No need for studies, computer models, statistics, etc. reduce the population on the planet by 2/3 or more and the problem is solved...
Exactly x1000000 this is and always will be the problem
Man made climate change
- Thread starter jacobdewey
- Start date
Exactly x1000000 this is and always will be the problem
Yes but life on earth was very different during the Carboniferous Period, and the fossil records show there was a massive extinction, due to a rapid change in climate. While CO2 does trap heat, things like sulfur aerosols from volcanos are a little more devastating since they reflect light from reaching the Troposphere causing major cooling periods.
The fact is we’re producing more CO2 than the ecosystem can absorb. You can observe this in ice core samples; they show that over the last 400,000 years the concentration of CO2 has been around 180-280ppm. This fluctuation is due to natural background noise, i.e. volcanos, extinctions, ice ages, etc. The fluctuations also take place over a long period of time, thousands of years. But since the industrial revolution, the mid 1700s, we’ve seen an increase of 121ppm but half of that increase has happened within the last 30years. Now I’m not a doomsayer, hippie, or scientist but this is a measurable and an example of exponential growth that shouldn’t be ignored. The argument now isn’t, “are we responsible” but what will be the implications for our actions and can to we correct this in an economically reasonable way. I don’t think we know what going to happen at 550ppm and that’s what’s really scary. Also I really don’t think we should let it get that far just to see who’s right.
We weren't around for the last mass extinction so it just goes to further the point that the earth has cycles that we cannot control. Co2 also loses it's sensitivity to hold heat as it increases in ppm. If we spend trillions of dollars to reduce co2 emissions and one large volcano erupts, that seems like a waste to me. We've reduced our emissions to a point that is very very low, many of them at or near zero. Everything past this point doesn't seem cost effective.
Personally I feel we have bigger fish to fry before for the sake of our kin before we worry about climate change. I know for an absolute fact we are in a huge financial crisis, but I have yet to see irrefutable proof that I've changed my climate. Alot more goes into climate change than just co2 gas production.
Here are a couple interesting reads.
http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/...predictions-haunt-the-global-warming-industry
http://www.climatedepot.com/2013/05...only-a-big-yawn-climate-depot-special-report/
Last edited:
So how do you solve this "over population problem"?
I have kids, you have kids.... we are obviously going to keep having kids and an increased population, so we're going to have to figure something out that's better than mass human casualties.
I feel over-population is a myth perpetuated by the Eugenics cults. Ive driven through vast areas of the country where there are zero people. I think urban over crowding might be an issue that presents itself as too many people.
The planet can only sustain so much I mean 7 billion people the waste from that is unbelievable and it is getting harder and harder to get rid of I mean sewage I have done alot of municipal sewer systems (least all the electrical) and it's the same story we can't keep up and we can't dispose of It fast enough. We control animal populations why do we do that? I am by no means wanting a mass genocide but population is the problem if you spred everyone out it comes out to like everyone gets 3 or 4 acres now what happens when we hit a critical point then there will he a genocide. There are 37 billion acres of land that includes the continent of antarctic used in that figure to so by the time you figure usable liveable land it gets much smaller then 3 or 4 acres
Eh... Human kind has lived in a relatively calm time in the world and universe. It will come to an end and fix the over population problem. I just hope for my sake I'm either long gone or die in the upcoming "mass extinction". hahaha I know if Yellowstone erupts, I'll head out to my back porch to watch, and hope I'm close enough to that 100 mile radius "instant death zone" that I won't have to live through the hardships that would follow that. Living in a bunker, starving, and fighting for the necessity's doesn't sound that fun to me.
Whenever asked "how do you want to die?", I always say "without me knowing".... I just want to wake up dead. hahaha!:angel:
Thats a load of crap put out by some george soros think tank. That website is full of propoganda.
Climate change? maybe maybe not, but why not have a clean planet to live on. I know in So Cal all of that terrible air regulation resulted in...... oh yeah, clean air. Clean water act made lakes and rivers cleaner. whats the harm in that? Farmers being regulated to use the correct amount of chemicals keeps the pasticides and herbicides from my drinking water, and it saves farmers money on those products.... I don't know, but seems to me environmental regulation has had more benefit than detriment.
But we were around for the last great extinction, the Holocene extinction. You know mammoths, saber-tooth tigers, mastodons, etc.
CO2 traps radiant heat, we know this, you can see it in a control lab and we’ve observed it in the natural world. If you look at the earth with an inferred camera you can see the CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere. Comparatively we can measure the temperatures of the troposphere and we’re seeing increasing temperatures while the stratosphere, which contains low concentrations of CO2, is cooling. This is because radiant heat is trapped the in troposphere due to the heavier molecular weight of CO2.
