How Silly is Climate Change Denial?

[mike]

Its funny because all im seeing is a discusion on the symptoms, but not a word about the root cause.

Over population

Say what you like about Suzuki, the math in this presentation is irrefutable

Just in time for Earth Day (April 22) the faculty at the college, at which environmental issues are the sole focus, was asked to help prioritize the planet’s most pressing environmental problems.
Overpopulation came out on top, with several professors pointing out its ties to other problems that rank high on the list.
“Overpopulation is the only problem,” said Dr. Charles A. Hall, a systems ecologist. “If we had 100 million people on Earth — or better, 10 million — no others would be a problem.” (Current estimates put the planet’s population at more than six billion.)
Dr. Allan P. Drew, a forest ecologist, put it this way: “Overpopulation means that we are putting more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere than we should, just because more people are doing it and this is related to overconsumption by people in general, especially in the ‘developed’ world.”
“But, whether developed or developing,” said Dr. Susan Senecah, who teaches the history of the American environmental movement, “everyone is encouraged to ‘want’ and perceive that they ‘need’ to consume beyond the planet’s ability to provide.”

Worst Environmental Problem? Overpopulation, Experts Say -- ScienceDaily

All this idle chatter about Co2, the weather, even Obama........

The remarkable thing is that the real cause of global warming is rarely mentioned. It is the elephant in the room. Everyone can see it but no one wants to speak about it, presumably because this subject is a contentious one and challenges the core beliefs of many religions.
The undeniable fact is that we, the human race, are the cause of our own difficulties and unless we reduce our numbers, we will self-destruct.

Over-population is the real cause of climate change – it's killing us all off - Independent.ie

I always find it funny that the elephant in the room rarely gets a mention in these debates

 

[BoyintheMachine]

Its funny because all im seeing is a discusion on the symptoms, but not a word about the root cause.

Over population

Say what you like about Suzuki, the math in this presentation is irrefutable

Worst Environmental Problem? Overpopulation, Experts Say -- ScienceDaily

All this idle chatter about Co2, the weather, even Obama........



Over-population is the real cause of climate change – it's killing us all off - Independent.ie

I always find it funny that the elephant in the room rarely gets a mention in these debates

Over-population is a myth. Your concept of thinking is of living here on this planet forever. If you are trapped in a mind frame of only playing in the same sand box forever than yes, you will be upset when there's too many people stomping in your sand. However, we can't stay here forever. If we do not get off this planet we will go extinct.

And no, there is no problem of over-population yet. The problem is the adequate sourcing of food and water to people. Right now in many third world countries there is no means of transporting food and water to people. Certain people want you to think that the problem there is over-population. It's not. The solution is to develop their nations and raise them to the Western world so that they can adequately source food and water to their citizens. In many countries there are war lords and dictators who purposefully withhold food and water to citizens. That's what has to be stopped.

Whenever you argue for over-population you are also arguing for a solution. There is only 2 solutions for a true over population....culling and sterilizing. So you can not argue for the earth to be over-populated without also arguing for one or both of these options.

The real answer is to let it go. If the earth truly does get overpopulated it will put even more pressure on us to expand out into the Universe, like baby birds who are getting too big for the nest. We have to leave. We can't stay here forever. In about 50,000 years the planet will return to an Ice Age. We may not want to be here for that. We most assuredly need to be gone within a million years when a super volcano erupts. If we are still stuck on this planet when that happens then we are most assuredly doomed.

 

[boomerang]

Whenever you argue for over-population you are also arguing for a solution. There is only 2 solutions for a true over population....culling and sterilizing. So you can not argue for the earth to be over-populated without also arguing for one or both of these options.

This makes no sense. No one need be sterilized or "culled." Birth rates in many nations are often at less than replacement levels. This is due to voluntary change in lifestyle, i.e., birth control. There is even historical evidence that birth rates fall as education and standard of living increase.

 

[mike]

Over-population is a myth. Your concept of thinking is of living here on this planet forever. If you are trapped in a mind frame of only playing in the same sand box forever than yes, you will be upset when there's too many people stomping in your sand. However, we can't stay here forever. If we do not get off this planet we will go extinct.

And no, there is no problem of over-population yet. The problem is the adequate sourcing of food and water to people. Right now in many third world countries there is no means of transporting food and water to people. Certain people want you to think that the problem there is over-population. It's not. The solution is to develop their nations and raise them to the Western world so that they can adequately source food and water to their citizens. In many countries there are war lords and dictators who purposefully withhold food and water to citizens. That's what has to be stopped.

