"the ocean is broken"

[PoopyTeaBags]

In the highly unlikely scenario of global warming being bogus, only a complete moron would still disagree with the view that our planet is 'in the toilet' & its in there because of 'Human activity', if you then require some kind of unit to measure 'destructive human activity', there is probably none better than 'Carbon use by weight'.

True or untrue, I don't see any downside to promoting the concept of global warming.

Down side is eventually it could lead to you paying for carbon credits or tax on things you do and use that contains carbon.. Which includes you breathing. So eventually we could get to a society that gets taxed just for living, which would turn into slavery for the poor or restrictions on how many childern.

 

[Eighths-n-Aces]

can anybody point out someplace or something in nature that has gotten better over the years? and places like love canal and other superfund sites do not count

i know a whole bunch of the places i use to hike are covered by houses and/or chopped up with fences now, the fishing sucks and the mule deer are gone,smaller or have been replaced by white tails.

i don't need a biology major to open my eyes ........... and i don't need political fucktards or big money to make my stomach turn

 

[Weird]

if you don't believe in the decline of our environments due to climate change your downright ignorant

if you doubt that we are the catalyst see above

call your local university, talk to scientists, real scientists and educate yourselves

 

[toketronix]

Down side is eventually it could lead to you paying for carbon credits or tax on things you do and use that contains carbon.. Which includes you breathing.

Credits/tax etc is a completely separate thing from the stand-alone fact that 'carbon use' is a good way of measuring the negative effects on the natural world caused by human activity.

The carbon tax system was heavily corrupted before it even got started, I read something recently about 'carbon offsetting'....carbon offset is a reduction in emissions of carbon dioxide or greenhouse gases made in order to compensate for or to offset an emission made elsewhere ..& this scientist was explaining how the act of chopping down a 1000 year old tree actually had a negative carbon footprint...because of 'carbon offsetting' or the idea of the wealthy west buying carbon quotas from the 3rd world just so they can continue to do exactly as they have always done ....the whole thing is a sick joke, but none of it changes the fact that 'carbon use' is a good way of measuring the negative effects on the natural world caused by human activity.

There are probably billions of different human activities that are harmful to the natural world, you need a way of consolidating all those activities into a single concept so it's easy for people to understand, then it can be monitored, controlled & eventually reduced.

So eventually we could get to a society that gets taxed just for living, which would turn into slavery for the poor or restrictions on how many childern.

We're already there. But what has this to do with the state of the planet?

 

[Agaricus]

Last night I was thinking about this stuff and I remember when I was a kid me and my buddies would save up in the summer to go deep sea fishing. It wasn't unusual to catch 20-30 pound cod. Now people get excited over a 12 or 15 pounder and feel lucky if they get any at all. That's a lot of change in 50 years.

 

[trichrider]

http://[youtubeif]gJCdfUKmzck[/youtubeif]

everything is broken...

 

[bombadil.360]

what is truly ignorant is to confuse pollution in general with the concept of global warming.

the two are strictly different and if you confuse them, shame on you.

Evidently, pro-global warming people ignore the fact of the ocean's pollution by industries other than the ones responsible for co2 emissions.

they ignore the fact of fresh water pollution too.

and insist the biggest problem we have are co2 emissions.

makes you wonder

 

[Pinball Wizard]

climate change, man, climate change

that's where places wash away for 6 months and then drys up for six months and blows away

coming to a theater near you

 

[Crusader Rabbit]

Evidently, pro-global warming people ignore the fact of the ocean's pollution by industries other than the ones responsible for co2 emissions.

Who the heck is "pro-global warming"?

 

[Growcephus]

Hell, check out google maps and look at all the areas on the planet that USED to have trees.

USED to, that is...

What happens to the atmospheric composition of the planet when we eliminate so many of the plants that intake carbon dioxide and exhaust oxygen? Do the weeds and grasses that grow in clear cut areas make up for the deficiencies we create when we cut down trees?

I have no clue.

All I know is that we are pretty much doomed as a species.

We generally have the intellect, as a species, to come up with viable solutions to a wide variety of problems, however, our intellect is STILL held hostage by pure raw animal instinct and selfish desire.

We were basically fucked from the get go...

 

[gloryoskie]

29,888,121, in thousands of tons, the amount of CO2 released
into earth's atmosphere in a year by human actions.

The planet will outlive us, no doubt, but our great-grandchildren
will curse us.

Humanity's legacy looks pretty weak at this point.