Yes, CO2 isn’t the only driving force of climate change, things like aerosols in the stratosphere, solar min and maximums, land use change, CH4, clouds, wind, and NOx all play an important role. The bigger issue with CO2 is that it dissolves in water creating H2CO3, a weak acid but is changing the pH balance of our oceans. Look up coral bleaching and algae blooms. Also, people get too caught up in mean average temperatures when talking about global warming and should be looking at unusually longer more volatile seasons for the northern hemisphere. When you look at it on a global scale it doesn’t look bad. .85c increase in the last 100 years, but CO2 isn’t evenly distributed in the atmosphere. NASA, which I would consider a reputable source, has a lot unbiased of information on the subject.
http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/carbon-dioxide/
They need to regulate Monsanto and not the farms. All of the glyphosates in the pesticides is what is polluting the land and water. Its a shame.
I agree, but as long as congress is in the pockets of big business, that will not happen. Tthats a whole different conversation.
I fit into #1. Haha. I'm not into conspiracy theories, and I believe alot of things people might think are crazy. (I'm a mormon.) But.... I like to make my own decisions based on information that I've gathered. When it comes to politics and economic factors, I would rather run off facts than faith. Science is meant to be able to produce reproductable results to reach a conclusion. At this point global warming is in the middle of the scientific method. They are stuck on hypothesis, and people take these scientific suggestions as fact. It's not fact as they have no way to include all variables that would be needed in these experiments. This is something that 100% of those scientists will agree with. In every article I've read citing the case for man made climate change, "suggests, mostly certain", and "other unknown variables" always seem to appear in the text.
I want to breathe clean air and drink clean water as bad as the next guy, but we need a balance. Go ahead and regulate farmers out of business. No food or clothing. Go ahead and regulate loggers out of the forest. No shelter. Go ahead and regulate miners and drillers out of business. No energy, no materials to make anything. All of the sudden there are no other jobs. There's nothing. At the very least, the already over stringent regulations are pushing all these these costs skyward. These are the jobs being hit hardest by EPA over stepping, and by no means do I want to do away with the EPA. There are definitely those people who try to cut corners, hurting others and themselves in the process. The fact the EPA controls the water that runs off my roof into a barrel is insane. The climate change argument just gives the EPA more authority to be in each of our personal lives. If that's what you want, so be it, but it will cost you.
Yup, seen that one
@ Jacob-
I appreciate that you're not going to, or willing to, just buy into any given conservative right wing activist group's "conspiracy theory"
I'm not one to follow just any ol Shepard myself.
Not every institution or individual speaking out about these topics is a wacko, conspiracy theorist or doomsday announcer...
To simply ignore the mass of information available found in public video, military demonstration, public meetings, declassified military literature and every other source...is flat out ignorant, and that's what they want, our ignorance
There are actions being taken against the public on a massive daily scale, if you don't believe that you're flat out in denial.
The INTENTIONAL dumbing down of our society
Fluoridation of our water supply
Vaccines
Chemtrails
GWEN towers
HAARP
The modern medicine approach to health care (pharmaceutics)
GMO's
You're a farmer?
Then you've got to have something to say about Monsanto....
Patenting seed? Seed that pollinates over 500sq miles and then infiltrates an unsuspecting farmed field, then the farmer gets taken to court and sued for patent infringement and gets shut down, oh and what do YA know, Monsanto aquires his field...
Bio-engineering plants to grow faster and be resiliant to pesticides, engineering the DNA of animals to grow faster and with larger portions of the parts of said animals that "we" eat...
That shit is t good for us man
How about
Cross genetic mutation of DNA to create, well, anything they damn well want to...
Have you read about "super salmon"?
How about the spider goat? A crossbreed goat DNA and spider DNA atrocity that was specifically created for the synthetic milk the goat would produce, which in turn could be processed to make a better bulletproof vest...
All I'm trying to point out is;
There's a whole helluva lot more going on around us, and more often than not against us (the mass populous/society) that is negative to "us" and the environment than that of the actions we take on a whole as regular people and consumers just going about our daily lives
You talk about conspiracy, what about the conspiracy you are buying into Jacob?
The conspiracy the government is spewing out on a massive scale that the issues at hand are a direct result of the populous...what a smoke screen!
Dude, chemtrails arent a conspiracy theory, they're a reality... Weather shaping and the "man made climate change" hat seems to be prevalent in the last 2 decades isnt completely a direct result of too many people driving too many cars.
If you look at the modern analysis, a fast food restaurant produces more emissions from their grill vent than a new diesel semi tractor does out its stack, in fact our current emissions footprint from cars is lower now than it was 30yrs ago, yet the problems in our air, water and soil (green house gasses, CO2, barium, lithium, dissolved aluminum, toxins etc) are getting worse...
