End of the World Prediction: Why a 1960 Scientific Paper Named 13 November 2026 as Doomsday

A scientific paper published in 1960 named Friday, 13 November 2026, as the point when humanity's population could reach a mathematical 'doomsday'. It did not predict Earth's destruction. The calculation relied on a global trend that has since changed.

The paper, Doomsday: Friday, 13 November, A.D. 2026, appeared in Science on 4 November 1960. Its authors, Heinz von Foerster, Patricia M. Mora and Lawrence W. Amiot, used 24 population estimates spanning 2,000 years.

The researchers estimated a population-growth singularity at 2026.87, plus or minus 5.50 years. The decimal 0.87 places it in mid-November, around the date named in the paper. It was never a certain extinction deadline.

The date also coincided with von Foerster's birthday on 13 November 1911. IFLScience suggested the Friday-the-13th framing was likely a joke, not a scientific choice. The original paper does not explicitly establish this as the authors' reason for selecting the date.

What the 1960 Paper Actually Predicted

The researchers argued population growth could accelerate because people cooperate and develop technologies that increase productivity and help societies overcome environmental limits.

In their model, a larger population could support further growth, producing a positive feedback loop. If continued indefinitely, the mathematical curve would approach infinity.

The authors warned unchecked growth could strain resources. They wrote: 'Our great-great-grandchildren will not starve. They will be squeezed to death'. They proposed halving the global birth rate.

Why the Prediction Appeared Convincing for Decades

The paper attracted attention and criticism from mathematicians and demographers. The authors defended their approach. It was cited in textbooks and public discussions, while projections remained close to observed figures through much of the 1970s and 1980s.

The annual global population growth rate peaked at approximately 2.3% in 1963, three years after the paper appeared. The world's total population continued increasing, but its annual growth rate began declining. By around 1993, actual population had started falling behind the model's projections. Growth had therefore slowed decades before the projections diverged from reality.

What Changed in Global Population Growth

The model's assumptions no longer describe modern demographic trends. Fertility fell as contraception became more accessible, women's education and employment expanded, urbanisation increased and family choices changed.

Population growth also reflects mortality. Better healthcare, sanitation, nutrition and child survival meant more people lived longer, contributing to earlier increases. As fertility declined and mortality improvements slowed, population growth also eased. The global birth rate is now less than half its 1960 level, according to historian Alan MacEachern's October 2026 analysis in The Conversation, republished by ScienceDaily.

The UN's World Population Prospects 2024 estimates the world had 8.2 billion people in 2024. It projects a peak of about 10.3 billion in the mid-2080s, followed by a slight decline by 2100. This is continued growth, not the runaway trajectory assumed by the 1960 model.

Does the Date Mean the End of Humanity?

GMA Network's Dami Mong Alam, Kuya Kim programme revisited the prediction, explaining that a mathematical singularity is not a physical event. The date extends a historical growth curve under specific assumptions; it is not evidence of an approaching apocalypse.

The paper remains a warning about population pressure. But its famous date is not a scientifically established doomsday: the model's central assumption no longer matches how the world's population is growing.