My Take on Environmentalism

My Take on Environmentalism

Postby Brian » Mon Mar 05, 2012 10:34 pm

Note: Thee opinions are mine, and mine alone. I'm actually eager for someone to challenge them, so feel free. I'm going to express these as bullet points.

-- "Save the Earth" is nonsense. The Earth doesn't need saving. We could do our best to kill off every living thing on the planet through pollution and "the Earth" would shake it off like a bad dream. It's been through worse than us.
-- I think people should produce less carbon emissions, recycle more, etc -- to the point where it makes sense. I don't think we should be majorly holding back people's lifestyles (making them use crappier lighting and washing machines, for example) for the sake of maybe temporarily lowering the Earth's temperature 1/2 of one degree.
-- When people talk about all the harm humans do to the Earth just by existing, it makes me want to smack them. With a 2x4. In the brain stem. Why? Because the natural, logical conclusion, as Bender might say, is "Kill all humans". The only rational alternative, to that, it seems to me, is to cut forests, pave roads, etc., only when we need to, but to not not do it. The Earth is not a museum that we need to keep exactly as we found it. We only need to keep it livable for us. An inordinate fondness for the spotted owl shouldn't be allowed to translate into human suffering.

(There. That should generate some discussion. ;))
"I guess the winter makes you laugh a little slower
Makes you talk a little lower
About the things you could not show her."

-- Counting Crows, "A Long December"
User avatar
Brian
Site Admin
 
Posts: 1913
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 10:02 pm

Re: My Take on Environmentalism

Postby Millennium » Tue Mar 06, 2012 5:28 pm

Damn...I can't disagree with a bit of that..... :bigsmile:
Save America, IMPEACH OBAMA! And continue tossing out the deadbeat Democrats that are currently in office.
User avatar
Millennium
Contributor
 
Posts: 1221
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 2:11 pm
Location: Georgia

Re: My Take on Environmentalism

Postby Brian » Tue Mar 06, 2012 7:58 pm

Millennium wrote:Damn...I can't disagree with a bit of that..... :bigsmile:


I kinda figured that'd be right up your alley, Mill. :)
"I guess the winter makes you laugh a little slower
Makes you talk a little lower
About the things you could not show her."

-- Counting Crows, "A Long December"
User avatar
Brian
Site Admin
 
Posts: 1913
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 10:02 pm

Re: My Take on Environmentalism

Postby Millennium » Tue Mar 06, 2012 8:19 pm

"Two great minds........."
Save America, IMPEACH OBAMA! And continue tossing out the deadbeat Democrats that are currently in office.
User avatar
Millennium
Contributor
 
Posts: 1221
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 2:11 pm
Location: Georgia

Re: My Take on Environmentalism

Postby Quicksilver » Thu Mar 15, 2012 2:44 pm

I don't care that much for the spotted owl, because we will lose a lot of species, many of which we don't really need. Going past the tipping point of self-releasing tundra methane to oceanic methane hydrates at deeper and deeper levels is something similar to what happened after thousands of years of large scale vulcanism 55 million years ago. Then, there was less carbon in the form of methane hydrates, sequestered than now, by a few percentage points. That "event" (geologically) took much more time than the present one beginning. Life had more time to adapt. Then, around 30% of species went extinct, with a lowering of numbers for the rest. The carbon was re-sequestered in 15- to 170K years and biological diversity restored in 2 million years. Tundra scientists in 2009 thought we were very near or at that tipping point. CO2 pollution has gone up in record amounts since then.
As far as mammalian population crashes, they have been documented in a number of case histories. The fact that humans are far into overshoot with overpopulation is well known, and nothing is being done to change the stimulated mammal population crash curve humanity is on. Depletion of a variety of essential resources continues. World fisheries collapse by 2050, Ogallala Aquifer and others gone by 2040, soil loss of 2/3 continuing to a higher percentage, beyond peak oil effects, AGW effects on crops---the world of 2050 will only be able to support 3 billion staving people or so. Yet the UN says it will be 9 or 10 billion----an impossibility!
If the population had gone up to a billion or 2 at most, then stabilized sanely, the future would look OK. If people would have used resources at their replenishment rates, we wouldn't be looking at running out of pure water and good farming soil. If people would have only polluted at the rate our natural system could absorb, then we would not be looking at malevolent climate change, or have six huge oceanic trash gyres.
If humanity would have taken measures to get population to sustainability back when Nixon addressed Congress on it, our children and grandchildren would not be facing the horrors of the population crash. If humanity would have gone solar, wind, and GenIV power when AGW was realized as fact by the vast majority of scientists 20 years ago, and taken other measures to reduce HGHGs, we would not be now at the tipping point of methane self-release to turnover, so fast(actually a thousand years) it causes an ELE worse than when the asteroid hit 65 million years ago. Denial has kept meaningful action from being taken, and the suffering of future generations is on the souls of those who did nothing, or made it worse. :bomb:
I believe Our Father wanted us to live sustainably with knowledgeable stewardship of our biosphere, and living in harmony with each other and other life. Using our resources no faster than He or we could regenerate them, and causing no more pollution than the world's plants could absorb, or other natural systems could break down. :angel:
It is a shame that some of us can and do live sustainably, but our children are dragged down with the rest in this collapse caused by human over-breeding, stupidity, and greed over time. Something like the seven deadly sins leading to the apocalypse. :angryfire: 2040-70 the human population falls from 9 billion to 1/2 billion. :boxing: :crybaby2: Then sometime around 3000 Anthropocene Thermal Maximum with an 87% ELE. :shock: :geek: Two ice age cycles skipped then in 200K years a return to "normal" conditions of ice ages and interglacials. :ugeek: In a couple million years the Earth is back up to 10 million species like it had at the start of the "Sixth Great Extinction" (like Leakey's '96 book). :guitar1: :rockon: :uzi:
Before every action and decision think of the consequences 7 generations into the future....Ute Rule of Life
Quicksilver
 
Posts: 231
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2010 5:16 pm


Return to Political Matters

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron