Here it is in baby talk, betcha the Right still don't get it. Chant 'greed is good' and it'll alll go away  ;D


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOMWzjrRiBg

Interesting video Grey......

Although it seems to be the standard' whiney eivronnutter 'back to the cave' philosophy that's been around since the 1960's....

I did expect better of you....

gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 7:01am:

Interesting video Grey...... Although it seems to be the standard' whiney eivronnutter 'back to the cave' philosophy that's been around since the 1960's.... I did expect better of you....

Can it be "interesting" AND A "standard' whiney environ-nutter 'back to the cave' philosophy", AT THE SAME TIME?

I would have said, your response was simply the standard denial approach, without any reference to the facts raised!

Which would make your comments a standard DENIAL OF REALITY approach, but hardly "interesting", although pretty much as expected!

Btw, "Exponential Growth" is a very good definition of "impossible"!

perceptions_now wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 8:44am:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 20th, 2012 at 7:01am: Interesting video Grey...... Although it seems to be the standard' whiney eivronnutter 'back to the cave' philosophy that's been around since the 1960's.... I did expect better of you.... Can it be "interesting" AND A "standard' whiney environ-nutter 'back to the cave' philosophy", AT THE SAME TIME? I would have said, your response was simply the standard denial approach, without any reference to the facts raised! Which would make your comments a standard DENIAL OF REALITY approach, but hardly "interesting", although pretty much as expected! Btw, "Exponential Growth" is a very good definition of "impossible"!

'Interesting' in information value, although nothing that I didn't learn at school

And 'whiney' in that it's conclusion are all negative ( "it'll all end in tears")

gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 9:46am:

perceptions_now wrote on Feb 20th, 2012 at 8:44am: gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 20th, 2012 at 7:01am: Interesting video Grey...... Although it seems to be the standard' whiney eivronnutter 'back to the cave' philosophy that's been around since the 1960's.... I did expect better of you.... Can it be "interesting" AND A "standard' whiney environ-nutter 'back to the cave' philosophy", AT THE SAME TIME? I would have said, your response was simply the standard denial approach, without any reference to the facts raised! Which would make your comments a standard DENIAL OF REALITY approach, but hardly "interesting", although pretty much as expected! Btw, "Exponential Growth" is a very good definition of "impossible"! 'Interesting' in information value, although nothing that I didn't learn at school And 'whiney' in that it's conclusion are all negative ( "it'll all end in tears")

Rubbish!

perceptions_now wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 10:30am:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 20th, 2012 at 9:46am: perceptions_now wrote on Feb 20th, 2012 at 8:44am: gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 20th, 2012 at 7:01am: Interesting video Grey...... Although it seems to be the standard' whiney eivronnutter 'back to the cave' philosophy that's been around since the 1960's.... I did expect better of you.... Can it be "interesting" AND A "standard' whiney environ-nutter 'back to the cave' philosophy", AT THE SAME TIME? I would have said, your response was simply the standard denial approach, without any reference to the facts raised! Which would make your comments a standard DENIAL OF REALITY approach, but hardly "interesting", although pretty much as expected! Btw, "Exponential Growth" is a very good definition of "impossible"! 'Interesting' in information value, although nothing that I didn't learn at school And 'whiney' in that it's conclusion are all negative ( "it'll all end in tears") Rubbish!

Yes, most of what you post and seem to believe is indeed 'rubbish'...

I just don't subscribe to the pessimistic, 'end of the world' type panic that is so popular in the evironmental segment of modern society..
Throughout it's existence, mankind has always found a way out of these periodic problems, and I feel sure we will again...

( So much for all the assertions from the greenie side that they aren't advocating a return to subsistence living)...

gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 10:48am:

perceptions_now wrote on Feb 20th, 2012 at 10:30am: gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 20th, 2012 at 9:46am: perceptions_now wrote on Feb 20th, 2012 at 8:44am: gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 20th, 2012 at 7:01am: Interesting video Grey...... Although it seems to be the standard' whiney eivronnutter 'back to the cave' philosophy that's been around since the 1960's.... I did expect better of you.... Can it be "interesting" AND A "standard' whiney environ-nutter 'back to the cave' philosophy", AT THE SAME TIME? I would have said, your response was simply the standard denial approach, without any reference to the facts raised! Which would make your comments a standard DENIAL OF REALITY approach, but hardly "interesting", although pretty much as expected! Btw, "Exponential Growth" is a very good definition of "impossible"! 'Interesting' in information value, although nothing that I didn't learn at school And 'whiney' in that it's conclusion are all negative ( "it'll all end in tears") Rubbish! Yes, most of what you post and seem to believe is indeed 'rubbish'... I just don't subscribe to the pessimistic, 'end of the world' type panic that is so popular in the evironmental segment of modern society.. Throughout it's existence, mankind has always found a way out of these periodic problems, and I feel sure we will again... ( So much for all the assertions from the greenie side that they aren't advocating a return to subsistence living)...

