There's a chance these scientists actually know what they're talking about, maybe we shouldn't be so swift to dismiss them

My solution: more corn subsidies! Right, guys? Guys?

DammitIForgotMyLogin: There's a chance these scientists actually know what they're talking about, maybe we shouldn't be so swift to dismiss them

LOL Joke fail.

I keep having "Food of the Gods" flashbacks. I'm not sure why...

doglover: DammitIForgotMyLogin: There's a chance these scientists actually know what they're talking about, maybe we shouldn't be so swift to dismiss them

LOL Joke fail.

How so?

DammitIForgotMyLogin: How so?

yay literacy

yogaFLAME: DammitIForgotMyLogin: How so?

yay literacy

Yay for actually reading my comment.

DammitIForgotMyLogin: There's a chance these scientists actually know what they're talking about, maybe we shouldn't be so swift to dismiss them

DammitIForgotMyLogin: swift

touché salesman. touché.

yogaFLAME: My solution: more corn subsidies! Right, guys? Guys?

YOU SHUDDUP ABOUT CORN, CORN HATER

yogaFLAME: My solution: more corn subsidies! Right, guys? Guys?

I want hookers and blow subsidies. Sure, it won't help anything, but at least when the world ends I'll die much happier than I would've otherwise been.

DammitIForgotMyLogin: yogaFLAME: DammitIForgotMyLogin: How so?

yay literacy

Yay for actually reading my comment.

DammitIForgotMyLogin: There's a chance these scientists actually know what they're talking about, maybe we shouldn't be so swift to dismiss them

LOL mybad!

Increasing food production is only a temporary solution. Looks at the Green Revolution, it fed millions and created vast food surpluses...... until populations grew.

DammitIForgotMyLogin: There's a chance these scientists actually know what they're talking about, maybe we shouldn't be so swift to dismiss them

But you know these scientists: they'll develop a better egg and we'll start fighting over whether we should break it at the big end or the small end.

/Maybe a Pope should decide.

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: But you know these scientists: they'll develop a better egg and we'll start fighting over whether we should break it at the big end or the small end.

Well, that's science. It's not all sweetness and light.

yogaFLAME: My solution: more corn subsidies! Right, guys? Guys?

TFA: The yields of new varieties of maize are climbing twice as fast as yields of rice and wheat. This is because maize is bred mainly by private companies, which invest $1.5 billion a year in it. Wheat and rice breeding, by contrast, is done mostly in government labs.

Or maybe not.

how can they enjoy food if they have no healthcare?

Ending world hunger is impossible. the goal posts are not fixed.

You increase the food supply so 6.5billion people can live comfortably and not be hungry and the population WILL grow to 7billion - 500million hungry


i don't worry about world hunger, it is impossible to solve. I worry about hunger in the united states - let other countries worry about their own over population problems.

One wonders if feeding 9 billion people is possible at all.

Topsoil loss. (new window)

canyoneer: One wonders if feeding 9 billion people is possible at all.

Topsoil loss. (new window)

we shouldn't even try.


hey peolpe.. STOP HAVING TEN farkING KIDS.

Kudos, A Modest Proposal by Swift was one of my favorite reads over the course of my education. Satire is a wonderful thing when properly executed.

/+1 for subby

I wonder if the article will suggest increased birth control and population control anywhere? Maybe addressing the fact that it is unrealistic for both our population and food productiong to keep rising in perpetuity and that at some point we won't be able to produce more just because there are more people and maybe we should start addressing the actual problem, overpopulation, rather than just a symptoms, e.g. starvation.

*reads article*

Nope... didn't think so.

/they should just eat their babies, that would surely assist in the problem of hunger AND over population.
//It's quite the modest proposal.

