The core of the problem of everything

[sgruenhagen44]

Over-population is a problem, very much so.

Is that a fact?

I would say so. Look at all of our land fills. Dependency on oil. Huge upswing in processed foods. This is all because of over-population. Do we really no where all that sewage goes? I know new technology has ways of filtering and reusing, but that is a luxury we enjoy not everyone. On the other hand over-population is all relative. I guess my point is that our earth would be much healthier with less humans. It's hard to argue against that. Sorry got a little off topic.

[tman]

Over-population is a problem, very much so.

Is that a fact?

I would say so. Look at all of our land fills. Dependency on oil. Huge upswing in processed foods. This is all because of over-population. Do we really no where all that sewage goes? I know new technology has ways of filtering and reusing, but that is a luxury we enjoy not everyone. On the other hand over-population is all relative. I guess my point is that our earth would be much healthier with less humans. It's hard to argue against that. Sorry got a little off topic.

You actually didn't state one fact that supports your argument.

Try again.

[sgruenhagen44]

It wasn't so much an argument. I was just stating that people do take a toll on mother earth. It really didn't have to relate with mass shootings and gun control. I would think that everyone would have to agree that humans have a lot bigger impact on the earth than lets say bambi or rabbits. I drive about 50 miles everyday in my V8 truck, and it also didn't help that I lost a couple of gallons of coolant last month either. Glad I got that fixed. I also smoke cigarettes and do the best I can to dispose of them properly, but not all of them end up in land fill. Humans have came up with a lot of great ideas and lot of ways to protect our environment and such... but the problem is that most of those problems were created by us in the first place. Get it? Sorry for not layin down stats and such. Plus look at all the west metro lakes. ewwwww. Full of fertilizer. Which if you think about it stems from the increase in population due to the demand for more food.

More people= more waste

But this is far from what the OP is saying. Not the "CORE PROBLEM OF EVERYTHING"

[sgruenhagen44]

Sorry if I came off as a left wing hippie liberal bunny lovin tree hugger.

In my mind there is no renewable resources. SAVE THE MUSKIES! catch and release only.

Now I have successfully gone waaaay off topic.

[Heffay]

It's ok. A little acknowledgement of global climate change around here is a good thing.

[tman]

It's ok. A little acknowledgement of global climate change around here is a good thing.

LOL.


Now, if were caused by man, then it might be an issue worth discussing.

[Heffay]

It's ok. A little acknowledgement of global climate change around here is a good thing.

LOL.

Now, if were caused by man, then it might be an issue worth discussing.

Well, he seems to think it is.

[xd ED]

The size of the planet and amount of it's natural resources hasn't increased in the last 20/ 200/ 2000/ 20000/ 200000 years.. The only thing that has allowed population to increase is the advancement of technology. If and when the collective technology plateaus, population numbers will act accordingly.




As far as having room to move- I believe something like 50% of the US population lives within 50 miles of a coastal water way.


The Wiki review

The Population Bomb is a best-selling book written by Stanford University Professor Paul R. Ehrlich and his wife, Anne Ehrlich (who was uncredited), in 1968.[1][2] It warned of the mass starvation of humans in the 1970s and 1980s due to overpopulation, as well as other major societal upheavals, and advocated immediate action to limit population growth. Fears of a "population explosion" were widespread in the 1950s and 60s, but the book and its author brought the idea to an even wider audience.[3][4] The book has been criticized in recent decades for its alarmist tone and inaccurate predictions. The Ehrlichs stand by the basic ideas in the book, stating in 2009 that "perhaps the most serious flaw in The Bomb was that it was much too optimistic about the future" and believe that it achieved their goals because "it alerted people to the importance of environmental issues and brought human numbers into the debate on the human future

[sgruenhagen44]

I never claimed man created climate change or anything. But I do know that coolant leaking out of my truck is not a good thing and either is the exhaust.

[XDM45]

I think there's 2 types of climate change...... 1) the natural kind where the Earth ebbs and flows between ice age periods and not; and 2) the climate change caused by humans.

We've been around for a very short time compared to the Earth and Universe. In all our time here, as short as that is, it's only in the past 150 years that has humankind has been part of the industrial age....and in the past 150 years, we've caused more damage to the Earth than all previous years of our existence combined. What changed is that humankind stopped living in harmony with nature and seeing ourselves as part of it, and we began to treat it like a resource rather than as another part of us, and we as part of it.

We are part of nature. We are not apart from nature.

If the Earth was a human body; then we're like good cells gone bad because we've replicated at a faster rate than normal all the while creating and spilling toxins we've created which do not exist by themselves in nature, such as plastic.

You know what cells-gone-bad are called?

Cancer.

Humankind is pretty much a Cancer upon the Earth.

We didn't used to be.
We don't have to be, but we are because it's what we choose.