Firstly, my background is not from the "greenie side", I spent over 40 years in the "Financial sector", mainly insurance!

Second, I don't subscribe to pessimism or optimism, but I do look at reality!

Third, I don't make decisions on feelings, I look at the facts, all the facts and then come to a considered, likely outcome, which I suppose comes from spending those years in the insurance industry!

Finally, in case you don't know, the entire insurance industry is built on two words - Sh!t Happens, which is proof that humanity endures bad & unwanted things happening to it, some minor, some major and in my estimation we are now coming up against a once in history episode of TSHTF!


That said, you will do what you will do, but WHAT YOU OR I DO NOW, WILL MAKE VERY LITTLE, IF ANY DIFFERENCE TO THE FINAL OUTCOME!

Btw, it's still Rubbish, about you do this stuff at school!

perceptions_now wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 11:08am:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 20th, 2012 at 10:48am: perceptions_now wrote on Feb 20th, 2012 at 10:30am: gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 20th, 2012 at 9:46am: perceptions_now wrote on Feb 20th, 2012 at 8:44am: gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 20th, 2012 at 7:01am: Interesting video Grey...... Although it seems to be the standard' whiney eivronnutter 'back to the cave' philosophy that's been around since the 1960's.... I did expect better of you.... Can it be "interesting" AND A "standard' whiney environ-nutter 'back to the cave' philosophy", AT THE SAME TIME? I would have said, your response was simply the standard denial approach, without any reference to the facts raised! Which would make your comments a standard DENIAL OF REALITY approach, but hardly "interesting", although pretty much as expected! Btw, "Exponential Growth" is a very good definition of "impossible"! 'Interesting' in information value, although nothing that I didn't learn at school And 'whiney' in that it's conclusion are all negative ( "it'll all end in tears") Rubbish! Yes, most of what you post and seem to believe is indeed 'rubbish'... I just don't subscribe to the pessimistic, 'end of the world' type panic that is so popular in the evironmental segment of modern society.. Throughout it's existence, mankind has always found a way out of these periodic problems, and I feel sure we will again... ( So much for all the assertions from the greenie side that they aren't advocating a return to subsistence living)... Firstly, my background is not from the "greenie side", I spent over 40 years in the "Financial sector", mainly insurance! Second, I don't subscribe to pessimism or optimism, but I do look at reality! Third, I don't make decisions on feelings, I look at the facts, all the facts and then come to a considered, likely outcome, which I suppose comes from spending those years in the insurance industry! Finally, in case you don't know, the entire insurance industry is built on two words - Sh!t Happens, which is proof that humanity endures bad & unwanted things happening to it, some minor, some major and in my estimation we are now coming up against a once in history episode of TSHTF! That said, you will do what you will do, but WHAT YOU OR I DO NOW, WILL MAKE VERY LITTLE, IF ANY DIFFERENCE TO THE FINAL OUTCOME! Btw, it's still Rubbish, about you do this stuff at school!

I get annoyed by the people who sit around pointing out potential problems, without making the effort to think of solutions other than the 'stop doing everything we're doing' sort....

And no it's not rubbish......we (or I anyway) learned about the oil/coal running out scenarios in school in thhe 70's and 80's.....

gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 11:39am:

I get annoyed by the people who sit around pointing out potential problems, without making the effort to think of solutions other than the 'stop doing everything we're doing' sort.... And no it's not rubbish......we (or I anyway) learned about the oil/coal running out scenarios in school in thhe 70's and 80's.....

Do you? Well, perhaps the reason that Grey posted the video was to educate people that there is a problem, of which most people would not be aware!

And, perhaps many of my posts are also aimed at increasing Public awareness that there are urgent & pressing Global issues, which may just be able to stop us from doing everything we're doing?

All of which means, that some of us are at least saying, "hey there are problems", whilst you are happy to play Ostrich and pretend that everything will continue on, as is, which it simply CAN NOT!

As for school teaching the sort of in depth information on this video, let's throw it open & see what other members think about that?

I get annoyed by the people who sit around pointing out potential problems, without making the effort to think of solutions other than the 'stop doing everything we're doing' sort....

<sighs> It was always going to be the difficulty. How to get the right, with their short attention span, to watch all the way through.

The solution Giz, is to face up to the facts first off. Once you've joined the 'reality based community*' we can do.

An economy based on exponential growth cannot work forever. The using up of finite resources cannot go on forever. And you cannot expect those who profit most from those systems to provide the solutions that will change things.

The army has been marching fowards for years defeating all before it. But it's hit a chasm. The solutions are pretty easy. It can turn left, turn right, Settle and build a big city and farms or it can build a bridge. But when the problem is relayed back through the ranks to the generals at the rear and they say, 'Forwards is what works, it's the way we've always done it around here, keep moving forwards' the result is disaster.   


