the sky isn't falling, and it probably won't, ever - at least, not on population grounds.
Loudmouth,
The sky will stay where it is but the ground will be soacked with so much filth that everyone will wish the sky would fall.

Indy you always make me smile and feel happy, see you make me proud I think nothing like you do mate, yet if we knew each other we may well be that, mates, I have mates who HATE my politics, who vote one notion, this morning however, like it or not, a symptom of the state of this world is on display, a boat with over six hundred refugees has docked after two country's refused it entry, while in Germany the leadership is under threat over her position on refugees, like it or not we will see very much more such issues as this refugee issue is about to grow.

Canem Malum,
"Answer- "Replacement Levels" are a moving target if less deaths occur births need to be revised down."
Perhaps I should clarify: I meant long term replacement levels, not instantaneous replacement levels.

"Basically you can't aim for a certain birth rate and then say it's not our fault due to the increasing life span."
You seem to be assuming that any population rise is a bad thing. I reckon that's a stupid attitude.

The fact remains that human population is not rising exponentially. Birth rates have even fallen below long term replacement levels, though a short term increase in population is still occurring because people are living longer.

Hi Aidan,

Yeah, even Australian Indigenous birth-rates could be much, much lower than generally assumed. I was looking at all the Censuses going back to 1971 (that's ten of them) and it struck me (I really am a slow learner) that the population rose from one Census to the next by more , or about as much as all the birth in the ensuing five years - i.e. no mortality. Indigenous mortality is notorious for its prevalence< i've been to perhaps a couple of hundred Aboriginal funerals.

Then (dumb-dumb) I noticed that age-cohorts seemed to grow in number from one census to the next - i.e. the number of people born in the same five-year period rose from one Census to the next, and the next. Impossible, without some re-identification, people coming 'back in'. When I adjusted the figures going backwards to earlier and earlier Censuses, i.e. added an estimated figure for mortality, I was amazed that the figure, say, for 1971 wasn't really 107,000 but more like 350,000.

Now you can either adjust the figures going forwards, i.e. deduct for estimated mortality, or do the reverse. Either way, what was striking was the very slow growth in the numbers of 0-4 (i.e. babies being born during a five-year Census period. I estimated that the annual birth-rate increase was well below 1 %, perhaps even 0.0 %, while morons (even in the ABS, who should know better) keep flapping their lips about how the Indigenous population is rising at 4 % p.a.

As well, populations in remote areas are inexorably declining. One community where I lived once had 150 people and now has one family: the bloke there calls himself Mayor. Another community has a third of the population that it had twenty years ago. NT's population share of all Indigenous people declines 1-2 % from one Census to the next. Population rise is a mixed bag.

Joe

Even if humans were to decide to adopt a cave dweller (gee, PC rubbed off on me) existence, could anyone imagine their surrounds without waste & water treatment facilities ?
Imagine the state of the environment with 8 billion cave men & their broods ?
Just imagine taking all people living above the first floor & find them accommodation at ground level ? The available land mass has shrunk suddenly to a frightening small area, eh ?
This what doesn't even enter the thoghts of those who believe we can easily add another few billion humans to the present number. The real question to which no-one seems to want to suggest a solution is, what quality of existence would the enterprising humans let themselves be reduced to just we can have more people on the plant ? What new low level of poverty would the poor be ageeable to ? I would love to get some suggestions on solutions to these scenario.
Call me what you like & see fit but for me it's population control asap or stop free aid.

//but for me it's population control asap or stop free aid.//

They're not mutually exclusive, and given what we know about the link between economic development and birth rates, I would argue that free aid is the best form of population control.