We all leave some toxic footprint upon the Earth with our car exhaust, plastic trash, etc. I work to reduce my carbon footprint, my waste, but it's still there. We all do it and we're all part of it. Even if you don't drive, your food was driven to you, the clothes on your back, it's all around us and there's no escaping it because it's part of our society. When we changed, society changed. When we thought ourselves apart from nature, so too became society apart from it, at least in mindset, but not in reality.

There are consequences for our actions and to be in denial of that is delusion.

Humankind has lived here without causing climate change for millenia, but that has now changed, and the sooner we accept that, accept the responsibility, and the sooner we can work towards a greener and natural existence, the better of we'll all be. To my knowledge, there's one Earth and if we wreck it, we're done for. The Earth may recover after a very long time without us, but we would last a very short time without it. We need the Earth, but it doesn't need us. It was here before us and it will be here after us. The choice really is ours to make.

So if people don't believe in the human effect on climate change, that's their right to an opinion as such; but clearly the evidence is all around us.

Anyone up for a nice glass of water from the Mississippi?

[sgruenhagen44]

I think there's 2 types of climate change...... 1) the natural kind where the Earth ebbs and flows between ice age periods and not; and 2) the climate change caused by humans.

We've been around for a very short time compared to the Earth and Universe. In all our time here, as short as that is, it's only in the past 150 years that has humankind has been part of the industrial age....and in the past 150 years, we've caused more damage to the Earth than all previous years of our existence combined. What changed is that humankind stopped living in harmony with nature and seeing ourselves as part of it, and we began to treat it like a resource rather than as another part of us, and we as part of it.

We are part of nature. We are not apart from nature.

If the Earth was a human body; then we're like good cells gone bad because we've replicated at a faster rate than normal all the while creating and spilling toxins we've created which do not exist by themselves in nature, such as plastic.

You know what cells-gone-bad are called?

Cancer.

Humankind is pretty much a Cancer upon the Earth.

We didn't used to be.
We don't have to be, but we are because it's what we choose.

We all leave some toxic footprint upon the Earth with our car exhaust, plastic trash, etc. I work to reduce my carbon footprint, my waste, but it's still there. We all do it and we're all part of it. Even if you don't drive, your food was driven to you, the clothes on your back, it's all around us and there's no escaping it because it's part of our society. When we changed, society changed. When we thought ourselves apart from nature, so too became society apart from it, at least in mindset, but not in reality.

There are consequences for our actions and to be in denial of that is delusion.

Humankind has lived here without causing climate change for millenia, but that has now changed, and the sooner we accept that, accept the responsibility, and the sooner we can work towards a greener and natural existence, the better of we'll all be. To my knowledge, there's one Earth and if we wreck it, we're done for. The Earth may recover after a very long time without us, but we would last a very short time without it. We need the Earth, but it doesn't need us. It was here before us and it will be here after us. The choice really is ours to make.

So if people don't believe in the human effect on climate change, that's their right to an opinion as such; but clearly the evidence is all around us.

Anyone up for a nice glass of water from the Mississippi?

[Evad]

So if people don't believe in the human effect on climate change, that's their right to an opinion as such; but clearly the evidence is all around us.

Anyone up for a nice glass of water from the Mississippi?

Are you calling dirt and trash "climate change"? I won't say we aren't affecting the planet...but polution and climate are not one and the same.

Any global warming theory supporters care to share with me how long man has been accurately reporting weather around the globe?

[sgruenhagen44]

So if people don't believe in the human effect on climate change, that's their right to an opinion as such; but clearly the evidence is all around us.

Anyone up for a nice glass of water from the Mississippi?

Are you calling dirt and trash "climate change"? I won't say we aren't affecting the planet...but polution and climate are not one and the same.

Any global warming theory supporters care to share with me how long man has been accurately reporting weather around the globe?

Read the first sentence of the second parargraph on XD45s last post.

[Evad]

So if people don't believe in the human effect on climate change, that's their right to an opinion as such; but clearly the evidence is all around us.

Anyone up for a nice glass of water from the Mississippi?

Are you calling dirt and trash "climate change"? I won't say we aren't affecting the planet...but polution and climate are not one and the same.

Any global warming theory supporters care to share with me how long man has been accurately reporting weather around the globe?

Read the first sentence of the second parargraph on XD45s last post.

I did. Now read the part I quoted and commented on.

[XDM45]

Are you calling dirt and trash "climate change"? I won't say we aren't affecting the planet...but polution and climate are not one and the same.

Any global warming theory supporters care to share with me how long man has been accurately reporting weather around the globe?

Pollution affects the climate, such as in acid rain, which then gets into the ecosystem and runs through it. Everything is connected, intertwined, and everything is thus affected. I'm sure the two great plastic patches in the ocean affect sea life, and those are just two sch examples. Call it the butterfly effect, but climate change is subtle, over time, it's not F5 tornadoes ripping down main street usa with signs saying "Humans did this!!"