Re: [HIST] IAS Population

On Fri, 5 Mar 1999, Thomas Barclay wrote:

> Thomas spake thusly upon matters weighty: 
> 
> As an aside, do we assume the England of today or the England of the 
> date the quote is made... hence suggesting a higher pop for Albion.

as john stated in a part of the post i snipped, there probably won't be
enormous population growth in the UK in the next 200 years. hmm. is that
right? let me check ...

well, an annual growth rate of 0.25% over 200 years yields a 65%
increases
in population. somehow, i doubt the UK population will continue to climb
like that, but i could be wrong.

(looking this up, i find the UN expects world population to reach 6
billion on 12 october this year; that's a little too precise, surely
...)

the UN predicts population growth in the industrialised nations will
fall
to zero by 2025. if the growth rate falls linearly until then, then ...
then it's a bloody integral, hang on ... no, i just get silly answers.
it's basically not much, though. something like a final population of
1.03
times the current population. i think.

the quote onion, just for completeness:

> > On Thu, 4 Mar 1999, John M. Atkinson wrote:
> > 
> > > Laserlight wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > >>I think there was something about "the largest off-Earth
population = 180
> > > > >>million" being in the published Word.
> > > > >
> > > > >I didn't realise that such a limit existed, sorry. By the way,
where was
> > > > > the word published
> > > > 
> > > > dunno.	John Atkinson posted it,
> > >
> > > There's a mention _somewhere_ of the point where Albion reaches
the same
> > > population as England.  Which is currently in the neighborhood of
160
> > > million
> > 
> > umm ... it's about 60 million; i assume that '1' was a typo. unless
the
> > whole spice babies effect has been quite a bit more significant than
i
> > thought :-).

Tom