 

[igrowone]

how much slack left in the ocean's fish supply?
i'd think not too much, it's going to have to end somewhere, and it won't be a good ending
at some point, there's going to be major droughts in the bread basket regions
just part of the normal weather cycles, global warming not even needed
and when those droughts hit, well, it's not going to be pretty

 

[iwannaretire]

While I personally don't litter, drive a hybrid as my daily driver, and avoid excess whenever possible..even though I'm not wealthy and make sacrifices to do these things. ..I am of the opinion that these are emotional "contributions" rather than intellectual.

The world is finished as I see it. I hope I'm wrong. I don't think I am.

I refuse to have children. I think this mess is just that.

..I try very hard to be a friendly guy to be around in spite of this outlook. But I don't this world of ours continuing on any level that a man like me sees as worthwhile.

I just captained my friends boat from ft lauderdale to the bahamas. Beautiful "drive." PM if you're in florida and want to cruise, we're going next weekend to. 8 of us on a sweet boat..

anyway, it's gross u guys. depressing. litter everywhere. my dad says the fish are like a shadow of 20 years ago when he took the same trip in a glorified row boat.

It really is broken. this isn't hyperbole.

 

[Abja Roots]

All we're doing is making the earth inhospitable for beings and creatures such as ourselves that have adapted to it over thousands of years. Overpopulation and the increasing use of resources by all of us is a huge issue that no politician wants to even touch.

You cannot have unlimited growth on a planet with limited resources.

 

[RetroGrow]

It's called overpopulation, folks. That is the source of all environmental degradation, and the one subject that you will never hear Gore, Obama, or any other politicians talk about. Apparently a taboo subject. The third world is where it's happening, and yes, there most certainly should be a restriction on the number of children that women in the third world should be permitted to have. After all, they are destroying us and the planet. I'm not saying eradicate them. I'm saying, incentivise them to stop @ two children by giving them food and educational credits, so that their two children can be both healthy and educated. As it stands now, the average female in Africa is having over 7 children, without a pot to piss in. They have nothing, yet continue to breed. This creates enormous numbers of refugees, the Balkanization of Europe and other areas, and the destruction of their cultures. It's either that or genetic warfare, but we cannot allow the destruction of habitat to continue, or our planet and ourselves and our ancestors will be destroyed. We need more than zero population growth. We need to return to 1950s era: 3 billion people on the planet. That's how many it can sustain without fouling everything.
I see the previous poster beat me to it while I was typing, but the truth is right in front of everyone's eyes: too many people.

 

[Hammerhead]

If im not mistaken you can only have 1 child in china

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-child_policy

 

[RetroGrow]

Yes, China is the only country that has restrictions, as they went way too far and have too many people, most of whom live in poverty. Unfortunately, religious types often object to any talk of population control, as it conflicts with their superstitions.

 

[Crusader Rabbit]

In third world countries there is high child mortality. For most people there is also no retirement. The only security is to have lots of children in the hope that some will survive to help you in your old age. When conditions stabilize enough that there is basic health and economic security then birthrates go down.

 

[toketronix]

The third world is where it's happening, and yes, there most certainly should be a restriction on the number of children that women in the third world should be permitted to have. After all, they are destroying us and the planet. I'm not saying eradicate them.....

The fact is that your average westerner uses far more resources than the average 3rd worlder.

I read something recently comparing two families for the impact they have on the environment, Family1 are a middle class couple living in NY with 1 kid, they live in a state-of-the art energy saving eco home, the dad bikes to work & the kid walks to school, they are not big consumers & recycle everything, even grow some of their own food ...you could say they are stereotypical eco types.

The other family lives a simpler life in the South American rain forest, this couple has 8 kids who go to the local school, they grow and gather a lot of their own food, but still buy stuff from market.

Even though there are fewer people in the NY family ....their impact on the environment is fifty times great than the SA family ...I will say that once more to let it sink in: 3 people living in NY have 50 times greater impact on the environment than 10 people living in SA.

Now I'm not saying we should eradicate Americans, but...

 

[iwannaretire]

Yes, China is the only country that has restrictions, as they went way too far and have too many people, most of whom live in poverty. Unfortunately, religious types often object to any talk of population control, as it conflicts with their superstitions.

Yep.

The human condition is the problem, though.

Weed, rasta philosophy, etc. is all just a band aid of superstitious bullshit.

Pick your flavor.

The problem is the very essense of human frailty , in my eyes.

We can go to the moon but a stupid car accident can wipe out a generation?


It's best not to take things too seriously, given that disposition^^..