Re:Stupidity is Self Curing
on
Eco-Terrorism
·
· Score: 1
> Unfortunately, from the extent of your hyperbole above, it sounds like you've adopted the opinion of a very few, largely-self-styled experts as if they were handed down to Moses on stone tablets. (Sorry -- it really is tough to avoid the "religion" metaphor when discussing these things.)
So you're just of the opinion that added CO2 and methane to the atmosphere is harmless? And we can keep losing dense biomass (forests) for our nice golf courses, manicured lawns and grazing land for 1 billion cattle while at the same time added greenhouses gases to our atmosphere. If we keep this up indefinitely, I hope you'll agree that somewhere down the road this might lead to some serious problems. CO2 is currently 0.35% or so I think....what happens when it's 5%? It's certainly a possibility, don't you think? And most experts and most countries agree that global warming is a serious problem that we need to address. The U.S. seems the only industrialized nation that's still trying to hide its head in the sand.
> Are you aware that as recently as the 1970s we were supposedly heading for another ice age? At least, we were according to the same clique of "environmental scientists" who are now telling us we're heading for imminent global heat death.
Ugh, this is such a weak argument. "Back when I was a child, the world was flat. Now the 'experts' say the world is round. What do they know"? So any opinion from X years ago that's conveniently on your side of the argument is reason to say the current beliefs are suspect or wrong?
> In short, read what you're writing, for Pete's sake, and understand what you're asking of the rest of us
My main point was that people need to get educated about a lot of environment issues. Is that too much to ask? Buying a more fuel efficient car, supporting renewable energy, or learning the environment cost of something? For example, 1 lb of cotton uses on average 10 lbs of pesticides and fertilizers to get made. You probably didn't know that and think of cotton as very natural and environmentally friendly. But it's not really. Buying organic cotton is a much better choice.
As for the end of the human race or the world, it's only a very remote possibility. But just the idea that we're doing things that could be causing it is alarming. Something that important needs to be taken very seriously. Waiting until we have "irrefutable proof" will be much too late.
Re:Stupidity is Self Curing
on
Eco-Terrorism
·
· Score: 1
> a gang of ignorant religious wackos
I doubt that most environmentalists are ignorant of the issues. Certainly eco-terrorists are overzealous, but I'm sure they're better informed (if misguided) than the common man.
> Unfortunately, the enviro-wackos won't be happy until we're all living in trees and caves. They simply aren't interested in solving the problems of how to clothe, feed, and house six billion+ healthy homo sapiens at anything beyond a subsistence level.
I'm guessing you're rather continue along on our merry way, destroying ecosystem after ecosystem, melting the polar ice caps, heating up the planet 10 degrees over the next 100 years, raising the sea level 100 feet (oops, hope you don't live in Florida!) and hope your descendants can solve all the problems we left behind?
The big problem I see with current trends (especially in the U.S.) is that nothing we're doing is sustainable. We're using up our natural resources at a frightening fast rate. We're still polluting like mad, we're pumping tremendous amounts of C02 and methane into the atmosphere and eventually we'll kill off the human race or just most of the planet. If every one in the world lived like the US did, we'd need 3 Earths to handle the demand on natural resources.
I don't expect to move back to living in trees and caves, but we better start working on solving some of our current problems. Drilling for more oil doesn't do anything productive in the long run. I'd rather see a $10 billion program to put solar panels on the majority of everyone's houses. Sure, it wouldn't solve all our power needs but it's a step in the right direction. Upping fuel mileage requirements, working on conservation and getting people educated on what they're consuming and it's environmental cost. The next time you buy something look at what its made of, where its made and imagine the complex process of manufacture and possibility of environmental problems.
Slashdot Mirror
> Unfortunately, from the extent of your hyperbole above, it sounds like you've adopted the opinion of a very few, largely-self-styled experts as if they were handed down to Moses on stone tablets. (Sorry -- it really is tough to avoid the "religion" metaphor when discussing these things.)
So you're just of the opinion that added CO2 and methane to the atmosphere is harmless? And we can keep losing dense biomass (forests) for our nice golf courses, manicured lawns and grazing land for 1 billion cattle while at the same time added greenhouses gases to our atmosphere. If we keep this up indefinitely, I hope you'll agree that somewhere down the road this might lead to some serious problems. CO2 is currently 0.35% or so I think....what happens when it's 5%? It's certainly a possibility, don't you think? And most experts and most countries agree that global warming is a serious problem that we need to address. The U.S. seems the only industrialized nation that's still trying to hide its head in the sand.
> Are you aware that as recently as the 1970s we were supposedly heading for another ice age? At least, we were according to the same clique of "environmental scientists" who are now telling us we're heading for imminent global heat death.
Ugh, this is such a weak argument. "Back when I was a child, the world was flat. Now the 'experts' say the world is round. What do they know"? So any opinion from X years ago that's conveniently on your side of the argument is reason to say the current beliefs are suspect or wrong?
> In short, read what you're writing, for Pete's sake, and understand what you're asking of the rest of us
My main point was that people need to get educated about a lot of environment issues. Is that too much to ask? Buying a more fuel efficient car, supporting renewable energy, or learning the environment cost of something? For example, 1 lb of cotton uses on average 10 lbs of pesticides and fertilizers to get made. You probably didn't know that and think of cotton as very natural and environmentally friendly. But it's not really. Buying organic cotton is a much better choice.
As for the end of the human race or the world, it's only a very remote possibility. But just the idea that we're doing things that could be causing it is alarming. Something that important needs to be taken very seriously. Waiting until we have "irrefutable proof" will be much too late.
> a gang of ignorant religious wackos
I doubt that most environmentalists are ignorant of the issues. Certainly eco-terrorists are overzealous, but I'm sure they're better informed (if misguided) than the common man.
> Unfortunately, the enviro-wackos won't be happy until we're all living in trees and caves. They simply aren't interested in solving the problems of how to clothe, feed, and house six billion+ healthy homo sapiens at anything beyond a subsistence level.
I'm guessing you're rather continue along on our merry way, destroying ecosystem after ecosystem, melting the polar ice caps, heating up the planet 10 degrees over the next 100 years, raising the sea level 100 feet (oops, hope you don't live in Florida!) and hope your descendants can solve all the problems we left behind?
The big problem I see with current trends (especially in the U.S.) is that nothing we're doing is sustainable. We're using up our natural resources at a frightening fast rate. We're still polluting like mad, we're pumping tremendous amounts of C02 and methane into the atmosphere and eventually we'll kill off the human race or just most of the planet. If every one in the world lived like the US did, we'd need 3 Earths to handle the demand on natural resources.
I don't expect to move back to living in trees and caves, but we better start working on solving some of our current problems. Drilling for more oil doesn't do anything productive in the long run. I'd rather see a $10 billion program to put solar panels on the majority of everyone's houses. Sure, it wouldn't solve all our power needs but it's a step in the right direction. Upping fuel mileage requirements, working on conservation and getting people educated on what they're consuming and it's environmental cost. The next time you buy something look at what its made of, where its made and imagine the complex process of manufacture and possibility of environmental problems.