Wisdom is, so, simple!

Even though in the media they keep harping on about how the world will have to be able to deal with a much larger population in years to come we have been experiencing the most rapid decline in global population growth ever.
It isn't like that in all places, as in Sub-Saharan Africa. There the population is expected to double by 2050 and possibly quadruple by 2100.

By 2020 the relative population growth worldwide is in line to be just 1%, and if it follows this pattern it will be down to 0.5% in 2050.

If the video was an analogy to Earth's population, which it seems to be given the planet being used as an image then our growth is not exponential. A growth of 0.5% in population is what we had in the 17th and 18th centuries.

#2 0.5% population growth does not sound like much, but it still means a doubling in 139 years, a time some of our grandchildren will live to see. The more serious issue is that low growth figures depend on economical prosperity, which in our current system itself relies on constant growth. With an economic growth of 2%, which is a typical figure in successful economies, this is an increase by the factor 16 by then and we are using up ressources beyond sustainability already now.
If economical growth declines again, which it inevitably will, birth rates will go up again and we will have a positive feedback loop. We should really have a plan for that.

#3 If this planet goes another 139 years at the present rate of stupidity with tensions in the middle east, religious wars and some twat getting their dirty finger on the button of a nuclear missile. I for one, who won't be here to see it, will however be very surprised. In fact I'm thinking of leaving a sealed envelope with a banking group to be opened in 139 years time on a Friday. inside will be a picture of me looking very surprised, which I'm not expecting anyone to see.

I don't think 10 or even 100 billion people would be such a massive problem for the planet, so those 0,5% or 2-3% growth in population may be the underlying problem, but the one that will only affect us indirectly. At what pace are we consuming resources? And there you have a much higher rate and a much smaller bottle.

#3 You are taking that 0.5% figure for population growth in 2050 and using that as a projection for the next 139 years. Yet I wrote that from 2020 with a 1% growth increase, it will have dropped to 0.5% in 30 years. See the problem with that?

The Earth's resources are being over-exploited by a small proportion of the population. It is consumerism that is the greater threat, and not the actual population.
The US outstrips all others in this category.

“With less than 5 percent of world population, the U.S. uses one-third of the world’s paper, a quarter of the world’s oil, 23 percent of the coal, 27 percent of the aluminum, and 19 percent of the copper,” he reports. “Our per capita use of energy, metals, minerals, forest products, fish, grains, meat, and even fresh water dwarfs that of people living in the developing world.”

The fossil fuel consumption of the average American is double that of the average Briton. It is 2.5 times that of the average Japanese. With only 5% of the population it produces half of the solid waste of the whole world.

So the planet would be soon doomed if this profligacy was to become a worldwide pattern. But this pattern was laid before we truly understood how we were pushing up against the limits of what the planet can support. Even granted the climate-change deniers, the understanding that we need to act in a more sustainable manner is being acted upon.

Again though, I will restate my original point which has been ignored. The analogy between the exponential growth of bacteria and the population growth of humans is a false analogy. Human growth is not exponential.