Whenever you argue for over-population you are also arguing for a solution. There is only 2 solutions for a true over population....culling and sterilizing. So you can not argue for the earth to be over-populated without also arguing for one or both of these options.

The real answer is to let it go. If the earth truly does get overpopulated it will put even more pressure on us to expand out into the Universe, like baby birds who are getting to big for the nest. We have to leave. We can't stay here forever. In about 50,000 years the planet will return to an Ice Age. We may not want to be here for that. We most assuredly need to be gone within a million years when a super volcano erupts. If we are still stuck on this planet when that happens then we are most assuredly doomed.

I agree with you about the imperative to get off the planet, preachin to the choir there son, But the very real scenario exists that our exponential growth will kill us off before we have the ability to do so.
The suggestion overpopulation is a myth is absurd, the numbers dont lie, to say there is no "problem" yet is also at odds with the reality.

Operate a system past its limits and the system breaks down
Given that today, our economy is bigger than our planet, corrective action is urgently needed. The latest estimates by the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) and the Global Footprint Network indicate that the Earth’s regeneration capacity has been overshot and that we now consume at a rate of 1.5 planets, the equivalent of 50% more per year than what the Earth can restore in that period. The medium-term trend also looks bleak, and it’s predicted that by 2050 we will be consuming at a ratio of 2.3 planets.
Our unsustainable rate of consumption of the Earth’s resources has already significantly impaired some of our natural infrastructure, and we now know that a number of our ecosystems are lost for good, with many others at the point of extinction.

By 2050 we will be consuming resources at a rate 2.3 times the planets ability to renew and regenerate those resources.

I could fill two thread pages in the next hour detailing the dire situation we are in, the dead oceans, the depletion of artesian water tables at a rate that will lead to a break down and collapse of these resources long before we get the ability to get off this planet, But your statement about the problem being a myth tells me you are in such profound denial of the obvious facts, the irrefutable reality the data shows that i would be wasting my breath.

But i can tell you this with absolute confidence, i will be proven right and you proven wrong within your lifetime. we are in the 59th minute.

At the rate we are going we are going to destroy ourselves long before we are able to get to new planets and new resources.

Carbon pollution plans will fail because of population growth
Submitted by webmaster on Mon, 2011-07-25 00:00

On World Population Day, 11 July, the National President of Sustainable Population Australia, said the Australian Government's announced target of a 5 per cent reduction in carbon emissions by 2020 would be 'useless' by 2020 because of Australia’s continuing population growth.
Ms Kanck said it seemed to be beyond the intellect of both Government and Greens MPs to understand that more people means more carbon pollution.
"Even if the government’s emissions target is met by all existing Australians, based on current rates of population growth any benefit gained will have been completely wiped out before we get to 2020," she said.
"It gets worse – the larger population will then have to reduce emissions by 20 per cent (instead of the 5 per cent required in 2011) to bring the total emissions back to 2011 targets, effectively to just stand still.
"Reining in population growth is essential if any impact is to be made in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. While the opponents of a carbon tax will make much of the fact that our electricity prices will rise by around 10% as a consequence, a much bigger contributor already to electricity prices is population increase.
"Between 2007 and 2010 there was a more than 20% increase in electricity costs because of the increased costs of the distribution network – a direct result of more people and the associated urban sprawl with increased demand for electricity.
"More electricity will be consumed by allowing uncontained population growth, producing still more greenhouse gas emissions. After all the hoo-ha about the carbon tax and targets, the public will justifiably be angry when they find out that the government’s plans will make no difference to the total amount of greenhouse gas emissions in Australia, and that things will be worse still because of population growth".

The math is pretty straightforward

Overpumping has largely depleted the shallow aquifer, forcing well drillers to turn to the region’s deep fossil aquifer, which is not replenishable.
The survey, conducted by the Geological Environmental Monitoring Institute (GEMI) in Beijing, reported that under Hebei Province in the heart of the North China Plain, the average level of the deep aquifer was dropping nearly 3 meters (10 feet) per year. Around some cities in the province, it was falling twice as fast. He Qingcheng, head of the GEMI groundwater monitoring team, notes that as the deep aquifer is depleted, the region is losing its last water reserve—its only safety cushion.
He Qingcheng's concerns are mirrored in a World Bank report: “Anecdotal evidence suggests that deep wells [drilled] around Beijing now have to reach 1,000 meters [more than half a mile] to tap fresh water, adding dramatically to the cost of supply.” In unusually strong language for a Bank report, it foresees “catastrophic consequences for future generations” unless water use and supply can quickly be brought back into balance.