There's fallout on U.S soil every second of every day from nuclear testing, military testing and poor compliance of various industry found in our air from wind from around the world...
I'm not saying "don't do your part to be better, do better and try and make the world a better place" I'm just saying try to accept a larger scope of what's going on in our world which is seemingly beyond our reach to control and isn't going to change because of the cars we drive or the sheer amount of us there are.
Last edited:
Jason, I like your point of view and I find it interesting. In this information age it's hard for all of us to figure out what is true and what is false. Any of us can post a "fact", and have someone believe it, hence this discussion. haha.
I'm sure there is plenty of shady stuff going on, and I don't doubt that there are grains (or more) of truth in many of your examples that have been brought up. I've always gone by the motto that there are two sides to a story and then there's the truth. The world is full of evil people seeking power.
I am very thankful for and happy to pay for the technology fee that Monsanto places on their Roundup Ready Genome. It raised our production levels by nearly 20%. I also see where it is a downfall like you have stated above. Luckily in our area we get overlooked because Idaho is sneaky like that, but not many people clean their own seed around here.
Just a little FYI, corn is not a natural plant. It is a hybrid of Teosinte and Wild maize that was bred by the Native Americans over thousands of years. It's like a gmo, except instead of doing it in a lab in a few months, it took breeding the wanted traits out of it over thousands of years. Fun fact, but back on track. lol
Scott Stevens was our local weather man for several years, and he was actually really good. He started mentioning chem trails on air and was soon relived of his position. (Cyrstal Egger was also our local weather woman for a while, and lets just say the weather was the best part of the news cast.)
I won't disregard all your points as merely fiction, but I won't regard them all as fact either. I will say they are good subject to research if bored and draw your own conclusions. :hug:
Politicians pulling the wool over our eyes is a fact, and it happens to all of us whether we like it or not! That's why talking with your local and state politicians is a must. Gotta know who is working for you so you know if you want to fire them or keep them on! ha ha
I would love super salmon fishing! ha ha ha
I'm sure there is plenty of shady stuff going on, and I don't doubt that there are grains (or more) of truth in many of your examples that have been brought up. I've always gone by the motto that there are two sides to a story and then there's the truth. The world is full of evil people seeking power.
I am very thankful for and happy to pay for the technology fee that Monsanto places on their Roundup Ready Genome. It raised our production levels by nearly 20%. I also see where it is a downfall like you have stated above. Luckily in our area we get overlooked because Idaho is sneaky like that, but not many people clean their own seed around here.
Just a little FYI, corn is not a natural plant. It is a hybrid of Teosinte and Wild maize that was bred by the Native Americans over thousands of years. It's like a gmo, except instead of doing it in a lab in a few months, it took breeding the wanted traits out of it over thousands of years. Fun fact, but back on track. lol
Scott Stevens was our local weather man for several years, and he was actually really good. He started mentioning chem trails on air and was soon relived of his position. (Cyrstal Egger was also our local weather woman for a while, and lets just say the weather was the best part of the news cast.)
I won't disregard all your points as merely fiction, but I won't regard them all as fact either. I will say they are good subject to research if bored and draw your own conclusions. :hug:
Politicians pulling the wool over our eyes is a fact, and it happens to all of us whether we like it or not! That's why talking with your local and state politicians is a must. Gotta know who is working for you so you know if you want to fire them or keep them on! ha ha
I would love super salmon fishing! ha ha ha
Last edited:
Thanks Jacob
I agree it's difficult to discern truth from lies/fact from fiction.
Admittedly, I don't consider myself to be all that smart and I find that I'm fascinated by allot of different things.
Lol
Agreed
Anymore I tend to believe that there's more truth to be found than not, and more evil people seeking for and in power than not as well
While raising production levels is great, there are downfalls to that benefit...right?
Coming full circle here on things I'm fascinated by, I've seen research that supports the "theory" that GMO crops tend to leave the soil in a poorer state and sooner than a traditional crop of plant organisms, and that while GMO's do grow faster , are resiliant to pesticide and produce more yeild, that those attributes also cause the plant to take in less stored nutrient, and thus also provide less nutrient to the consumer...
What are your thoughts here, true/false
???
I didn't know that!
Hmmm
Do you see an "agenda" there
Take the old guy that was trickling info to the public out, and replace him with an attractive woman...
That's all we can do and that's all anyone could ask for
I'm not entirely sure as to where I stand with what I believe about most of these topics either. My conclusion thusfar is there are too many reputable individuals in all these communities of science, military and politics trying to be heard, with the only hope of allowing the masses to informed to actually make a conclusion, rather than to be force fed one
I agree to a point, anymore though, it would seem like even the good ones are forced to make decisions against their own better judgment once they are in their respective position of power...it's more a game of thrones than a democracy
In which our only ally is hope
