Sabre52
Cave Dweller
Me and my gal, Rosie
Member since August 2005
Posts: 20,487
|
Post by Sabre52 on Apr 21, 2013 22:04:47 GMT -5
Heck Helen, you're always quoting scientists. My viewpoint, while it may strike you as sociopathic, is based on scientific principles and the outcome is pretty much a certainty. We refuse to limit population growth. The growth in our population and the resources our vast numbers consume or destroy is a threat to all living things on the planet. Ecosystems tend to get rid of such threats. Disease, famine, war, a planet rendered environmentally unusable for our species etc. From an ecological point of view, humanity is like a disease spreading uncontrolled across the planetary surface leaving destruction in it's path. You can be a Pollyanna if you like and bury your head in the sand but that's about the meat of the situation. I don't really see why acknowledging mankind is a pestilence to the planet is sociopathic. It's more a realistic viewpoint. You do read National Geographic and all them other science mags right. If this conclusion surprises you you must not understand what you've been reading *L*. In 200 years we've basically trashed our entire planet beyond all redemption for humanity. Our only hope was to get off the planet and find another to infect but that does not seem likely as I'm sure our planet is posted with "Keep Out Biohazard" signs for alien visitors who might wander near. *L* As for scorpions etc. They're tougher and more adaptable. In our big old brains and egos we think the planet belongs to us but really it does not. The planet belongs to the survivors.*L* ...Mel
PS: I know this sounds cruel but first off, you had kids, increasing a population already out of control, I suppose in the hope of some sort of biological immortality through your offspring. Now you hope the planet that's been screwed up is salvageable so your kids won't have to deal with the results of the damage done by those who have gone before them. Problem is, by having kids in the first place you're part of the problem not part of the cure and now you want to do a little something to help fix the problems created by a zillion folks who felt the need to reproduce just as you did. *W*
|
|
Sabre52
Cave Dweller
Me and my gal, Rosie
Member since August 2005
Posts: 20,487
|
Post by Sabre52 on Apr 21, 2013 22:51:11 GMT -5
Oh and Helen, just to really depress you. My wife and I decided not to have children, mainly because having one big kid in the family, me,was enough. So get this. No matter how many gas guzzlers, I drive, how long I leave my lights on, how much food and water we consume etc, that single decision not to reproduce has made us much less damaging to the planet than you will ever be, no matter what you do. By reproducing, you've made kids who might give you grandkids, and great grandkids etc etc. You've created a family tree of resource consumption, and waste generation. Why heck, imagine all the global warming and environmental damage your progeny will indirectly create over the years, at least if the human race lasts that long. A veritably huge environmental footprint and there ya go grousing about global warming and calling me names *L* And me being mister responsible with this tiny little environment footprint and all....Mel
|
|
|
Post by helens on Apr 22, 2013 3:00:47 GMT -5
LOL! Mel, you sound like PETA for humans. Every living creature on earth consumes. Every species wants to survive. For someone who believes in survival of the fittest so closely, it's odd that you think the best suited to survive of all species, the most adaptable- humans, should not.
I think we can survive fine if we control ourselves. It's no different than eating, drinking, smoking in moderation... we don't have to overindulge to meet our needs. The unchecked growth is the problem, not growth itself.
Now if we're going to die anyway, ask yourself why you care if we damage the earth? What difference whether we choose to save ourselves or seal our fates? When you abdicate responsibility either way, why care what others do at all?
I hope someday our species will reach beyond the earth. Who says we have to die out at all:)?
|
|
jamesp
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2012
Posts: 36,558
|
Post by jamesp on Apr 22, 2013 6:39:33 GMT -5
*L* I blame all global warming on Helen. She types so much so fast that the friction from her keys heats up all the Florida air and changes global weather patterns....Mel I love you Helen.