Aquifer depletion

With its population growing at 3 percent a year and with water tables falling everywhere, Yemen is fast becoming a hydrological basket case. Aside from the effect of overpumping on the capital, World Bank official Christopher Ward observes that “groundwater is being mined at such a rate that parts of the rural economy could disappear within a generation.”
Israel, even though a pioneer in raising irrigation water productivity, is depleting both of its principal aquifers—-the coastal aquifer and the mountain aquifer that it shares with Palestinians. Israel’s population, whose growth is fueled by both natural increase and immigration, is outgrowing its water supply

China’s population is projected to grow by 126 million people, the World Bank predicts that the country’s urban water demand will jump from 50 billion to 80 billion tons, an increase of 60 percent. Industrial water demand, meanwhile, will increase 62 percent, from 127 billion to 206 billion tons.

The following example is a localised one, but in a closed system like we currently have here on earth can just as easily apply to the globe as it does china

Weak prices, falling water tables, and severe drought together caused the grain harvest in 2001 to drop to 335 million tons, down from the all-time high of 392 million tons in 1998. This year’s harvest will fall short of projected consumption by 46 million tons, easily the biggest grain shortage in China’s history. This dramatic deficit, coming as it does on the heels of last year’s 34 million-ton shortfall, raises serious questions about future food security.
The combination of back-to-back shortages and China’s reluctance to import grain have caused the nation’s grain reserves to fall by roughly 81 million tons. With accessible grain stocks now largely depleted, another sizable crop shortfall in 2002 would almost certainly force China to import large amounts of grain to prevent soaring food prices.

China can import grain to make up its shortfalls, but globally we cant import anything from other planets yet, its still a closed system.

The question do we reach a crisis point before or after an ability to go to other planets, the data suggests we will reach that point soon, and well before we have the ability to look elsewhere for new resources.

The problem is population, you say its not ,its a myth , the experts say it is

Worst Environmental Problem? Overpopulation, Experts Say -- ScienceDaily

Jim Leape, Director General of WWF International, said if people continue to consume more than the planet can provide it will drive other species into extinction. Already global species are down 30 per cent and 60 per cent in the tropics since 1970.
"The report shows that continuing of the current consumption trends would lead us to the point of no return,” he said.
How many planet’s resources are used up by individuals in the top ten countries for consumption?
United Arab Emirates 6
Qatar 5.9
Denmark 4.6
Belgium 4.5
United States 4.5
Estonia 4.4
Canada 3.9
Australia 3.8
Kuwait 3.5
Ireland 3.5
* Britain 2.75

Thats per year.......... the US uses 4.5 planets worth of resources every year with that figure growing with the population

The report shows that continuing of the current consumption trends would lead us to the point of no return

To suggest we dont have a (population) problem, is absurd

The United Arab Emirates has the worst ecological footprint, using six planet’s worth of resources for each person. If everyone lived like a person in the US, the population would need 4.5 times the resources provided by one planet.

In a closed system which we still are, thats a problem, deny it all you like.

 

[mike]

"The report shows that continuing of the current consumption trends would lead us to the point of no return,” he said

Britons use three times the planet's resources - Telegraph

If we are still stuck on this planet when that happens then we are most assuredly doomed.

 

[mike]

You better hope we have the ability to find and travel to another planet by 2030............

World is facing a natural resources crisis worse than financial crunch
• Two planets need by 2030 at this rate, warns report

World is facing a natural resources crisis worse than financial crunch | Environment | The Guardian

The problem is also getting worse as populations and consumption keep growing faster than technology finds new ways of expanding what can be produced from the natural world. This had led the report to predict that by 2030, if nothing changes, mankind would need two planets to sustain its lifestyle. "The recent downturn in the global economy is a stark reminder of the consequences of living beyond our means," says James Leape, WWF International's director general. "But the possibility of financial recession pales in comparison to the looming ecological credit crunch."
The report continues: "We have only one planet. Its capacity to support a thriving diversity of species, humans included, is large but fundamentally limited. When human demand on this capacity exceeds what is available - when we surpass ecological limits - we erode the health of the Earth's living systems. Ultimately this loss threatens human well-being."

Suzuki's exponential growth example is a good one, in a timeline of one hour, at the 59th minute the test tube is only 50 percent full, plenty of room left.

It may seem to you we still have plenty of room left, but the math doesnt lie. The earths human population is its biggest crisis, and its the 59th minute.............

 

[BoyintheMachine]

This makes no sense. No one need be sterilized or "culled." Birth rates in many nations are often at less than replacement levels. This is due to voluntary change in lifestyle, i.e., birth control. There is even historical evidence that birth rates fall as education and standard of living increase.

