room only on our planet by the year 2028 A.D.

This sombre forecast cannot be entirely correct, for a variety of reasons, but it cannot be ignored. It is of vital importance to realise that the world population expansion is indeed explosive and that something drastic will need to be done about it well within the next 65 years. The gravity of the situation becomes more obvious if the steadily decreasing amount of living space per person is plotted on a graph as shown. We see that there is about 12 acres of the world’s land surface available for each man, woman and child alive today. Back at the time of Christ it worked out at around 338 acres per person. The rate of population increase is such that by the end of this century there will only be about five acres per person. These figures are, of course, averaged over the whole world: already in Japan the amount of living space is less than ona acre per person.

The Zero Line Following the Ijving-space graph on beyond 2000 A.D. we see that it strikes the zero line by the year 2026 A.D. This is absurd. but why? Although the graph has faithfully traced the course of human fecundity for two millenia, a hitherto unimportant factor will soon begin to take control and the graph will descend a little less steeply. This is because von Foerster, Mora and Amiot’s theory took no account of the fifteen-year to twenty-year delay between birth and reproduction, a delay which slightly postpones the Doomsday date. We have, however, been warned. Even the delayed Doomsday date is not very far away. Whatever the ultimate solution may be it is

not too early to examine the various possibilities. Von Foerster, Mora and Amiot conclude their population study by suggesting the obvious solution: birth-con-trol. They admit that worldwide birth-control would be extraordinarily difficult to establish: it would mean halving the present birthrate and imposing a rigorous state control over the size of families. A considerable loss in personal freedom would result and the religious difficulties. for examole, would be immense. We must, therefore, cast around and find out whether any other possibilities are open.

A Brave New World One school of thought believes that a nuclear catastrophe will be needed to solve the world population problem. They visualise a brave new world emerging, with the surviving one per cent, or so of humanity fprging an idyllic new civilisation upon the ruins of the old. Naturally, this Utopian concept is advocated only by those who feel sure of being included among the survivors. Clearly, there is the real danger of having no survivors thus solving the population problem by eliminating the population, Already much thought has been devoted to the possibility of a war of extinction in the near future. In such an event there are only two ways of preserving the human race: either a fully self-sus-taining colony must previously be established on the moon or one of the planets, or else some form of “Noah’s Ark” must be ready here on

earth. These intriguing ideas are discussed in a recent study entitled “The Social and Political Implications of the Ultimate Human Society, by D. M. Cole, a scientist working for the American General Electric Company. Effect Of Nuclear War “If an all-out nuclear war should be fought in, say, 1970,” according to Cole, “the survivors would emerge from their shelters to find themselves on an alien planet almost as inhospitable as the moon and perhaps even more inimical to life than Mars.” It is possible that completely sealed off underground colonies may retain their viability until the world can again foster life, but only if extensive research into the maintenance of closed ecological systems is started right now. Alternatively, underwater ?fcrks” could be built whi-h. not being as completely closed as their dry-land counterparts. would take advantage of the low radioactive pollution of the ocean compared with the land and atmosphere. Ideally such an Ark should have a population of several thousand people, plus plants and animals, but several smaller bases, similar to that shown, could help guarantee the survival of our race.

Returning to the problem of over-population it has been proposed that space emigration might save the situation. Certainly, as we move into the Space Age and ever larger rockets are being launched, it seems to be a tempting solution. Unfortunately, Sir Charles Darwin dashed any such hopes when he visited New Zealand a few years ago. He pointed out the vital fact that each and every day 80,000 people would need to be ferried away in order to keep the world population static. Obviously. then, space travel cannot hinder the population explosion: the remedy, if there is one. must be found here on earth. However, the story is quite different if the survival of the human race is the sole consideration The conquest of space offers the greatest hope of all for the ultimate advancement of humanity. Indeed it is possible that we may, when we master the spacj environment, be able to evolve a vastly improved human society. (To be Continued)