Quote:

*The source of the term is a quotation in an October 17, 2004, The New York Times Magazine article by writer Ron Suskind, quoting an unnamed aide to George W. Bush (later attributed to Karl Rove): The aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." ... "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."

I guess I'm a little cynical about these sorts of things...

After all, I've been through the 'only an inch of topsoil' famine caused extinction of humanity by 1970 (1975, 1980, oh wait, 1990)

And the 'only enough oil for 3 months' things in 1973, 1979, 1985, 1995, 2001 etc etc...

And my parents, grandparents and uncles/aunts have told me about the various 'end of the world, next Thursday' things from their childhoods, although, those were usually due to the 'decay' of contemporary society (votes for women was going to cause it, so was promiscuity, splitting the atom, the invention of motorcars, the decline in church attendance, the approaching millennium (1900) and pretty much everything else).....

It seems there are ALWAYS groups around, predicting the fall of man.....since the 50's it's been environmental, rather than the older 'wrath of god' type though....

About the only common thread is, all the predictions have failed, and many have failed miserably...

Grey....Everyone should watch your little video!

The difference between all those you mention, and global warming, is global warming is actually a consensus view of scientists, and an enormous amount of work has gone into verifying it.

Your predictions are from one or two theorists.

But I'm sure you knew that.  ;D


gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 12:52pm:

I guess I'm a little cynical about these sorts of things... After all, I've been through the 'only an inch of topsoil' famine caused extinction of humanity by 1970 (1975, 1980, oh wait, 1990) And the 'only enough oil for 3 months' things in 1973, 1979, 1985, 1995, 2001 etc etc... And my parents, grandparents and uncles/aunts have told me about the various 'end of the world, next Thursday' things from their childhoods, although, those were usually due to the 'decay' of contemporary society (votes for women was going to cause it, so was promiscuity, splitting the atom, the invention of motorcars, the decline in church attendance, the approaching millennium (1900) and pretty much everything else)..... It seems there are ALWAYS groups around, predicting the fall of man.....since the 50's it's been environmental, rather than the older 'wrath of god' type though.... About the only common thread is, all the predictions have failed, and many have failed miserably...

gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 12:52pm:

I guess I'm a little cynical about these sorts of things... After all, I've been through the 'only an inch of topsoil' famine caused extinction of humanity by 1970 (1975, 1980, oh wait, 1990) And the 'only enough oil for 3 months' things in 1973, 1979, 1985, 1995, 2001 etc etc... And my parents, grandparents and uncles/aunts have told me about the various 'end of the world, next Thursday' things from their childhoods, although, those were usually due to the 'decay' of contemporary society (votes for women was going to cause it, so was promiscuity, splitting the atom, the invention of motorcars, the decline in church attendance, the approaching millennium (1900) and pretty much everything else)..... It seems there are ALWAYS groups around, predicting the fall of man.....since the 50's it's been environmental, rather than the older 'wrath of god' type though.... About the only common thread is, all the predictions have failed, and many have failed miserably...

A dri9ve through the older farming land of Queensland will show you that all the older farmhouses are standing on hills. But, they weren't built on hills. These issues are not based on the prphecies of Nostradamus, It's all just common sense. The future will view the question as to whether the shyte hit the fan in 2000, 2050, orn 2075 as moot. The fact is the longer we fail to act the worse the situation is going to be. We are stealing the resources, the money and the very environment from our children. If having a sense of reponsibility means anything, it means we do have to do something - NOW.

I can't watch til tonight Grey, but I will be back!  :)

gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 12:52pm:

I guess I'm a little cynical about these sorts of things... After all, I've been through the 'only an inch of topsoil' famine caused extinction of humanity by 1970 (1975, 1980, oh wait, 1990) And the 'only enough oil for 3 months' things in 1973, 1979, 1985, 1995, 2001 etc etc... And my parents, grandparents and uncles/aunts have told me about the various 'end of the world, next Thursday' things from their childhoods, although, those were usually due to the 'decay' of contemporary society (votes for women was going to cause it, so was promiscuity, splitting the atom, the invention of motorcars, the decline in church attendance, the approaching millennium (1900) and pretty much everything else)..... It seems there are ALWAYS groups around, predicting the fall of man.....since the 50's it's been environmental, rather than the older 'wrath of god' type though.... About the only common thread is, all the predictions have failed, and many have failed miserably...

Did you know that in 1970 -
1) There were less than 4 Billion Humans, now there are over 7 Billion.
2) US Oil Production Peaked, the Global annual rate of discovery of Oil also Peaked and both have steeply declined since then.
3) Nearly all, if not ALL Oil Producing countries have now hit Peak Oil Production.
4) In 1970, a barrel of Oil was less than $2, it is now just over $100 per barrel, after hitting a high of $147 in 2008.

So, given the above, what do you think are the likely scenarios, in respect of -
1) Future Global Population Growth?
2) Future Global Oil Discovery?
3) Future Global Oil Production?
4) Future Global Oil Price?

People ask if I'm a Greenie?
But I say - "Not quite"
For I believe in Fishing and such of our natural resources.
But I believe the Greenies have to deliver a more 'productive' answer than just saying "No".

Take Fish for example:
We dump ex-military ships in the ocean for 'dive sites' under the excuse 'artificial reef' which cons the public that its all for the benefit of the fish.
So I get it - we destory their natural habitat and replace it with unwanted 'garbage'. ::)
Also, where are the designs of actual Artificial Reefs that provide maximum stimulation for Aquatic Life to proliferate ...and provide a Fishing Industry with sustainable quality quotas??

Everyone is just saying "No" these days.
I don't blame the oldies for their Environmental/Conservational mistakes.
Its not like they've had any real 'precident' on the matter ...nor have we.

Its easy for us Australians to call Americans 'dumb' - especially when we have them as a precidence but Australia was never around so to speak when America kick started its place in the world - it had to work things out on its own ...mistakes.

I think the World's resources WILL COLLAPSE as too will the population and everything else.
Why?
Because there is one half of the world that needs to learn from that.

Once we know our world is dying, our youth will be gone like a long lost dream.
Only then will we know our Golden Age
...and our finite existence.

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 1:23pm:

The difference between all those you mention, and global warming, is global warming is actually a consensus view of scientists, and an enormous amount of work has gone into verifying it. Your predictions are from one or two theorists. But I'm sure you knew that.  ;D gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 20th, 2012 at 12:52pm: I guess I'm a little cynical about these sorts of things... After all, I've been through the 'only an inch of topsoil' famine caused extinction of humanity by 1970 (1975, 1980, oh wait, 1990) And the 'only enough oil for 3 months' things in 1973, 1979, 1985, 1995, 2001 etc etc... And my parents, grandparents and uncles/aunts have told me about the various 'end of the world, next Thursday' things from their childhoods, although, those were usually due to the 'decay' of contemporary society (votes for women was going to cause it, so was promiscuity, splitting the atom, the invention of motorcars, the decline in church attendance, the approaching millennium (1900) and pretty much everything else)..... It seems there are ALWAYS groups around, predicting the fall of man.....since the 50's it's been environmental, rather than the older 'wrath of god' type though.... About the only common thread is, all the predictions have failed, and many have failed miserably...

Well I wasn't actually referring to 'global warming' when I said environmental issues......more the running out of resources, running out of food and over population bits....

That being said, a 'consensus' on an untested theory that exists in a vacuum is all that compelling. Despite all the testing that's apparently gone on, this is the very first time that science has had the capacity to make these assumptions.....you can't compare real world measurements with fossil measurements (ice cores, geo-cores, tree rings etc) with any degree of accuracy, because the best the fossil measurements will give you is a range of temperatures with a plus/minus degree of error that is pretty large..

gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 12:42am:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 20th, 2012 at 1:23pm: The difference between all those you mention, and global warming, is global warming is actually a consensus view of scientists, and an enormous amount of work has gone into verifying it. Your predictions are from one or two theorists. But I'm sure you knew that.  ;D gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 20th, 2012 at 12:52pm: I guess I'm a little cynical about these sorts of things... After all, I've been through the 'only an inch of topsoil' famine caused extinction of humanity by 1970 (1975, 1980, oh wait, 1990) And the 'only enough oil for 3 months' things in 1973, 1979, 1985, 1995, 2001 etc etc... And my parents, grandparents and uncles/aunts have told me about the various 'end of the world, next Thursday' things from their childhoods, although, those were usually due to the 'decay' of contemporary society (votes for women was going to cause it, so was promiscuity, splitting the atom, the invention of motorcars, the decline in church attendance, the approaching millennium (1900) and pretty much everything else)..... It seems there are ALWAYS groups around, predicting the fall of man.....since the 50's it's been environmental, rather than the older 'wrath of god' type though.... About the only common thread is, all the predictions have failed, and many have failed miserably... Well I wasn't actually referring to 'global warming' when I said environmental issues......more the running out of resources, running out of food and over population bits.... That being said, a 'consensus' on an untested theory that exists in a vacuum is all that compelling. Despite all the testing that's apparently gone on, this is the very first time that science has had the capacity to make these assumptions.....you can't compare real world measurements with fossil measurements (ice cores, geo-cores, tree rings etc) with any degree of accuracy, because the best the fossil measurements will give you is a range of temperatures with a plus/minus degree of error that is pretty large..

But its the deniers who hang their arguments on these historical data samples.  Middle ice age ?  Hotter or Cooler 1000's of years ago. They go on like rapid global warming is just normal, because the fossill measurements tell them so.  Ignoring, as you say, the  error ratio.