Whatever. However, the point is that we are not over-populated.

Overpopulation is a myth |

 

[mike]

Heres what the 59th minute looks like on planet earth, if you read no other links ive posted read this one slowly and carefully

''After we left Japan it felt as if the ocean itself was dead,'' Macfadyen says. ''We saw one whale, sort of rolling helplessly on the surface with what looked like a big tumour on its head. I've done a lot of miles on the ocean in my life and I'm used to seeing turtles, dolphins, sharks and big flurries of feeding birds. But this time, for 3000 nautical miles, there was nothing alive to be seen.''
But garbage was everywhere.


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/environment/the-ocean-is-broken-20131018-2vs7v.html#ixzz32Eg7sKCI

 

[mike]

Whatever. However, the point is that we are not over-populated.

Overpopulation is a myth |

Are you insane, if we are using the planets resources at twice the rate they can be renewed....... then its over populated

If you spend twice your weekly wage (by using a credit card) and continue to do so without stopping you are overspending

The math is so simple, im flabergasted you continue to deny it

 

[BoyintheMachine]

You better hope we have the ability to find and travel to another planet by 2030............



World is facing a natural resources crisis worse than financial crunch | Environment | The Guardian




Suzuki's exponential growth example is a good one, in a timeline of one hour, at the 59th minute the test tube is only 50 percent full, plenty of room left.

It may seem to you we still have plenty of room left, but the math doesnt lie. The earths human population is its biggest crisis, and its the 59th minute.............

You people just love fear porn, don't you?

I dare you to research the origins of the over-population myth. One of the earliest examples was in ancient Greece where a commentator lamented saying there were too many people pressing down upon Gaia, the earth goddess.

Sorry, but the fear mongering has got to come to a stop. The earth is not overpopulated. The sky is not falling either.

 

[BoyintheMachine]

Are you insane, if we are using the planets resources at twice the rate they can be renewed....... then its over populated

If you spend twice your weekly wage (by using a credit card) and continue to do so without stopping you are overspending

The math is so simple, im flabergasted you continue to deny it

 

[mike]

And if humankind continues to use natural resources and produce waste at the current rate, "we will require the resources of two planets to meet our demands by the early 2030s," a gluttonous level of ecological spending that may cause major ecosystem collapse, the report said.

Mankind using Earth's resources faster than replenished - Environment - The Independent

See, today is the day that the Global Footprint Network estimates that we’ve exhausted a year’s worth of global resources. If you think of how much energy and resources the planet can replenish in a year, we’ve used up that amount since Jan. 1. Everything from now until New Year’s Eve, then, is us putting it on our credit cards. Or, more accurately, using next year’s resources. Even more accurately, some year in the 2030s’ resources.

Imagine your household. The point the Global Footprint Network is trying to make is that this is equivalent to your using up your paycheck a few hours earlier every week. Some Sunday, you’re going to be screwed.

Each year, the United States uses over four planets worth of resources. Please note: We only have one planet.

We’ve already used a year’s worth of resources in 2012 | Grist

If you are using the resources faster than they can be replenished, your overspending

 

[BoyintheMachine]

Mankind using Earth's resources faster than replenished - Environment - The Independent

Each year, the United States uses over four planets worth of resources. Please note: We only have one planet.

We’ve already used a year’s worth of resources in 2012 | Grist

[/quote][/QUOTE]



FEAR.PORN.

Go back and read that last sentence. "Each year the U.S uses over 4 planets worth of resources". How can this be? If this were true then the planet would already be a wasteland and you and I would be dead. The truth of the matter is this is "Fear Porn" and the people behind this study/chart thing are the ones who are choosing the values and defining things biased in their own favor. Use common sense, man.

 

[mike]

Attenborough had confessed to previously being sceptical about the belief that global warming is predominantly caused by humans. But now, he argued, the evidence of it was too overwhelming to ignore. He became sure of it when he saw graphs provided by climatologists that demonstrated the link between increasing temperatures and the levels of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere, with the growth in population and industrialisation:
"I was absolutely convinced this was no part of a normal climatic oscillation which the Earth has been going through and that it was something else."[1]
Throughout his television career, Attenborough had, by and large, purposely avoided specific references to the effect of humans on the ecology of the planet. He saw his role simply as a presenter of programmes on natural history. However, the final episode of The Living Planet (1984) had been devoted to man's own habitat and his destruction of others, and in later years, Attenborough started to become more outspoken about the subject. The three-part State of the Planet in 2000, and the last instalment of The Life of Mammals (2002), which dealt with the evolution of Homo sapiens and subsequent overpopulation, were explicit in this regard.

