What's new

600 years ago, you had over 1 billion ancestors.

Hash Zeppelin

Ski Bum Rodeo Clown
Premium user
ICMag Donor
Veteran
We breed like rabbits and devour like locusts.

http://www.prb.org/articles/2002/howmanypeoplehaveeverlivedonearth.aspx

This semi-scientific approach yields an estimate of about 108 billion births since the dawn of the human race.

How Many People Have Ever Lived on Earth?

"How Many People Have Ever Lived on Earth?" is one of PRB's most popular articles. First published in 1995 and updated in 2002, this latest 2011 article includes data through mid-2011 and a short video explaining the estimate.

by Carl Haub

(October 2011) The question of how many people have ever lived on Earth is a perennial one among information calls to PRB. One reason the question keeps coming up is that somewhere, at some time back in the 1970s, a writer made the statement that 75 percent of the people who had ever been born were alive at that moment.

This factoid has had a long shelf life, even though a bit of reflection would show how unlikely it is. For this "estimate" to be true would mean either that births in the 20th century far, far outnumbered those in the past or that there were an extraordinary number of extremely old people living in the 1970s.


If this estimate were true, it would indeed make an impressive case for the rapid pace of population growth in this century. But if we judge the idea that three-fourths of people who ever lived are alive today to be a ridiculous statement, have demographers come up with a better estimate?

Any such exercise can be only a highly speculative enterprise, to be undertaken with far less seriousness than most demographic inquiries. Nonetheless, it is a somewhat intriguing idea that can be approached on at least a semi-scientific basis.

And semi-scientific it must be, because there are, of course, absolutely no demographic data available for 99 percent of the span of the human stay on Earth. Still, with some speculation concerning prehistoric populations, we can at least approach a guesstimate of this elusive number.

How Many People Have Ever Lived On Earth? 108 Billion

Year Population Births per 1,000 Births Between Benchmarks
50,000 B.C. 2 - -
8000 B.C. 5,000,000 80 1,137,789,769
1 A.D. 300,000,000 80 46,025,332,354
1200 450,000,000 60 26,591,343,000
1650 500,000,000 60 12,782,002,453
1750 795,000,000 50 3,171,931,513
1850 1,265,000,000 40 4,046,240,009
1900 1,656,000,000 40 2,900,237,856
1950 2,516,000,000 31-38 3,390,198,215
1995 5,760,000,000 31 5,427,305,000
2011 6,215,000,000 23 2,130,327,622
NUMBER WHO HAVE EVER BEEN BORN 107,602,707,791
World population in mid-2011 6,987,000,000
Percent of those ever born who are living in 2011 6.5
Source: Population Reference Bureau estimates.

Prehistory and History

Any estimate of the total number of people who have ever been born will depend basically on two factors: the length of time humans are thought to have been on Earth and the average size of the human population at different periods.

Fixing a time when the human race actually came into existence is not a straightforward matter. Various ancestors of Homo sapiens seem to have appeared at least as early as 700,000 B.C. Hominids walked the Earth as early as several million years ago. According to the United Nations Determinants and Consequences of Population Trends, modern Homo sapiens may have appeared about 50,000 B.C. This long period of 50,000 years holds the key to the question of how many people have ever been born.

At the dawn of agriculture, about 8000 B.C., the population of the world was somewhere on the order of 5 million. (Very rough figures are given in the table; these are averages of an estimate of ranges given by the United Nations and other sources.) The slow growth of population over the 8,000-year period, from an estimated 5 million to 300 million in 1 A.D., results in a very low growth rate—only 0.0512 percent per year. It is difficult to come up with an average world population size over this period. In all likelihood, human populations in different regions grew or declined in response to famines, the vagaries of animal herds, hostilities, and changing weather and climatic conditions.