|
|
Sabre52
Cave Dweller
Me and my gal, Rosie
Member since August 2005
Posts: 20,487
|
Post by Sabre52 on Apr 22, 2013 9:12:07 GMT -5
Helen *L* Don't you see, you are missing the point entirely. Mankind is not adaptable. Man does not adapt to fit the environment. Man adapts the environment to fit him. Man cuts trees to build homes, digs fossil fuels to keep warm and provide transportation, paves the planet so we can get around faster, develops toxic pesticides so we can combat pests and grow food more efficiently to feed our masses, builds nukes to more efficiently kill his fellows etc. All these things man does to adapt the environment to fit him are destructive. Adaptable organisms ( rats, roaches, possums, scorpions etc) adapt themselves to fit the environment, "without damaging" the environment *L*
It should also be noted that most all other species breed to the extent the environment will support them. When their numbers exceed carrying capacity, they either die off or have less offspring. Man in his infinite arrogance, thinks he's God's gift to the planet and as such, has the responsibility and God given right to procreate and make more of his wonderful ken. Pity the rest of the species on the planet don't have a say in the matter *L*. But then, what the heck, I'll bet the dinosaurs thought they were pretty hot sh*t too and look how that turned out *L* But wait, that's not really true is it? Dinosaurs "adapted" to fit their changing environment and became birds. I wonder will man adapt when his environment goes to heck? Hasn't yet but then maybe a tough manroach is in our future*L*...Mel
|
|
|
Post by jakesrocks on Apr 22, 2013 9:21:34 GMT -5
Don't know how much more of this heavy, wet "GLOBAL WARMING" we can stand up here in the northern plains. Can barely see the end of the driveway through this "GLOBAL WARMING".
|
|
Sabre52
Cave Dweller
Me and my gal, Rosie
Member since August 2005
Posts: 20,487
|
Post by Sabre52 on Apr 22, 2013 9:39:43 GMT -5
Helen: Oh another little note on man's survival chances. I'm a bit of an expert in the field of pesticides and after many years in the field something became very apparent. The pests are gradually winning because they are adaptable and we are not. The gap between how toxic a pesticide must be to kill a particular pest and not kill us is narrowing. Pests adapt to fight toxins because they have short lives and many generations in which to mutate, so it take more and stronger poisons to kill them. We, do not adapt and live a long time so these same poisons, if we are exposed to them can kill us directly or can accumulate in our systems and give us cancer or other long term health problems.
This adaptation by pests, is why pesticide companies are constantly having to develop new chemicals to kill pests no longer controlled by the older pesticides. It was also interesting that a huge number of chemical we used to commonly issue permits for have now been banned due to adverse human effects that did not initially show up on testing ( because scientists are whores and wanted to sell these new chemicals). Of course, when these chemicals are banned in the U.S, the companies sell them to foreign countries ( a process known as dumping) who use them to grow produce they ship right back to the U.S. Sadly, all the info the government puts out about this produce being tested is bullsh*t to ease our minds. Only a minute portion shipped in or even produced here is tested. I quarantined fields or shipments for illegal residues all the time on the job. In reality, almost none is tested.
So, to make a long story short, eventually the pests will be immune to the chemicals we use to control them and the amounts and toxicities needed for control will damage us more than them because we cannot adapt. At that point, more food supplies will fail and everybody will starve. Everybody except the bugs and weeds at least...Mel
|
|
|
Post by helens on Apr 22, 2013 11:37:41 GMT -5
Mel, I can't argue about the pesticides... I know it's true. I also know it's true that the more screaming we do about regulations costing us money, the fewer inspectors we will have for the things we need inspected. Just like the 'no increase on taxes' turning into 'make the middle class pay the taxes so the rich can dodge taxes altogether, what we THINK we vote for rarely turns out to be what we vote for, Republican politicians are masters of bait and switch. Dems do it too, but to a far less degree.
I haven't spent a lot of time looking at Gov't research databases recently, but when I did take a look, I was floored at how little was there... we have already been pulling the plug on research over the last 10 years, and so many things the Gov't should have studied to protect us, new chemicals, new technology, new methods, are not studied at all. Now those selling the things are the ones who write the studies, it's horrifying.
The smaller the government, the more Corporations can sneak poisons into our food and water and laws that once protected the consumer are fewer because of the 'no regulation' climate we thought we would like.
Right now, we are losing the balance, we need more regulations and more studies of long term effects of brand new chemicals and molecules, not less. In the name of getting rid of annoyances like EPA regulations, we let them justify getting rid of our food and water testing.
I am realizing too that with the 'global warming' issue, the TERM, 'global warming' is so misleading, because it MEANS climate change caused by man, not a specific temperature in any direction. So when the weather changes to being 'stuck' in a cooling pattern, it 'disproves' global warming... when it actually proves the unnatural climate change.
