Seven Big Failed Environmentalist Predictions

Sort:
Juhomorko

Damn. I'm such an unlucky bugger. My parents forbit me saying 'End of discussion' after i had made some random "argument" my self. That was when i was about 5yo. Cry

SpiritoftheVictory

Human habitats MUST expand. The Earth should have a much larger Human poplulation. Humans are the only species with intelligence and, therefore, it is our fate that matters the most. Some, maybe most, other species will have to go.

The choice is clear we grow, they go!

 

The alternative, of course, is a much harsher reality for Humanity. If we try to impose stasis on our population growth, and human econoimic growth, there will be wars, there will be civil unrests, and conflicts all around the globe. We are already witnessing this. These conflicts are a result of lack of freedom and education, not shortage of resources and overpopulation. If you think about it, lack of freedom and lack of education perpetuates poverty; poverty, in turn creates the pressure cooker that bursts in conflicts. I know this personally full and well because I grew up in a relative poverty. I could see how people (who were otherwise very alike) got divided and became hostile to each other quickly.

 

If we believe that there's only so much resources to go around, we are doomed. If we, on the other hand, believe that resources are created by Human ingenuity, we are destined to prosper and reach the farthest stars. If you think about a resource like oil, for instance: it has been siting around for millions of years, until Humans discovered how to burn that resource to generate energy. Oil drives the global economy to this day. It's a relatively cheap, and energy-efficient resource. We need to continue using it (environmental impact nonwithstanding) as well as develop and put to use other sources of energy to lift people out of poverty. Our #1 problem is poverty, and not global warming or pollution (which is a more real and pressing threat actually). And here too, I've seen that access to education and technology has eased poverty, and conflicts between people. This needs to continue.

 

And YES, there are things we can do much smarter, as far as environmental protection is concerned. I'm not against sensible environmental protection. However, in principle, we'll have to make some serious sacrifices to facilitate Human population growth. Truly (and sadly), some animals will have to go. Their habitats will be taken by Humans - billions of them. These new people will be much better educated than we are now - just like we all are much better educated now than people 100, 200, 300 years ago. They will also have new tools and a higher standard of living. Some of them will be really, really bright. They'll unlock new secrets of science and technology - they'll develop ways for us to move to other planets, such as Mars, and terraform them. Then, new branches of civilization will start in places other than the Earth. [Interestingly, this process will spread other forms of life beyond the Earth. We may even bring some of the extinct animals back to life through genetic engineering (right now scientist are actually thinking of doing that with some extinct species).] Some new geniuses will be born. They'll find the way of interstellar travel (impossible though it may seem today). And, in thousands of years, Human colonies will be all over our Galaxy, and maybe other Galaxies... I like that vision and I am Happy and Proud to be a HUMAN! And I refuse to tolerate opinions that view us as a problem. Those who do that need to rethink their ideas and see how dangerous they are since they are pitting us against each other.

zborg

Don't forget "youthful" Karpov --

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-players/anatoly-karpov-is-64

An inspiration to us all, (with OCD).

Juhomorko

NOTE!! SpiritoftheVictory DON'T READ THIS! You won't tolerate it!!

I do not comprehend how humanity would need billions of more humans to increase the level of education. Secondly, alot of inventions and innovations have been done by people without vast education on the field of that innovation/invention. I do however recognize the merrit of education for research. There will always be a footprint for every human in the resource usage, that's just a simple fact. There will never be a situation that Tellus could support limitless number of humans. Sorry..

If someone suggests that humans are somehow so superior that we don't have to care (not to mention take responsibility) for other forms of life, i suggest GO OUT, see the nature. Watch NatGeo if you're living in surroundings so SUPERIOR that there's no wildlife left to be seen. Then answer why the educational level isn't related to population or population density..? Funny, huh?

It's a fact that humanity won't survive for ever. I just hope humanity won't leave it's only mark as beeing f#$@ing self centered ignorant power slaves.

Juhomorko

True! And the last week an elefant killed a man in Germany.. xD Smart animals..

bigpoison

Taking care of animals is good for the environment after all!

913Glorax12
JamieDelarosa wrote:
lesterbean wrote: 10 hottest years globally

Flawed data set.

A terrible data set.

SpiritoftheVictory

Reply to post #537. Well, I read the post. And I don't tolerate the nonsense in it. I will explain myself for others to judge, since I have little hope that the author will be able to see beyond the dogma...