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 8:09am:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 21st, 2012 at 12:42am: Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 20th, 2012 at 1:23pm: The difference between all those you mention, and global warming, is global warming is actually a consensus view of scientists, and an enormous amount of work has gone into verifying it. Your predictions are from one or two theorists. But I'm sure you knew that.  ;D gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 20th, 2012 at 12:52pm: I guess I'm a little cynical about these sorts of things... After all, I've been through the 'only an inch of topsoil' famine caused extinction of humanity by 1970 (1975, 1980, oh wait, 1990) And the 'only enough oil for 3 months' things in 1973, 1979, 1985, 1995, 2001 etc etc... And my parents, grandparents and uncles/aunts have told me about the various 'end of the world, next Thursday' things from their childhoods, although, those were usually due to the 'decay' of contemporary society (votes for women was going to cause it, so was promiscuity, splitting the atom, the invention of motorcars, the decline in church attendance, the approaching millennium (1900) and pretty much everything else)..... It seems there are ALWAYS groups around, predicting the fall of man.....since the 50's it's been environmental, rather than the older 'wrath of god' type though.... About the only common thread is, all the predictions have failed, and many have failed miserably... Well I wasn't actually referring to 'global warming' when I said environmental issues......more the running out of resources, running out of food and over population bits.... That being said, a 'consensus' on an untested theory that exists in a vacuum is all that compelling. Despite all the testing that's apparently gone on, this is the very first time that science has had the capacity to make these assumptions.....you can't compare real world measurements with fossil measurements (ice cores, geo-cores, tree rings etc) with any degree of accuracy, because the best the fossil measurements will give you is a range of temperatures with a plus/minus degree of error that is pretty large.. But its the deniers who hang their arguments on these historical data samples.  Middle ice age ?  Hotter or Cooler 1000's of years ago. They go on like rapid global warming is just normal, because the fossill measurements tell them so.  Ignoring, as you say, the  error ratio.

Which is not an error in it's self...It simply highlights the problem.

IF there had been no warming events before industrialisation, then Co2 would be the definite culprit....but there have been previous events, the question is why is this time different, and how can you say it is, without accurate comparison data??

The temperature increase since 1880 has been around 1 C degree, so the per century rate is 0.8 or 0.9 C.......that's ok, I'm not arguing with that, but there's no way to say if the rate of increase during the MWP was lower (or the same, or even higher), after all, this IS the first time we've had accurate daily/yearly/decadal temperature readings.

DRAH (for one) constantly refers to the 'rate of change', which would be the best method of comparison, if we had any equal records to compare it to....but just mentioning rate of change, without any indication of the realtionship to earlier rates of change is pointless, if not counterproductive...

gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 12:52pm:

I guess I'm a little cynical about these sorts of things... After all, I've been through the 'only an inch of topsoil' famine caused extinction of humanity by 1970 (1975, 1980, oh wait, 1990) And the 'only enough oil for 3 months' things in 1973, 1979, 1985, 1995, 2001 etc etc... And my parents, grandparents and uncles/aunts have told me about the various 'end of the world, next Thursday' things from their childhoods, although, those were usually due to the 'decay' of contemporary society (votes for women was going to cause it, so was promiscuity, splitting the atom, the invention of motorcars, the decline in church attendance, the approaching millennium (1900) and pretty much everything else)..... It seems there are ALWAYS groups around, predicting the fall of man.....since the 50's it's been environmental, rather than the older 'wrath of god' type though.... About the only common thread is, all the predictions have failed, and many have failed miserably...

Well said.
Doomsday scenarios have been around for thousands of years.
This is just the latest.

Every Industry has its 'Fear Factor'.
The Military would say the threat of a Comet hitting the planet to justify a big gun on the moon (not that it would ever point back at earth like a Death Star :-?)
The Medical would say the threat of Pollution leads to an ill health planet.
Religion with God.
Sailors with monsters of the deep
Astronomers with Aliens.
...and so on.

Humanity will die.
The world will end.
But not tomorrow.

I think Humanity has just turned 21 years today.
Not bad. Still got a fair way to go. ;)

Some of us will venture out from the planet to find more life, etc.
Others will stay to improve the one we originally have.

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 9:48pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 20th, 2012 at 12:52pm: I guess I'm a little cynical about these sorts of things... After all, I've been through the 'only an inch of topsoil' famine caused extinction of humanity by 1970 (1975, 1980, oh wait, 1990) And the 'only enough oil for 3 months' things in 1973, 1979, 1985, 1995, 2001 etc etc... And my parents, grandparents and uncles/aunts have told me about the various 'end of the world, next Thursday' things from their childhoods, although, those were usually due to the 'decay' of contemporary society (votes for women was going to cause it, so was promiscuity, splitting the atom, the invention of motorcars, the decline in church attendance, the approaching millennium (1900) and pretty much everything else)..... It seems there are ALWAYS groups around, predicting the fall of man.....since the 50's it's been environmental, rather than the older 'wrath of god' type though.... About the only common thread is, all the predictions have failed, and many have failed miserably... Well said. Doomsday scenarios have been around for thousands of years. This is just the latest.