As regards #2: There was an interesting article in Scientific American a while back where some guy was arguing for developing perennial versions of corn, wheat and rice. You would only need to sow every few years, harvesting every season for as long as the plants would produce. Perennial staple grains would stabilize the soil with denser root mats, sequester carbon, and smother weeds once established.

theorellior: As regards #2: There was an interesting article in Scientific American a while back where some guy was arguing for developing perennial versions of corn, wheat and rice. You would only need to sow every few years, harvesting every season for as long as the plants would produce. Perennial staple grains would stabilize the soil with denser root mats, sequester carbon, and smother weeds once established.

that is actually a good idea. but i don't see how they would manage it plant genetics wise

Just let the weak ones dies off. Then let the new weak ones die off. Lather, rinse, repeat.

As far as topsoil loss goes and saying that in the future we can't feed everyone, I don't think that's totally true.

With hydroponics and vertical farming, you can grow shiat in a lot of places you couldn't before, and that will only become easier and unless we change other shiat, more required technology to be looked into.

Sure, it'd be expensive, but maybe we as the world can someday pony up the twenty billion a year to y'know, try and end hunger, as opposed to the hundreds of billions we Americans spend alone on blowing up rocks and funerals and huts and a couple terrorists per dozen innocent people every year.

Reading this article however does make me think that it'll just let Monsanto own Africa by the end of it all though....

Swift move, Subby!

npt:

Reading this article however does make me think that it'll just let Monsanto own Africa by the end of it all though....

Monsanto will be a wholly owned arm of the PRC.

canyoneer: One wonders if feeding 9 billion people is possible at all.

Topsoil loss. (new window)

One of the biggest losses of topsoil is pavement. We have settled on the most productive farmland, and now urban sprawl pushed lesser farmland out of production.

Was it just me, or was improving distribution methods no where on that list.

None of that will help if you don't get the food to the people that need it.

The only real solution is to stop population growth. The rest are just kicking the can down the road a short distance.

Granted, feeding a population of 12 billion might be possible, but why would we want to? Can anyone give a reason the would would be better for having that many people? Making as many humans as possible is an arbitrary goal, and likely dangerous. If they are wrong, there will be mass starvation, disease, unemployment, and social unrest. If we shrink our population and I end up being wrong there will be... plenty of boats and big houses and cars and food to go around for everyone.

i noticed none of the solutions involved "have less babies"

Dorf11: canyoneer: One wonders if feeding 9 billion people is possible at all.

Topsoil loss. (new window)

One of the biggest losses of topsoil is pavement. We have settled on the most productive farmland, and now urban sprawl pushed lesser farmland out of production.

People want to live where it's nice with a pretty view. My mom remembers when they tore down all the orange tree orchards in Orange County. I fail to understand why we need to put houses and malls and highways over the most arable land and then try to grow tomatoes and lettuce out in the goddamn desert.

Kazan: theorellior: As regards #2: There was an interesting article in Scientific American a while back where some guy was arguing for developing perennial versions of corn, wheat and rice. You would only need to sow every few years, harvesting every season for as long as the plants would produce. Perennial staple grains would stabilize the soil with denser root mats, sequester carbon, and smother weeds once established.

that is actually a good idea. but i don't see how they would manage it plant genetics wise

Me neither, but then again I didn't foresee the glowing pig phenomenon either.

Kazan: Ending world hunger is impossible. the goal posts are not fixed.

You increase the food supply so 6.5billion people can live comfortably and not be hungry and the population WILL grow to 7billion - 500million hungry


i don't worry about world hunger, it is impossible to solve. I worry about hunger in the united states - let other countries worry about their own over population problems.

I recall seeing some recent analyses showing that population growth is actually starting to level off.

And I can't find it again, maybe someone here can but I came across a website awhile ago that had lectures (it wasn't TED) by people explaining concepts that showed really fancy graphs as they explained it. I watched one on population growth tracked by country and it showed what coincided with what in terms of reducing population growth in those countries. I think most were social factors but basically as food production and social programs increased population growth leveled off.

One of the reasons why people have a lot of kids in Africa is to support the family and because of high infant mortality. You reduce those, reduce hunger, increase education, etc and population growth will look after itself.

Approves.

/Baby back ribs...
//hawt

7of7: The only real solution is to stop population growth. The rest are just kicking the can down the road a short distance.