In any case, life was short. Life expectancy at birth probably averaged only about 10 years for most of human history. Estimates of average life expectancy in Iron Age France have been put at only 10 or 12 years. Under these conditions, the birth rate would have to be about 80 per 1,000 people just for the species to survive. Today, a high birth rate would be about 45 to 50 per 1,000 population, observed in only a few countries of Africa and in several Middle Eastern countries that have young populations.

Our birth rate assumption will greatly affect the estimate of the number of people ever born. Infant mortality in the human race's earliest days is thought to have been very high—perhaps 500 infant deaths per 1,000 births, or even higher. Children were probably an economic liability among hunter-gatherer societies, a fact that is likely to have led to the practice of infanticide. Under these circumstances, a disproportionately large number of births would be required to maintain population growth, and that would raise our estimated number of the "ever born."

By 1 A.D., the world may have held about 300 million people. One estimate of the population of the Roman Empire, from Spain to Asia Minor, in 14 A.D., is 45 million. However, other historians set the figure twice as high, suggesting how imprecise population estimates of early historical periods can be.

By 1650, world population rose to about 500 million, not a large increase over the 1 A.D. estimate. The average annual rate of growth was actually lower from 1 A.D. to 1650 than the rate suggested above for the 8000 B.C. to 1 A.D. period. One reason for this abnormally slow growth was the Black Death. This dreaded plague was not limited to 14th-century Europe. The epidemic may have begun about 542 A.D. in western Asia, spreading from there. It is believed that half the Byzantine Empire was destroyed in the 6th century, a total of 100 million deaths. Such large fluctuations in population size over long periods greatly compound the difficulty of estimating the number of people who have ever lived.

By 1800, however, world population had passed the 1 billion mark, and it has continued to grow since then to the current 7 billion.

Guesstimates

Guesstimating the number of people ever born, then, requires selecting population sizes for different points from antiquity to the present and applying assumed birth rates to each period. We start at the very, very beginning—with just two people (a minimalist approach!).

One complicating factor is the pattern of population growth. Did it rise to some level and then fluctuate wildly in response to famines and changes in climate? Or did it grow at a constant rate from one point to another? We cannot know the answers to these questions, although paleontologists have produced a variety of theories. For the purposes of this exercise, it was assumed that a constant growth rate applied to each period up to modern times. Birth rates were set at 80 per 1,000 per year through 1 A.D. and at 60 per 1,000 from 2 A.D. to 1750. Rates then declined to the low 30s by the modern period.

This semi-scientific approach yields an estimate of about 108 billion births since the dawn of the human race. Clearly, the period 8000 B.C. to 1 A.D. is key to the magnitude of our number, but, unfortunately, little is known about that era. Some readers may disagree with some aspects—or perhaps nearly all aspects—of the table, but at least it offers one approach to this elusive issue. If we were to make any guess at all, it might be that our method underestimates the number of births to some degree. The assumption of constant population growth in the earlier period may underestimate the average population size at the time. And, of course, pushing the date of humanity's arrival on the planet before 50,000 B.C. would also raise the number, although perhaps not by terribly much.

So, our estimate here is that about 6.5 percent of all people ever born are alive today. That's actually a fairly large percentage when you think about it.
 

Anti

Sorcerer's Apprentice
Veteran
Try it the other way. Start with a breeding pair like Adam and Eve and after 30 generations there will be 1 billion descendants.

Well, it would certainly not take 30 generations to get to a billion if the females were capable of being impregnated and carrying the child to term more than once in a lifetime. It would also depend on the ratio of females to males being born. (A handful of male children could impregnate thousands of their sisters, cousins, daughters and mothers.)

If you just do the simple math, it is possible for one breeding pair of anything to produce a billion living offspring within a determinable number of generations.

You have misunderstood what I was saying. I probably wasn't being clear, my bad. What I was saying is it DOES take 30 generations counting backwards from 1 to reach one billion. But it would NOT necessarily take 30 generations to reach one billion unless each woman only gave birth to one child and 2/3 were born female.