This thread topic is not 'global warming'. It's the future prospects stemming from continued exponential growth. Do we have 'exponential growth deniers' ? Are they the same people?

Grey wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2012 at 1:25pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Feb 21st, 2012 at 9:48pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 20th, 2012 at 12:52pm: I guess I'm a little cynical about these sorts of things... After all, I've been through the 'only an inch of topsoil' famine caused extinction of humanity by 1970 (1975, 1980, oh wait, 1990) And the 'only enough oil for 3 months' things in 1973, 1979, 1985, 1995, 2001 etc etc... And my parents, grandparents and uncles/aunts have told me about the various 'end of the world, next Thursday' things from their childhoods, although, those were usually due to the 'decay' of contemporary society (votes for women was going to cause it, so was promiscuity, splitting the atom, the invention of motorcars, the decline in church attendance, the approaching millennium (1900) and pretty much everything else)..... It seems there are ALWAYS groups around, predicting the fall of man.....since the 50's it's been environmental, rather than the older 'wrath of god' type though.... About the only common thread is, all the predictions have failed, and many have failed miserably... Well said. Doomsday scenarios have been around for thousands of years. This is just the latest. This thread topic is not 'global warming'. It's the future prospects stemming from continued exponential growth. Do we have 'exponential growth deniers' ? Are they the same people?

I think that is likely!

Just to reiterate, from an earlier post, did any of you "exponential growth deniers" know that in 1970 -
1) There were less than 4 Billion Humans, now there are over 7 Billion.
2) US Oil Production Peaked, the Global annual rate of discovery of Oil also Peaked and both have steeply declined since then.
3) Nearly all, if not ALL Oil Producing countries have now hit Peak Oil Production.
4) In 1970, a barrel of Oil was less than $2, it is now just over $100 per barrel, after hitting a high of $147 in 2008.

So, given the above, what do you think are the likely scenarios, in respect of -
1) Future Global Population Growth?
2) Future Global Oil Discovery?
3) Future Global Oil Production?
4) Future Global Oil Price?

Grey wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2012 at 1:25pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Feb 21st, 2012 at 9:48pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 20th, 2012 at 12:52pm: I guess I'm a little cynical about these sorts of things... After all, I've been through the 'only an inch of topsoil' famine caused extinction of humanity by 1970 (1975, 1980, oh wait, 1990) And the 'only enough oil for 3 months' things in 1973, 1979, 1985, 1995, 2001 etc etc... And my parents, grandparents and uncles/aunts have told me about the various 'end of the world, next Thursday' things from their childhoods, although, those were usually due to the 'decay' of contemporary society (votes for women was going to cause it, so was promiscuity, splitting the atom, the invention of motorcars, the decline in church attendance, the approaching millennium (1900) and pretty much everything else)..... It seems there are ALWAYS groups around, predicting the fall of man.....since the 50's it's been environmental, rather than the older 'wrath of god' type though.... About the only common thread is, all the predictions have failed, and many have failed miserably... Well said. Doomsday scenarios have been around for thousands of years. This is just the latest. This thread topic is not 'global warming'. It's the future prospects stemming from continued exponential growth. Do we have 'exponential growth deniers' ? Are they the same people?

Yes I know we can't have infinite growth with finite resources. But I believe recycling will become more and more popular and that new technologies will be created to recycle more and more things.

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2012 at 1:50pm:

Grey wrote on Feb 22nd, 2012 at 1:25pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Feb 21st, 2012 at 9:48pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 20th, 2012 at 12:52pm: I guess I'm a little cynical about these sorts of things... After all, I've been through the 'only an inch of topsoil' famine caused extinction of humanity by 1970 (1975, 1980, oh wait, 1990) And the 'only enough oil for 3 months' things in 1973, 1979, 1985, 1995, 2001 etc etc... And my parents, grandparents and uncles/aunts have told me about the various 'end of the world, next Thursday' things from their childhoods, although, those were usually due to the 'decay' of contemporary society (votes for women was going to cause it, so was promiscuity, splitting the atom, the invention of motorcars, the decline in church attendance, the approaching millennium (1900) and pretty much everything else)..... It seems there are ALWAYS groups around, predicting the fall of man.....since the 50's it's been environmental, rather than the older 'wrath of god' type though.... About the only common thread is, all the predictions have failed, and many have failed miserably... Well said. Doomsday scenarios have been around for thousands of years. This is just the latest. This thread topic is not 'global warming'. It's the future prospects stemming from continued exponential growth. Do we have 'exponential growth deniers' ? Are they the same people? Yes I know we can't have infinite growth with finite resources. But I believe recycling will become more and more popular and that new technologies will be created to recycle more and more things.

