23 Jun 08
Originally posted by flexmoreProbably about when we nearly run out of oil! -Because we are too stupid to develop economical alternative to oil quickly enough.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societal_collapse
Are we going to collapse just like the roman empire and so many other empires?
This will lead to a would famine.
23 Jun 08
Originally posted by sonhouseThere already is mass starvation and always has been. In my experience it has very little to do with the capacity of the earth to grow food, or even the total population of the earth. I has more to do with economics (most people who starve do so due to lack of currency to purchase food, not lack of food available for purchase), war, cultural issues and so on. The weather has never ever been particularly reliable, and people often have trouble coming to terms with that even now. People have a bad habit of labelling the best rainfall on record the 'normal' rainfall, and everything else a 'drought'.
If we don't fix the climate issue we won't be able to grow enough food, they say there might be 10 billion people on the planet by 2100 that will cause massive starvation all by itself even if the climate stays benign.
23 Jun 08
Originally posted by sonhouseIf I agreed with those scientists who believe there is a climate crisis, as opposed to the ones who do not, I would be concerned.
It's not the government that is the problem, only indirectly. If we don't fix the climate issue we won't be able to grow enough food, they say there might be 10 billion people on the planet by 2100 that will cause massive starvation all by itself even if the climate stays benign.
If the climate goes like the predictions say, melting ice in greenland, all t ...[text shortened]... about the climate and population control or the double whammy will for sure be upon us.
24 Jun 08
Originally posted by PinkFloydAre you saying that a crisis must be something that has never happened before? If so then try telling that to someone who works in an ambulance.
The climate is changing, but it's been doing that for millions, nay BILLions of years. So no, I do not see a crisis.
24 Jun 08
Originally posted by PinkFloydThe issue is not whether or not climate has changed in the past. The issue is whether or not the current changes will impact us significantly. For example, hurricanes have happened before. Does that mean that 'there is no crisis' when a hurricane happens? What about earthquakes? If an 8.0 earthquake was predicted to strike New York would you say "its no crisis, earthquakes are nothing new"?
The climate is changing, but it's been doing that for millions, nay BILLions of years. So no, I do not see a crisis.
So, are you saying that you believe that the current changes in climate will not have a significant impact on humans in general ie that we will be able to adapt to them without significant effort?
For you to agree to the above, you must also be claiming that:
1. the ice caps will not melt to the extent that coastal cities will be flooded.
2. weather patterns will not change dramatically or quickly enough to catch most of the worlds farmers off guard.
Do you have a reason for your beliefs in this regard?
24 Jun 08
Originally posted by PinkFloydHitchens answered the question "Do you think humans are causing global warming?" very well.
The climate is changing, but it's been doing that for millions, nay BILLions of years. So no, I do not see a crisis.
He said whether we are or not, we should act as if we were.
That doesn't mean to me that we shouldn't stop investigating the causes, but it does mean that we should take action to either stop it or manage how we react to it. Even if we are 5% of the cause, we would be doing something by reducing that to 1%. It's much better than just saying "well, it mostly isn't us so we don't need to change anything".
We only have one planet and we need to fight to make sure it remains as inhabitable as possible for as long as possible. Waiting until it is a crisis - whether caused by us or not - isn't really a viable option.
27 Jun 08
2 edits
Originally posted by PinkFloydYour reasoning is flawed:
The climate is changing, but it's been doing that for millions, nay BILLions of years. So no, I do not see a crisis.
Yes, the climate has been changing for “BILLions” of years. And, during those “BILLions” of years, there has been many mass extinctions as a result of climate change causing a global crises for all life on earth. So your conclusion of your reasoning that you should see no “crises” does not logically follow from the premise of your reasoning that “The climate is changing, but it's been doing that for millions, nay BILLions of years”.
If anything, you should conclude that there is a crisis.
03 Jul 08
Originally posted by twhiteheadYes, I do.
The issue is not whether or not climate has changed in the past. The issue is whether or not the current changes will impact us significantly. For example, hurricanes have happened before. Does that mean that 'there is no crisis' when a hurricane happens? What about earthquakes? If an 8.0 earthquake was predicted to strike New York would you say "its no c ...[text shortened]... st of the worlds farmers off guard.
Do you have a reason for your beliefs in this regard?
And while hurricanes and earthquakes are certainly "crises", they are also not in any more abundance now than they were at any other point in human history.
03 Jul 08
Originally posted by Andrew HamiltonI don't consider "mass extinctions" to be crises; I consider it evolution.
Your reasoning is flawed:
Yes, the climate has been changing for “BILLions” of years. And, during those “BILLions” of years, there has been many mass extinctions as a result of climate change causing a global crises for all life on earth. So your conclusion of your reasoning that you should see no “crises” does not logically follow from the premis ...[text shortened]... or millions, nay BILLions of years”.
If anything, you should conclude that there is a crisis.
03 Jul 08
Originally posted by PsychoPawnIf I thought Hitchens was an intellect worthy of my caliber, I'd pay attention to what he says. However....
Hitchens answered the question "Do you think humans are causing global warming?" very well.
He said whether we are or not, we should act as if we were.
That doesn't mean to me that we shouldn't stop investigating the causes, but it does mean that we should take action to either stop it or manage how we react to it. Even if we are 5% of the cause, w ...[text shortened]... ing until it is a crisis - whether caused by us or not - isn't really a viable option.
03 Jul 08
Originally posted by sonhouse😴
It's not the government that is the problem, only indirectly. If we don't fix the climate issue we won't be able to grow enough food, they say there might be 10 billion people on the planet by 2100 that will cause massive starvation all by itself even if the climate stays benign.
If the climate goes like the predictions say, melting ice in greenland, all t ...[text shortened]... about the climate and population control or the double whammy will for sure be upon us.
13 Jul 08
It ain't lookin' good. What scared me recently was a show about the decline of bee populations. Without them, no pollination takes place; therefore, no food. This show said, at the current rate of decline, pollinating bees will be gone by 2032. Why did my wife and I just have a child?
13 Jul 08
Originally posted by peacablekingdomMakes you wonder about that, eh. And we had 8, well, His, Hers, Ours, and Theirs, but anyway there are way way too many people on the planet.
It ain't lookin' good. What scared me recently was a show about the decline of bee populations. Without them, no pollination takes place; therefore, no food. This show said, at the current rate of decline, pollinating bees will be gone by 2032. Why did my wife and I just have a child?
We are now using up something like 30 percent of ALL the available resources right now, so think what it's going to be like for our grandkids.
My point in all this is our technological civilization does not HAVE to go on like it has, that is to say, a decade ago we were at level 20 and today we are at level 21 (on our understanding of the universe and how to exploit various resources responsibly, etc.) and ten years from now we aren't necessarily going to be on level 22 and ten years after that on level 23.
If climate intervenes, we may find ourselves going back to level 3 or 4, unable to fly into space but be more concerned with just basic survival after the loss of 5 billion of us.