|Inversion of the
Since 1963 the global population growth rate has been STEADILY declining. This is not due
to government programs as sociologists and demographers allege. This is the result of people
migrating from the country to the cities. In the cities:
1. DDBR sets in.
2. The culture changes as it adapts to the Service and Unemployment Economic System.
3. Humans live longer and have fewer children.
The result is that the Population Pyramid Overturns. Man has no antidote to this phenomenon.
History of Global Population
Man is an old species
There can be no doubt that all individuals eventually age and die. It is also pretty much established that
entire species, orders and families of plants and animals have died throughout the history of life on Earth.
One number that is often kicked around is that over 99% of the species of animals that ever lived are no
longer with us. That number is pretty close to what just about anyone would call a 'law of life'. The million
dollar question is whether a species can age. Can interbreeding beings such as the Neanderthals grow
old as a group? Can an entire population age?
One way to approach this question is to look at the species we have the most data for: our own. Is Man
an old species or a young one? Does it even make sense to ask the question? Does it make sense to ask
whether our species is old?
Given no choice, most people would probably answer that we are a young species. If the paleontologists,
biologists, geneticists and related fields have it correct, anatomically modern humans have been around
for only about 200,000 years. In comparison, T-Rex is said to have lived for at least 2 million years and
Dimetrodon for 20 million years. Matched against them we seem to be but babies just crawling out of the
cradle. We have eons ahead of us.
On second thought, perhaps Mother Nature counts birthday candles in a different way. Maybe she doesn't
look at how many times the Earth goes around the Sun. Maybe she looks at the average age of the
population and compares this to the average life expectancy of that species. It is not the same for 10
individuals to have an average of 70 years on a life expectancy of 80 than for the same group to have an
average of 20 years. Clearly, the 70-year group is older than the 20-year group. This has a bearing,
among other things, on whether the group has a chance of reproducing. If we find a colony of 100 humans
on an island and the youngest member is 65, we can be absolutely certain that the colony will end in
extinction. Therefore, the average age of a population in relation to the life expectancy of that species is a
crucial parameter in determining if the species is old. The reproduction rate of the species goes down
drastically with every 50% increase in the average age of the population.
There are a couple of loopholes to this argument and they have to do with how species are manufactured
by Mother Nature. We won't deal with all the possibilities here. We'll just briefly look at the most obvious.
A species is born in isolation from the parent branch. We can be pretty sure that given enough generations
the fledgling colonists will end up being a different species than the one that gave them origin.
Unfortunately, we can't apply this 'rule' to humans because we are the last hominins and we are now
sedentary. We have no other cousins to exchange genes with and we no longer find regions of the planet
where humans can evolve in isolation from the mother group under conditions that require us to
mutate. The age of exploration and colonization is over. For those who missed it, it happened 500 years
ago! We have now conquered every squared centimeter on Earth. We wear heavy coats in Antarctica and
barely anything in the Caribbean. No one needs to develop alligator skin or three ears because of his
environment. Humans will never again change in any meaningful way. We are the perfect (and final)
specimens of our species: the beautiful ones. Man won't evolve into anything in what little time remains for
us on our clock.
This leaves us with the reality tha