Just wondering, did you watch the video that Grey put up at the start of this thread?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOMWzjrRiBg[/quote]

Grey wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2012 at 1:25pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Feb 21st, 2012 at 9:48pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 20th, 2012 at 12:52pm: I guess I'm a little cynical about these sorts of things... After all, I've been through the 'only an inch of topsoil' famine caused extinction of humanity by 1970 (1975, 1980, oh wait, 1990) And the 'only enough oil for 3 months' things in 1973, 1979, 1985, 1995, 2001 etc etc... And my parents, grandparents and uncles/aunts have told me about the various 'end of the world, next Thursday' things from their childhoods, although, those were usually due to the 'decay' of contemporary society (votes for women was going to cause it, so was promiscuity, splitting the atom, the invention of motorcars, the decline in church attendance, the approaching millennium (1900) and pretty much everything else)..... It seems there are ALWAYS groups around, predicting the fall of man.....since the 50's it's been environmental, rather than the older 'wrath of god' type though.... About the only common thread is, all the predictions have failed, and many have failed miserably... Well said. Doomsday scenarios have been around for thousands of years. This is just the latest. This thread topic is not 'global warming'. It's the future prospects stemming from continued exponential growth. Do we have 'exponential growth deniers' ? Are they the same people?

I know Grey, nothing in my post, or destroyer's response, was about 'global warming'....

Doc Jolly was the one who mentioned GW, I just answered his comments...

OK THEN.
ONE WORD about such 'growth'.

= SUPERNOVA

and we all know what remains after that.  ;)

x20 Rabbits are let loose in a large expanse of land that is securely fenced. It doesn't take long before the Rabbit population grows into thousands. Then the 'resources' run out and BOOM - the Rabbit Population collapses.
This is to be expected.
The amazing thing about this is that after the collapse.
The Rabbit Population grows again but keeps a respectable rate and number that doesn't put a strain on the resources.

Animals are amazing,.

gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2012 at 2:09pm:

Grey wrote on Feb 22nd, 2012 at 1:25pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Feb 21st, 2012 at 9:48pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 20th, 2012 at 12:52pm: I guess I'm a little cynical about these sorts of things... After all, I've been through the 'only an inch of topsoil' famine caused extinction of humanity by 1970 (1975, 1980, oh wait, 1990) And the 'only enough oil for 3 months' things in 1973, 1979, 1985, 1995, 2001 etc etc... And my parents, grandparents and uncles/aunts have told me about the various 'end of the world, next Thursday' things from their childhoods, although, those were usually due to the 'decay' of contemporary society (votes for women was going to cause it, so was promiscuity, splitting the atom, the invention of motorcars, the decline in church attendance, the approaching millennium (1900) and pretty much everything else)..... It seems there are ALWAYS groups around, predicting the fall of man.....since the 50's it's been environmental, rather than the older 'wrath of god' type though.... About the only common thread is, all the predictions have failed, and many have failed miserably... Well said. Doomsday scenarios have been around for thousands of years. This is just the latest. This thread topic is not 'global warming'. It's the future prospects stemming from continued exponential growth. Do we have 'exponential growth deniers' ? Are they the same people? I know Grey, nothing in my post, or destroyer's response, was about 'global warming'.... Doc Jolly was the one who mentioned GW, I just answered his comments...

Just a small correction there Gizmo, it was actually you who first introduced the Environment (although admitedly mis-splelled), on the very first post after Grey's initial post!


gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 7:01am:

Interesting video Grey...... Although it seems to be the standard' whiney eivronnutter 'back to the cave' philosophy that's been around since the 1960's.... I did expect better of you....

perceptions_now wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:04pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 20th, 2012 at 12:52pm: I guess I'm a little cynical about these sorts of things... After all, I've been through the 'only an inch of topsoil' famine caused extinction of humanity by 1970 (1975, 1980, oh wait, 1990) And the 'only enough oil for 3 months' things in 1973, 1979, 1985, 1995, 2001 etc etc... And my parents, grandparents and uncles/aunts have told me about the various 'end of the world, next Thursday' things from their childhoods, although, those were usually due to the 'decay' of contemporary society (votes for women was going to cause it, so was promiscuity, splitting the atom, the invention of motorcars, the decline in church attendance, the approaching millennium (1900) and pretty much everything else)..... It seems there are ALWAYS groups around, predicting the fall of man.....since the 50's it's been environmental, rather than the older 'wrath of god' type though.... About the only common thread is, all the predictions have failed, and many have failed miserably... Did you know that in 1970 - 1) There were less than 4 Billion Humans, now there are over 7 Billion. 2) US Oil Production Peaked, the Global annual rate of discovery of Oil also Peaked and both have steeply declined since then. 3) Nearly all, if not ALL Oil Producing countries have now hit Peak Oil Production. 4) In 1970, a barrel of Oil was less than $2, it is now just over $100 per barrel, after hitting a high of $147 in 2008. So, given the above, what do you think are the likely scenarios, in respect of - 1) Future Global Population Growth? 2) Future Global Oil Discovery? 3) Future Global Oil Production? 4) Future Global Oil Price?

