Global warming

Global warming

 
Our society is facing so many threats, can we really rise to the challange?
 
Posts  1 - 8  of  8
Global warming discussion
 
wrongworld
With an ever growing population that is alrdy twice the size it should be, we are facing many great threats, such as food, water and electricity supplies amongst others, like oil and mm.
The decert cities in the US are starting to take their water reserves in use, ripping down fields of trees, to try and minimize the water they are using.
Already we have taking more then 90% of the planets surface in use, using more and more chemicals and gene manipuletion to get more food faster.
The oil reserves of our planet is getting close to zero, we'll have to take electricity and other methods in use, but alrdy we are having a hard time generating enough electricity.
First now are we beginning to understand the damage we do with all our chemicals, we use 1000s of different chemicals, which dont do much damage on their own, but up untill now we have had no idea of the damage they can do when they are combined with eachother, millions of different combinations, that have never been tested.
Not to mention our economy is in bad shape.
An ice age is coming, like it always have every 110.000 years or so. (about 12.000 years inbetween the ice ages)
Global warming are coursing more and more disasterous weather. and much more..
How many people are even aware of all of this?
or take the threats seriously?
can we really beat all these threats? or will our society join all the past societies in history, as another society that didnt make it?

I urge you all who havnt alrdy, to watch some of the documentaries like, The Colapse? Strange Days on Planet Earth, or what they are all called.

what do you people out there think or have to say? and sorry for the spelling mistakes, english isnt my born language ^^
           
 
MWolff
replied to: wrongworld
Replied To:  With an ever growing population that is alrdy twice the size it sho...
(1) I think we should rather (and more often) look at regional changes and threats rather than always at the global picture, and we should try to search for regional problem solving. Much literature has shown that climate change can have both positive and negative effects for different places on earth - so to adapt to these predicted changes, we need to concentrate on our site/region of concern. Global models (and predictions) of climate change may be interesting for theoretical researchers but are quite useless for the development of local adaptation stategies.
(2) Our planet still has enough food and water for all. However, the distribution of wealth allows some people to access it, while others can not and suffer. So most of our human problems are primarily of a socio-political nature and not of an ecological.
(3)I feel that all the talk (and writing in the global press) of climate change makes too many people think and act as if this needs to be our only mayor concern. So people unfold activities to reducing CO2 emissions, changing their nutrition and waste production habits etc.,which little attention is given to the more severe problems, those of poverty and corrupt societies.
(4) Development -and research proyects aiming at educating people or installing co-management processes for natural resource use and biodiversity conservation should be pushed instead. The implementation of processes that lead to more democatisation of corrupt systems and to the development of sustainable food production should be our highest priority.

Why do I write this? Because I think that we got our priorities wrong and too much talk on global change puts other, possibly more relevant issues, out of the focus.
           
 
wrongworld
replied to: MWolff
Replied To:  (1) I think we should rather (and more often) look at regional cha...
While i do agree that some countries should put more focus on poverty and crime, and other regional problems. Many countries got it alright, actually very well compared to some countries.

Some of the things i've mentioned are regional problems, like water supply in the US desert cities, economy i know little about, but we in denmark are doing very well, and thats mostly due to regional changes.

You are making the big threats i've stated and more seem small and unimportant.
Like, all the chemicals we spill out into our waters, drinking, rivers and sea.
This is a big problem, we are only beginning to understand the damage it is aleady cousing. birth rate amongst humans have gone very far down some places, due to it. Many animals are suffering and even going instinct because of it, who knows how many illnesses we incounter today, are the cause of this aswell or how much worse it will get.

and stating that climate change will be both positive and negative depending on regions of the world isnt well thought through in my opinion, since what effect one country often effect other countries aswell.
Global warming, may not be something we can do much about, but it is cousing more and more problems all over the world.
and will at some point effect your country too.
the US is just one out of many countries heavily effected by this.
The climate change which we have seen so far certainly dont bring furtune to any part of the world..
and when the ice age hits the world, you can be sure that every country will be negativly effected by it even though not all countries will lie under many meters of snow.
Just think about all the land which we cant use for producing food, its not like the big deserts around the world will end up becoming green.
           