 

[mike]

FEAR.PORN.

Go back and read that last sentence. "The U.S uses over 4 planet's worth of resources". How can this be? If this were true then the planet would already be a wasteland and you and I would be dead. The truth of the matter is this is "Fear Porn" and the people behind this study/chart thing are the ones who are choosing the values and defining things biased in their own favor. Use common sense, man.

Once you need to charge the debate with emotive words like porn, youve lost it imo. The data speaks for itself, the math is irrefutable. I dont need to inject silly gimmicks like the word porn to make a point.

Like Gene im done trying to reason with you, you are unable to grasp even the simple concepts, relying on gimmicks like "porn" to charge your narrative.

Deniers of such obvious facts are the problem, but by all means go forth and multiply. We are past the point of no return anyway, which is the second reason i chose never to have children. They would only inherit the credit card bills you think are fair and reasonable to run up in the futures name

Your argument just highlights how little reading comprehension you must have, those planetary figures relate to the replenishment rate, not whole planets

If you think of how much energy and resources the planet can replenish in a year, we’ve used up that amount since Jan. 1. Everything from now until New Year’s Eve, then, is us putting it on our credit cards. Or, more accurately, using next year’s resources. Even more accurately, some year in the 2030s’ resources.

Your simplistic interpretation of this data is whats wrong with this debate.

Thats the example we see in aquifer depletion, its being used faster than its being put back, and the water is being used to grow crops which grow the population, which speeds up the problem

Since the overpumping of aquifers is occurring in many countries more or less simultaneously, the depletion of aquifers and the resulting harvest cutbacks could come at roughly the same time. And the accelerating depletion of aquifers means this day may come soon, creating potentially unmanageable food scarcity.

Of course we cant pump out any more water than whats actually there, thats not the point. the point is we are pumping it out faster than it gets replaced. But the planet is a big system, we can draw on resource credit for a while. but eventually with 1o extra mouths to feed having grown your family on "credit" it gets cut off, no more credit and all those hungry mouths to feed...............

 

[BoyintheMachine]

David Attenborough is not a climate scientist and so his opinion is about as equal as our opinions. He can not be giving a scientific opinion on the matter because he's not qualified to do so. I don't know why I have to keep repeating this. Stop trying to use the bandwagon effect.

 

[BoyintheMachine]

Once you need to charge the debate with emotive words like porn, youve lost it imo. The data speaks for itself, the math is irrefutable. I dont need to inject silly gimmicks like the word porn to make a point.

Like Gene im done trying to reason with you, you are unable to grasp even the simple concepts, relying on gimmicks like "porn" to charge your narrative.

Deniers of such obvious facts are the problem, but by all means go forth and multiply. We are past the point of no return anyway, which is the second reason i chose never to have children. They would only inherit the credit card bills you think are fair and reasonable to run up in the futures name

Laughable. Look it up. The world's population will peak in about 50 years or so and then it will begin to decline naturally. Over-population was used as a tool by the elite in an attempt to argue to do away with the poor lest they infringe on their resources. Nice that you've been hoodwinked into thinking that you are somehow part of the elite.

 

[mike]

Laughable. Look it up. The world's population will peak in about 50 years or so and then it will begin to decline naturally. Over-population was used as a tool by the elite in an attempt to argue to do away with the poor lest they infringe on their resources. Nice that you've been hoodwinked into thinking that you are somehow part of the elite.

Again ive never made the claim i am part of the elite, thats just another emotive gimmick you need to chuck in to try and prop up your untenable argument.

 

[boomerang]

Please consider the big picture. This is a unique period in human history. Never before has mankind had the ability to see itself wholly in relation to the earth on which it lives. Never before has the human population been remotely close to its present levels and consuming raw materials at its current rate. Never before have we had the ability to literally blow ourselves off the face of the earth.

With or without climate change, and whether 10 or 50 years from now, something must change. In any closed system, the game is zero sum. There's an inevitable balance between 'x' number of humans at 'y' standard of living. Of course, nature has an uncanny way of balancing its books. We may stumble rather than walk carefully into the future, finding a kind of Malthusian correction in starvation and disease. Nature does not care.

 

[BoyintheMachine]

Again ive never made the claim i am part of the elite, thats just another emotive gimmick you need to chuck in to try and prop up your untenable argument.

Mike. I don't want to discuss this anymore. I already provided you with a link to the overpopulation is a myth site and posted a video. What you believe is your choice. However, if you continually fall for fear porn it's going to negatively effect your life and your perceptions.