Mel, man is the most adaptable species. Not because we can adapt so well, but we are uniquely able to adapt our climates to our needs, something no other species can do. You mentioned this, but you don't see the advantage? We have more wood in some areas, we build wooden homes. We have more sand and clay, we build block homes. We live in an area with caves, we build cave homes. Adapting our environment means we are MORE adaptable than other species, not less. We have a capacity to solve complex problems unmatched by any species that has ever existed on earth. We WILL survive.
As for the pests that are overrunning us, I'll bet they're nutritious. If they overrun our food supply, we'll have a new source of cheaper protein by eating them. We will adapt.
Looking for a solution to Global Warming now means that we don't suffer catastrophic loss later. Being willing to accept that global warming is a problem we need to solve is the first step towards solving it. Agreeing with people on oil company payrolls that there is no problem is delaying the search for solutions. Denying we have a problem only makes the problem worse.
|
|
Sabre52
Cave Dweller
Me and my gal, Rosie
Member since August 2005
Posts: 20,487
|
Post by Sabre52 on Apr 22, 2013 13:56:44 GMT -5
Helen, nope you are still getting adaptability wrong. Think of it this way. Any organism living on the planet is essentially parasitic as it's lives off the resources available on the host planet. A perfect parasite lives of the host without damaging said host and can physically adapt to even drastic environmental changes. The more perfectly adapted the parasite is the less damage it does and the more successful. Hence the scorpion that has been around on host planet Earth 400 million years. You are mistaking killing an animal for it's fur when you get cold or cutting down a forest to build homes to keep the rain off as an adaptation. This is adaptive behavior (altering your environment) but at the same time destructive behavior. It is forcing your environment to adapt to your needs, not species adaptation. Successful adaptation would be to grow waterproof fur on our bodies. That is non destructive "adaptation" and is what other survivor organisms do.
Since man as a species, cannot adapt well to climate or provide natural food sources for his growing numbers etc. Man has to alter the environment to survive. Such alteration damages the environment and the more numerous we get the more extreme the damage and the it's impossible to mitigate said damage as long as our population grows. As we've all seen it's not just resource consumption but waste generation too. Anyone who keeps livestock knows this. If you have a carrying capacity of one animal unit per 30 acres of rangeland and you graze ten AU's/acre on that range, the rangeland is destroyed very quickly. Man is simply overgrazing his range. *L* As I've said, man's arrogant sense of entitlement and stupid faith in the "Hey if we have faith, it'll all work out" theory of existence makes him refuse to accept population limits and man is therefore doomed to be a short timer on this planet. At least, unless something happens to change the dynamic and it is not likely to be any of your hopey changey BS either. It's got to be much more grim that that because ole ma Nature is one cruel beee atch *L*.
And again, global warming whether man made of not is a much lesser issue than if we should have global cooling. But really, that point is unnecessary to consider anyway because, as long as man's numbers increase, global warming if man made, isn't going to go away until man's huge population goes away. Remember, many nations ( ie China, India, Pakistan etc) are where we were back in the forties and just starting down the path to conspicuous consumption. If global warming is man made, we're not looking at any solution down the line .
Oh, and regarding the pesticide thing which is very scary. True ironic story. I received a call about watermelons in the market contaminated with a dangerous pesticide called temik. Me and several other biologists went to all the markets in our district and quarantined and destroyed the affected melon lots. Meanwhile, it turns out my dad was eating poison melons in northern California and got very sick. It's virtually impossible to have enough guys in the field to even dent the sampling required to actually keep our food supply safe. We're just lucky that 99% of farmers and ranchers are well educated and responsible growers. That's why I try to buy American produce whenever possible or stuff from countries like Chile where farmers are very modern and American in their practices.
And as for eating the pests, weeds etc. You forget, they adapt *L* The bugs will be full of residues from the pesticides we try to kill them with and fail, and the plants, well they adapt by making themselves toxic so we cant eat them or are all full of pesticide residues they soak up from contaminated soil.. I've actually taken samples where there were illegal levels of DDT and no crop on which DDT had been used had been grown on that land for like 40 years. The evil than man has done to the environment lives on long afterwards...Mel
|
|
jamesp
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2012
Posts: 36,558
|
Post by jamesp on Apr 22, 2013 14:41:28 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by helens on Apr 22, 2013 16:18:34 GMT -5
at airport so must keep it short... James, of course women are to blame for everything! no women=no men. pretty basic:).