 

We need Billions more people for the very same reasons that we have Billions of people today. One may say "wouldn't we be better off if we had half the population that we have today?" To a naive mind, the answer to this question may seem an obvious yes. Indeed, we wouldn't need to use as much energy, food and other resources to sustain ourselves. However, if you're taking out half of the population of the Earth, you'll also need to take away half the inventors and inventions. Take your pick: either do away with Thomas Edison (electricity) or Louis Pasteur (pasteurization). I like the fact that both of them were around. And it is no coincidence, that with the higher population we have a much higher standard of living. Accross the globe, on average, literacy rates have gone up, infant mortality rates have gone down. Majority of people have access to electricity, food, and drinking water. An ever-increasing number of people have access to the Internet, cell phones, and even cars.  We can continue, we need to continue on this path.

 

Like I mentioned before, the idea of "not having enough space" is an extremely dangerous idea. Let's see who had this idea. Aha, Hitler. Hitler: "Germany needs living space - Let's go to war!" ... and sends millions of his men to die in Russia. Germany didn't need a living space! It had a larger area than it has today and a much smaller population. All they needed to do is innovate. And that they did - after the World War II. And no wonder that Germany has a much higher standard of living today than it did back then - despite having a smaller "living space."

 

So, of course the Earth can sustain a much higher population than it has today - provided Human Creativity and Human Freedom is unleashed. Now, I agree that the Earth can't sustain an unlimited number of people. And that's why, in time we'll move into SPACE. I'm no scientist but my understanding is that one resource that SPACE is very, very rich with is...

 

SPACE! I rest my case.

clms_chess

Coooool! Finally this thread has reached the Lunar Landing denial stage....:D

So true kaynight....man didn't walk on the moon...

We walked SIX times on the moon! ....and left a lot of lunar landing junk (and footprints) that's still there!... since 1969-early 70's. :D

kayak21
clms_chess wrote:

Coooool! Finally this thread has reached the Lunar Landing denial stage....:D

So true kaynight....man didn't walk on the moon...

We walked SIX times on the moon! ....and left a lot of lunar landing junk (and footprints) that's still there!... since 1969-early 70's. :D

We call that Fly Tipping. You can get a fine for that in the UK. ;)

clms_chess

to youuuuuu...lol...but NOT to real powerful entities...Russia and China who would like nothing better than to prove to the world that the SIX (not one but six) lunar landings were a hoax....

but they don't. :D

kayak21
kaynight wrote:

For tipping flies? We must be told!

Yes. One must always tip one's flies.

clms_chess

Riiiiiiight. Lol

JerryKasporav

DING DING DING!!  We have a winner!  By playing the Hitler card and envoking Godwin's law SpiritoftheVictory has lost the internet by technical knock-out!

JerryKasporav

kaynight, how can we miss you if you never go away??

clms_chess
kaynight wrote:

Please yourself man, it was a big con.

I knowwwwww! Lol....we not only "fooled" the world once....but 6x...LOL

and spent millions leaving lunar junk and rover. Man...we are devious...:D


 

JerryKasporav

I guess that makes you a consistent troll.

kayak21
clms_chess wrote:
kaynight wrote:

Please yourself man, it was a big con.

I knowwwwww! Lol....we not only "fooled" the world once....but 6x...LOL

and spent millions leaving lunar junk and rover. Man...we are devious...:D


 

That's you, kaynight. lol ;)

SpiritoftheVictory
JerryKasporav wrote:

DING DING DING!!  We have a winner!  By playing the Hitler card and envoking Godwin's law SpiritoftheVictory has lost the internet by technical knock-out!

Well, well, well. I guess when logical arguments are not there one can throw in a stupid one-liner to derail the debate. No wonder the concept was introduced by a mainstream lawyer and picked up by the mainstream media industry. I imagine there are lots of convenient tools like that work well brainwashing people. No wonder we have lawyers in the Government who keep being re-elected by a thoroughly brainwashed public. 

SpiritoftheVictory
kaynight wrote:

Man did not walk on the moon.

You can't be serious... Surprised Not sure if you're trolling or you indeed are serious.

 

In case you are serious, here's a question for you: why do you think the USSR did not debunk the whole thing? Why do you think the lunar landings were covered, in detail, in the Big Soviet Encylopedia - without a shadow of a doubt that the landing indeed took place... Why do you think that is?