[IsThisObvious]

> We're already seeing the first stages.

Can you support this?

We're not seeing any mass deaths which are sufficient to even slow the population growth rate, and instead, seem to simply be seeing more statistically unlikely events as the population grows larger - which is what we would expect.

[smoyer]

There have been several articles posted here recently on the health of the oceans, specifically how the oxygen levels are decreasing leading to a decrease in sea-life (with the exception of species like jellyfish that thrive in that environment). While I'm sure the human race could survive as vegetarians, I think it's also important to protect the systems that convert CO2 back into oxygen ... we're still going to need to breath.

Of course, there's the whole global warming debate (which I won't get into) as well ... what effect will that have on plant-life and agriculture?

P.S. I like seafood, so I'd also prefer we manage to keep the oceans habitable.

[antris]

Of course, there's the whole global warming debate

It's not a debate, it's science.

[lutusp]

> Can you support this?

Of course. Just look at the number of people who are on the brink of starvation:

http://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Learn/world%20hunger%20f...

Quote: "The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization estimates that nearly 870 million people of the 7.1 billion people in the world, or one in eight, were suffering from chronic undernourishment in 2010-2012. Almost all the hungry people, 852 million, live in developing countries, representing 15 percent of the population of developing counties. There are 16 million people undernourished in developed countries."

> We're not seeing any mass deaths which are sufficient to even slow the population growth rate ...

Not true, and in any case, that's not how an uncontrolled population expansion works -- such a process involves more mass death accompanied by more and more people surviving at the same time. The model is the Logistic function:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logistic_function

The curve is nearly flat on the left because there are too few organisms available to produce a higher growth rate.

The curve is nearly flat on the right because mass death prevents enough surviving organisms able to produce a higher growth rate.

Notice about the Logistic curve that the trend is always positive -- more people, but more death, at the same time. I emphasize that the Logistic curve is matched by any number of laboratory experiments -- it's more than a hypothesis about biology, including human biology.

[fedvasu]

I am pretty sure you are living in a first world. No I am not a political nutjob. I was born in and live in a 3rd world country, I have seen all the problems, Just type Indian food security bill in Google. I mean come on,it is not even funny how the situation is in south Asia.