Sent from my Nexus 4 using proboards
|
|
Sabre52
Cave Dweller
Me and my gal, Rosie
Member since August 2005
Posts: 20,487
|
Post by Sabre52 on Apr 24, 2013 8:29:22 GMT -5
Global warming my a**! *L* Man I just got in from feeding and just about froze my hiney off. I should be in shorts and a tee shirt by this time of year and had to wear a heavy hoody instead. Fiesta Days at San Antonio recorded the coldest temps ever I think. Scr*w these snake oil salesmen science types and all their mumbo jumbo gibberish they use to explain how global warming is making it colder. I'd like to see them in their skivvies and tied to a stake in my backyard giving me a lecture on their BS global warming theories *L*.....Mel
|
|
bushmanbilly
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2008
Posts: 4,719
|
Post by bushmanbilly on Apr 24, 2013 10:08:03 GMT -5
Mel your a wimp. Just kidding. It wa 40 here yesterday. When I was down town there was a lady walking around in a sundress. Spring has finally arrived here. For the first time we have a forecast that is above 0 for 2 weeks.
|
|
Sabre52
Cave Dweller
Me and my gal, Rosie
Member since August 2005
Posts: 20,487
|
Post by Sabre52 on Apr 24, 2013 12:08:02 GMT -5
You are totally correct Billy, I am a a wimp where cold is concerned. I hate it and that's one reason I moved to south Texas. And it's barely above 40 "here" today with a strong wind chill so it feels way cooler. And I should remind you, this is south Texas, not Saskatchewan home of you tough snow living folks *L*. Imagine that, I'm in hot ole Texas and it's practically May, and it's freaking cold as Canada....Mel
|
|
|
Post by jakesrocks on Apr 24, 2013 20:56:14 GMT -5
Lol Mel, it got up to 46 here today. Along with the warm up came rain, sleet, snow, thunder and a strong wind. I think all of this global warming stuff has mother nature confused. She's trying to give us ice age global warming.
|
|
Sabre52
Cave Dweller
Me and my gal, Rosie
Member since August 2005
Posts: 20,487
|
Post by Sabre52 on Apr 24, 2013 23:11:22 GMT -5
*L* Maybe we need some of that global cooling so's we can warm up Jake *L*....Mel
|
|
grayfingers
Cave Dweller
Member since November 2007
Posts: 4,575
|
Post by grayfingers on Apr 29, 2013 6:43:12 GMT -5
|
|
bushmanbilly
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2008
Posts: 4,719
|
Post by bushmanbilly on Apr 29, 2013 18:41:40 GMT -5
I think you have been censored in Canada Grey. Your last link is giving me a 403 forbidden page. Care to copy and paste please.
|
|
grayfingers
Cave Dweller
Member since November 2007
Posts: 4,575
|
Post by grayfingers on Apr 29, 2013 18:52:37 GMT -5
|
|
bushmanbilly
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2008
Posts: 4,719
|
Post by bushmanbilly on Apr 29, 2013 19:48:49 GMT -5
That one worked. Good article. I bet the lamestream media won't be reporting that report. Here is another good one from the Telegraph. www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/10022134/The-mercury-is-falling-but-our-MPs-are-full-of-hot-air.htmlLast week it was reported that 3,318 places in the USA had recorded their lowest temperatures for this time of year since records began. Similar record cold was experienced by places in every province of Canada. So cold has the Russian winter been that Moscow had its deepest snowfall in 134 years of observations. Here in Britain, where we had our fifth freezing winter in a row, the Central England Temperature record – according to an expert analysis on the US science blog Watts Up With That – shows that in this century, average winter temperatures have dropped by 1.45C, more than twice as much as their rise between 1850 and 1999, and twice as much as the entire net rise in global temperatures recorded in the 20th century. But, hang on, it wasn’t meant to be like this. Weren’t we told that, thanks to all that carbon dioxide we are pumping into the air, the world was faced with global warming; that, according to the computer models, temperatures were due to rise by at least 0.3C every decade; and that snowfall in Britain was “a thing of the past”?
|
|