 
Andrewess
replied to: wrongworld
Replied To:  While i do agree that some countries should put more focus on pover...
Soft and hard policies are already implemented to address these issues. Unfortunately such depopulation theories as implemented by politicians or how they become interpreted by the public is more or less a hit and miss reaction. Policies usually involve subtly polarizing interpersonal human issues. The idea that it is not being taken care of is misunderstood, it is the method of implementation that leaves the mind boggling. Policies are those derived from such as the doctrine of potency, race and more equitably wealth. A more radical approach through more publicly weaker herd behavior (as per corporate welfare theorem) is being addressed as we speak. The bad news is it is bad for even those who think they are worthy or good enough to avoid these policies. The good news is the earth will carry on with or without us, hopefully in a hundred million years or so will have overcome the BS we have created. We are only important to ourselves and our existentialist Gods will take what he wants of us while few if any will meet the standard.
           
 
RandBesnyl
replied to: wrongworld
Replied To:  With an ever growing population that is alrdy twice the size it sho...
The earth can sustain five billion humans if we are responsible...your worry is acceptable to many. Reducing population is partly people's, partly God's obligation. And Nature has definite ways of getting rid of critical mass failures- the next ten years will very painful. History shows men and women make thoughtful, lasting changes after great calamity...may we be good enough to do so
           
 
wrongworld
replied to: RandBesnyl
Replied To:  The earth can sustain five billion humans if we are responsible...y...
True true true. our currency economy is the parasite. dont actually wanna get into all this atm, so im just gonna leave with.
Look into The Zeitgeits Movement and Venus Project if neither of u have already.
Youtube > The Future of Economics - Zeitgeist Movement

explains very well how our current economy system is BAD in so many ways, and also gives a good idea of how to do it alot better.
if you dont know about it, you should really look into it.
A world without corruption, starvation and little crime and much more. In other words a way to build a paradise global society.
           
 
leonardabbott916
replied to: wrongworld
Replied To:  True true true. our currency economy is the parasite. dont actually...
Big business and Government control of the environmental movement has ruined the economy, and does very little good for the environment. This is because it allows the worse polluters to decide what is good and what is bad for the environment. There are hundreds of things that could be done other than Western bashing to solve the problem, Instead of dumping wast water into our rivers ,lakes our drinking water, every drop should be used to grow more trees Scientists have looked carefully at each of these factors. The only one where the data matches up is greenhouse gases -- levels of these gases have risen sharply as we burn more fossil fuels. If liberals were really interested in solving the problem, and not interested only in bashing industrialized nations, They would look for real solutions, The most logical solution is to increase oxygen in the atmosphere, rather than slow industrialization. One average size tree produces enough oxygen for breathing of 25 people. The average new home built would add 5 new trees to the world's best oxygen producers A simple solution in the US Is to force the US Government to release some of the millions an millions of acres, they are holding away from the people to control demographers for political reasons. GB advocates have already starved 100 millions Africans to death with their Western bashing agenda. Trees not only pump oxygen into the atmosphere they also pump moisture into the air. It doesn't rain much any more in Africa because most of the trees have been cut down in Africa and the Mid east.
           
 
leonardabbott916
replied to: leonardabbott916
Replied To:  Big business and Government control of the environmental movement h...
There are counties in several states, with less than 500 people, land owners in these counties keep control over countie Government, by using different means. Protecting the environment to control population groath, is one way demographs ,Endangered species is another way used to keep people from making a living off the land. Gridlock in Washington makes it impossible for the whole Country to emerge from the present economic slump. "Occupying the land" movement is a good way to help Washington break theBig business and Government control of the environmental movement has ruined the economy, and does very little good for the environment. This is because it allows the worse polluters to decide what is good and what is bad for the environment. There are hundreds of things that could be done other than Western bashing to solve the problem, Instead of dumping wast water into our rivers ,lakes our drinking water, every drop should be used to grow more trees Scientists have looked carefully at each of these factors. The only one where the data matches up is greenhouse gases -- levels of these gases have risen sharply as we burn more fossil fuels. If liberals were really interested in solving the problem, and not interested only in bashing industrialized nations, They would look for real solutions, The most logical solution is to increase oxygen in the atmosphere, rather than slow industrialization. One average size tree produces enough oxygen for breathing of 25 people. The average new home built would add 5 new trees to the world's best oxygen producers A simple solution in the US Is to force the US Government to release some of the millions an millions of acres, they are holding away from the people to control demographers for political reasons. GB advocates have already starved 100 millions Africans to death with their Western bashing agenda. Trees not only pump oxygen into the atmosphere they also pump moisture into the air. It doesn't rain much any more in Africa because most of the trees have been cut down in Africa and the Mid east. present gridlock..