- #1
- 19,439
- 10,014
Can we afford to curb our use of global resources? Can we afford not to?
Does not the mountain need the snow?Originally posted by Greg Bernhardt
Can we afford to curb our use of global resources? Can we afford not to?
Originally posted by Andre
Yes Daniel Quinn has some valid ideas:
http://webseitz.fluxent.com/wiki/DanielQuinn
However if we need to grow food for all people, we need more carbon, since that is where living stuff is made off. We also need good high temperatures to grow crops fast. Would anybody have an idea how we could accomplish that?
Originally posted by Njorl That's the problem with being a doomsayer. If your good at it, people change their ways and make you look bad.
Njorl
Originally posted by Andre
Is this another Antropogenic Global Warming thread with emission control as the great solution?
Except, that's wrong. The hot summer recently has led to widespread crop damage with some countries losing as much as 60% of their wheat yield this year. Look up the Ukraine argicultural figures for 2003. In fact, all recent studies factoring in a combination of both factors have resulted in a dieback stage when temperature continues to rise.Originally posted by Andre
However if we need to grow food for all people, we need more carbon, since that is where living stuff is made off. We also need good high temperatures to grow crops fast. Would anybody have an idea how we could accomplish that?
Originally posted by Andre
Magick
You seem to have some good ideas. The problem is, do we know the problem? I think we do not
Originally posted by FZ+
Except, that's wrong. The hot summer recently has led to widespread crop damage with some countries losing as much as 60% of their wheat yield this year.
Originally posted by magick323
Maybe one problem is nearly 6.4 billion people and counting?
Sounds simple enough, let's get started. You replace our electric power generation capacity and I'll replace our cars. I'll let you when I'm finished.Originally posted by magick323
Instead of emissions 'control'...why not rethink industry?
Well that one at least is a piece of cake - I have access to the US's nuclear launch codes. I can drastically fix that number in about 45 mintues. Ehhh, you know what, I need to go hit some golf balls. Maybe I'll do it later.Maybe one problem is nearly 6.4 billion people and counting?
Originally posted by Andre
Right, So who are you going to send away from Earth?
Originally posted by russ_watters
Sounds simple enough, let's get started. You replace our electric power generation capacity and I'll replace our cars. I'll let you when I'm finished. Well that one at least is a piece of cake - I have access to the US's nuclear launch codes. I can drastically fix that number in about 45 mintues. Ehhh, you know what, I need to go hit some golf balls. Maybe I'll do it later.
I see this all the time. Its a disease where people find problems and propose self-evident non-solutions to them. I call it "hippieism." Hippieism is counter-productive because it takes energy and emphasis away from people trying to find REAL SOLUTIONS to these problems.
Originally posted by Greg Bernhardt
Can we afford to curb our use of global resources? Can we afford not to?
there exists a real problem that needs real solutions.
Right, but we can't cut the growing within a wink of an eye. This will be a very gradual process at the most.that human population cannot grow forever due to constraints of food, drinking water and living space
Absolutely, It's a case of balancing. Every species should have it's own living space. However if a certain species like the big Panda insists on getting extinct due to natural causes and would have gone extinct even without human interference, would we really need to spent unproportional efforts trying to preserve it and neglecting the possible extinction of many healthy species due to intensive fishing or hunting?that natural resources should be preserved as far as possible from degradation so as to ensure that future generations are not deprived of them.
Agreed!Originally posted by sage
does every one agree that
1)there exists a real problem that needs real solutions.
2)that human population cannot grow forever due to constraints of food, drinking water and living space
3)that natural resources should be preserved as far as possible from degradation so as to ensure that future generations are not deprived of them.
if you agree then we can think of possible solutions. even a skeptic of global warming must agree that biodiversity zones are being lost very rapidly primary due to humans and this is effecting us adversly. clearly something must be done to prevent this.
Originally posted by Andre
Absolutely, If only we knew which is the bigger problem. We seem to be prepared to spend billions to a fictional non-problem (Anthropogenic Global Warming) whilst the real problems like the eradication of the tropical rain forests are on the background. Those two problems are from the same source, rain forest eradication is a form of Anthropogenic Global Warming instigation.
Right, but we can't cut the growing within a wink of an eye. This will be a very gradual process at the most. Use is the relativity here, and re-use is important, that and new methods with different products.
Absolutely, It's a case of balancing. Every species should have it's own living space. However if a certain species like the big Panda insists on getting extinct due to natural causes and would have gone extinct even without human interference, would we really need to spent unproportional efforts trying to preserve it and neglecting the possible extinction of many healthy species due to intensive fishing or hunting? Very few species have degradatinal problems that are NOT somehow human related or attached, land usage, forestation degredations (same thing) = Habitat loss! The losses from overfishing are as a result of the enforceblity problems(?) of International laws.
Those two problems are from the same source, rain forest eradication is a form of Anthropogenic Global Warming instigation.
Very few species have degradatinal problems that are NOT somehow human related or attached
Suggest nothing!Originally posted by Andre
(SNIP) I'm sorry, I don't understand what you suggest here. (SNoP)