安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文(繁体中文)
日本語(日语)
한국어(韩语)
ไทย(泰语)
български(保加利亚语)
Čeština(捷克语)
Dansk(丹麦语)
Deutsch(德语)
English(英语)
Español-España(西班牙语 - 西班牙)
Español - Latinoamérica(西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲)
Ελληνικά(希腊语)
Français(法语)
Italiano(意大利语)
Bahasa Indonesia(印度尼西亚语)
Magyar(匈牙利语)
Nederlands(荷兰语)
Norsk(挪威语)
Polski(波兰语)
Português(葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙)
Português-Brasil(葡萄牙语 - 巴西)
Română(罗马尼亚语)
Русский(俄语)
Suomi(芬兰语)
Svenska(瑞典语)
Türkçe(土耳其语)
Tiếng Việt(越南语)
Українська(乌克兰语)
报告翻译问题



As to the ultimate average standard of living, I have no idea.
That's not what the graph shows, at all.
It shows that sometime around the year 2100, the growth rate will be zero (somehow), but we'll have a population of over 10 billion people.
how about the cat population? will they still be alright?
i think they will be okay, cats are intelligent and resourceful. and small species of cats have some of the highest predation success rate of any animal on the planet. so good that they destroy entire populations of small critters in certain areas and have to move on to another one once the food supply dwindles.
I think if countries isolate themselves from population influx when they are in decline will recover within a couple generation on their own, and produce a more stable population overall.
There was a documentary about small scale evolution of lizards on a few rocky island in the Mediterranean, it was a stable population, they introduced a similar species on the island, they out bred the local population causing it to disappear. Continued breeding until the population collapsed, once it recovered, it stayed at a stable level.
What data is being cited?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nw_cdqQHGA8