It would get to one billion a whole lot sooner than 30 generations if each woman of each generation was having multiple children who all had multiple children.

I was not arguing that you could not reach one billion by simply doubling the population every generation, because clearly, you can.

Also given enough time, the DNA from a single breeding pair or an individual can be spread amongst a billion living descendants. It's possible for everyone on earth to be related to a single breeding pair.

So far the genes that are identifiably homo sapiens can be traced to a single individual in Africa a very long time ago. Eve has been found.

I'll have to find the article and post it...

http://www.cartage.org.lb/en/themes...nGeneticEvolution/EarlyModern/EarlyModern.htm

Ok. This is from your link:
Geneticists at the University of Californiahave arguedthat the geographic region in which modern people have lived the longest should have the greatest amount of genetic diversity. They base this on the premise that the rate of mutation is more or less constant everywhere. Through comparisons of mitochondrial DNA from living people throughout the world, it was concluded that Africa has the greatest genetic diversity and therefore must be the homeland of all Homo sapiens sapiens. Assuming a specific rate of mutation, it was suggested that the common ancestor of modern humans was a woman living 200,000-100,000 years ago. She has been dubbed "mitochondrial Eve."

(bold and emphasis mine) - .\nti

So what they really say is that, if they assume a specific rate of mutation they can more or less pinpoint the area that all modern humans migrated from. And I don't argue with any of this.

What I'm saying is there was never a Homo Erectus mama who gave birth to a Neanderthal. Everybody is the same species as their parents.

human-evolution.jpg


But a species is simply the point at which mutual divergence, variation and mutation have made two breeding populations that come from the same ancestral stock incapable of interbreeding (because of barriers like geological separation, adaptation to local climates and environments, etc.) It's a word constructed for humans to use when they want to discuss the differences between animals and to help classify knowledge.

We are still 96% identical to chimpanzees. This does not mean that in the past, we were chimpanzees, it means that our ancestors were something that was neither a chimp or a human and at some point, its populations were separated for a long enough interval that their dna diverged enough to make them a separate species from both each other AND their parent species.

It is estimated that the common ancestor of humans and chimps lived somewhere between 4-6 million years ago. So you have four million years of babies being born to two groups that slowly adapted to their environments in different ways. After four million years, you bring them back together and you get:

chimp_baby_film1.jpg
 
Last edited:
T

texsativa

That is good thinking Anti, finally I have read something about evolution to be true. So oftentimes people do not understand the whole chimpanzee human evolution. Chimpanzees did not evolve to humans as chimpanzees are still alive and well. But we humans do have that common ancestor...that something or other that happened when we broke off and formed our own branch of the tree of life.

First came the universe, then the small creatures, then the humans. It's fascinating.
 

FirstTracks

natural medicator
Veteran
Interesting thing about the mutation data pointing towards Africa is that the conclusions are most likely based on evidence available presently, whether living, not living, fossilized, or abstractions of data.

What the data may not account for are evidences that have been lost over the years. Lots of 'what ifs' such as 'are there millions of members of other species who left the earth at some point' or 'could there be vast amounts of humanoid life living below the surface of the earth or under the oceans where we have just not discovered them?' , similar in nature to all the species of animals and insects we have yet to discover in remote regions such as rain forests and ocean trenches.

What about the whole theory of 'Eve' being the first woman who had wide enough hips to successfully birth a homosapien baby who's head was larger in volume than its ancestors?

It seems the above article also discussed this briefly, but natural disasters, plagues, and great wars most likely also influenced the population sizes at any time.

And let's not forget....