Exactly. The problem is, this issue is nowhere near the radars of middle America. It is frustrating as hell. Washington is controlled by corporate money, and corporations are pretty much the only entities who benefit from overpopulation. They want to see a world with 30% unemployment, where people are begging to work skilled jobs for minimum wage. Ergo, they have created a climate where the issue cannot even be breached.

Could you imagine if a Presidential candidate ran on a platform of lowering population? He would immediately be decried as a Nazi, no matter how logically sound his defense was. Even just suggesting that we should end tax deductions after the second child would be enough to end any politician's career in this country.

It is nice to see some grass root support on Fark, though. Eventually the farking baby boomers will die off and the rest of us who actually care about sustainability issues will be able to get some real shiat done.

entropic_existance

population size is capped by food availability. so if it's leveling off that means we're reaching a level of "world hunger" sufficient to stop population growth.

the idea that better health will cause reduced birthrate is ridiculous. look at how many people here in the states have umpteen kids.

meat0918: Was it just me, or was improving distribution methods no where on that list.

None of that will help if you don't get the food to the people that need it.

It was mentioned in the article. They talked about how in Nigeria they increased cassava production in the south but all of the trucking business was in the north. They needed to work on distribution as well as production.

7of7: The only real solution is to stop population growth. The rest are just kicking the can down the road a short distance.

Not if you actually look at the population growth data. Making poor countries more prosperous and self sufficient in terms of food production will lead to all sorts of spin-off social benefits and a decrease in population growth. If you don't have kids starving to death in famines you don't need to have as many kids to ensure that enough survive to adulthood to look after you in your old age.

Savoir-Faire: Kazan: theorellior: As regards #2: There was an interesting article in Scientific American a while back where some guy was arguing for developing perennial versions of corn, wheat and rice. You would only need to sow every few years, harvesting every season for as long as the plants would produce. Perennial staple grains would stabilize the soil with denser root mats, sequester carbon, and smother weeds once established.

that is actually a good idea. but i don't see how they would manage it plant genetics wise

Me neither, but then again I didn't foresee the glowing pig phenomenon either.

Anything is possible, although that one seems more complicated than manipulating their metabolic networks, which is an impressive feat by itself. You would need to alter their entire reproductive system, the problem being that it is the reproductive system they have now that makes them so good as staple food sources.

scout48: Kudos, A Modest Proposal by Swift was one of my favorite reads over the course of my education. Satire is a wonderful thing when properly executed.

/+1 for subby

Wait... that was supposed to be satire?

Kazan: population size is capped by food availability. so if it's leveling off that means we're reaching a level of "world hunger" sufficient to stop population growth.

the idea that better health will cause reduced birthrate is ridiculous. look at how many people here in the states have umpteen kids.

It isn't ridiculous when you look at the actual data. Its countries without hunger problems, that are wealthier and self-sufficient, high average education, etc that have reduced birth-rates. Sub groups with larger than average families in these countries, like in the US, are just that, small minority sub groups. In general these countries have all experienced radical reductions in population growth over the last 60 years.

It's a planet, not a clown car.

I like Sarah Silverman's "Sell the Vatican - Feed the World" proposal.

entropic_existence: It isn't ridiculous when you look at the actual data. Its countries without hunger problems, that are wealthier and self-sufficient, high average education, etc that have reduced birth-rates.

I think it is highly correlates with education of women.

Found it. It's on the website Gapminder which is based on the principle of using good statistics to inform ourselves. Here's the one on population growth and access to health care:

What stops population growth?

If Africa went from this:



to this:


they could feed the world.

LouDobbsAwaaaay: I think it is highly correlates with education of women.

Yes, that is definitely one of the larger factors. Apparently access to good health care and decreases in child mortality is the biggest factor but yes, education of women is huge. Its also hard to separate since the two tend to go hand in hand.

FunkOut: I fail to understand why we need to put houses and malls and highways over the most arable land and then try to grow tomatoes and lettuce out in the goddamn desert.

BECAUSE I WANNA DRIVE FIVE MINNITS TO THE NEAREST APPLEBEES YOU COMMIE FACIST SOCIALIST.