9769338.jpg
 

southflorida

lives on planet 4:20
Veteran
:tiphat:we actually come from nothing...are nothing...and always and only can "be" nothing

oh...yes...and that stuff that can be called virtual reality...lol :)

is a very real looking thing...but it is not the truth...only an interpretation with a meaning and an emotional charge to give you an emotional charge so that you know how to take the next step, and most important will give you the needed charge so that you can choose the "best" step to actually take
 

flubnutz

stoned agin ...
Veteran
i like how they now think that homo sapiens cross-bred with neanderthals, brings new meaning to the complaint from the family that they can't believe you married into that clan of neanderthals lol :)
 

MIway

Registered User
Veteran
..
i like how they now think that homo sapiens cross-bred with neanderthals, brings new meaning to the complaint from the family that they can't believe you married into that clan of neanderthals lol :)

Yeah... I enjoyed that tid bit as well. Something like 1-4% neanderthal genes in most people.. With the exception of pure blood Africans... 100% homo sapien. Rest of us have neanderthal in us. Wonder what the master race makes of that...? Lol

We some inbred neanderthal fuckers.
 

Goldy

Member
pretty sure i read somewhere that neanderthals had significantly larger skulls than modern day homo sapiens and yea that we likely interbred, before we started competing and we took over. and that we left africa and split off to different continents around 50-80,000 years ago which explains genetic differences today. genetics as a subject is so under-rated, just incredible.
 
S

SeaMaiden

There is new data suggesting also that Neandertals made art. I've been saying for years we're going to push back language to at least pre-Homo erectus, and feel that other very complex forms of communication must not be ruled out, and I'm going to go out on a very thin, long limb here and include intuition in that assertion.

I am going to fucking KILL that fucking fly. Oops. Killed the fly. And my cuppa. <rolleyes>
 

flubnutz

stoned agin ...
Veteran
neanderthals may have had less cranial capacity than homo sapiens, but i have this gut feeling that they knew how to make beer :)
 

Hash Zeppelin

Ski Bum Rodeo Clown
Premium user
ICMag Donor
Veteran
..

Yeah... I enjoyed that tid bit as well. Something like 1-4% neanderthal genes in most people.. With the exception of pure blood Africans... 100% homo sapien. Rest of us have neanderthal in us. Wonder what the master race makes of that...? Lol

We some inbred neanderthal fuckers.

this explains quite a bit about humans....... :D
 
S

SeaMaiden

Some years ago I knew an Aboriginal fellow from Oz who insisted he was a different species from the rest of us. Absolutely insisted. I figured, why not? And if so, what would be so wrong with that idea?
 

Grizz

Active member
Veteran
everything in the universe degresses and dies, we now have so many damn deseases , cancer, diabetis, heart diese so on and so on. if we evolved from some ape or whatever why arent we still seeing apes with more human looks, if there were half the desease back 1000 years ago man kind wouldent have survived, man has degressed and is a dying species. we my number in the billions but belive me the majority aint healthy
 

Goldy

Member
^just not at all correct sorry, throughout human evolution we have encountered tens of thousands of diseases, many thousands of viruses. As a whole we are far healthier than ever before - we now suffer frm problems that are due to different causes such as old age and overeating. things that until recently really didnt occur that much. Science has increased our livespans hugely. we now have a life expectancy of 70+ years. and arguably we look a fair bit like apes. very similar anatomicaly, enough that we test medicines on them to see how theyl effect humans.
 

Grizz

Active member
Veteran
yeah they test meds on rats and pigs to , your point is ? we only live longer due to meds and doctors that rip us off, as a species we are not better off . tecnology makes us think we are smarter, better but hell the mayans figured out shit we couldent do today without computers
 

FirstTracks

natural medicator
Veteran
Not sure if this is established theory or not, but its possible that humans were actually much more intelligent and had longer lifespans before our gene pool began degenerating. One idea is that, while there was basically a water curtain in our atmosphere shielding life on earth from radiation, life flourished, animals and humans lived longer lifespans, and the curtain created a perfect environment below it for sustaining life. As that curtain collapsed, either suddenly or over time, lifespans shortened and other negative effects ensued.

Our lifespans may be longer than people who lived in the middle ages, but I bet if you really went back a few thousand years, you'd see healthier, more intelligent versions of us.
 

Latest posts

Latest posts

Top