I note that the Ostrich's haven't ventured forth with any thoughts on the Future of Global -
1) Population Growth?
2) Oil Discovery?
3) Oil Production?
4) Oil Price?

Well let me confirm that the answers are -
1) Down
2) Down
3) Down
4) Up

And, as a result, the Global Future of the following will be -
1) Demand for Goods & Services - DOWN
2) Economic Growth - DOWN
3) Unemployment - UP

And, all of that is without any general AUS-terity programs!

You don't want to know what would happen, IF any general AUS-terity programs were implemented!

perceptions_now wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2012 at 10:27pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 22nd, 2012 at 2:09pm: Grey wrote on Feb 22nd, 2012 at 1:25pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Feb 21st, 2012 at 9:48pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 20th, 2012 at 12:52pm: I guess I'm a little cynical about these sorts of things... After all, I've been through the 'only an inch of topsoil' famine caused extinction of humanity by 1970 (1975, 1980, oh wait, 1990) And the 'only enough oil for 3 months' things in 1973, 1979, 1985, 1995, 2001 etc etc... And my parents, grandparents and uncles/aunts have told me about the various 'end of the world, next Thursday' things from their childhoods, although, those were usually due to the 'decay' of contemporary society (votes for women was going to cause it, so was promiscuity, splitting the atom, the invention of motorcars, the decline in church attendance, the approaching millennium (1900) and pretty much everything else)..... It seems there are ALWAYS groups around, predicting the fall of man.....since the 50's it's been environmental, rather than the older 'wrath of god' type though.... About the only common thread is, all the predictions have failed, and many have failed miserably... Well said. Doomsday scenarios have been around for thousands of years. This is just the latest. This thread topic is not 'global warming'. It's the future prospects stemming from continued exponential growth. Do we have 'exponential growth deniers' ? Are they the same people? I know Grey, nothing in my post, or destroyer's response, was about 'global warming'.... Doc Jolly was the one who mentioned GW, I just answered his comments... Just a small correction there Gizmo, it was actually you who first introduced the Environment (although admitedly mis-splelled), on the very first post after Grey's initial post! gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 20th, 2012 at 7:01am: Interesting video Grey...... Although it seems to be the standard' whiney eivronnutter 'back to the cave' philosophy that's been around since the 1960's.... I did expect better of you....

Yes, and??
Environmentalism isn't restricted to global warming, in fact it predates the agw argument by a couple of decades (or more)...

The very first Earth Day in 1970 focused on over population and  global cooling fears......

Air pollution, water pollution, noise pollution (although I never got that one), logging, hunting, over fishing, topsoil depth, resource scarcity and numerous other things ( including the Tasmanian green movements protests AGAINST 'renewable' hydroelectricity projects from the late 60's until the early 80's..) were the major focuses of the early environmental movements around the world....

Global Warming/Climate Change came much later...

gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2012 at 11:33pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Feb 22nd, 2012 at 10:27pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 22nd, 2012 at 2:09pm: Grey wrote on Feb 22nd, 2012 at 1:25pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Feb 21st, 2012 at 9:48pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 20th, 2012 at 12:52pm: I guess I'm a little cynical about these sorts of things... After all, I've been through the 'only an inch of topsoil' famine caused extinction of humanity by 1970 (1975, 1980, oh wait, 1990) And the 'only enough oil for 3 months' things in 1973, 1979, 1985, 1995, 2001 etc etc... And my parents, grandparents and uncles/aunts have told me about the various 'end of the world, next Thursday' things from their childhoods, although, those were usually due to the 'decay' of contemporary society (votes for women was going to cause it, so was promiscuity, splitting the atom, the invention of motorcars, the decline in church attendance, the approaching millennium (1900) and pretty much everything else)..... It seems there are ALWAYS groups around, predicting the fall of man.....since the 50's it's been environmental, rather than the older 'wrath of god' type though.... About the only common thread is, all the predictions have failed, and many have failed miserably... Well said. Doomsday scenarios have been around for thousands of years. This is just the latest. This thread topic is not 'global warming'. It's the future prospects stemming from continued exponential growth. Do we have 'exponential growth deniers' ? Are they the same people? I know Grey, nothing in my post, or destroyer's response, was about 'global warming'.... Doc Jolly was the one who mentioned GW, I just answered his comments... Just a small correction there Gizmo, it was actually you who first introduced the Environment (although admitedly mis-splelled), on the very first post after Grey's initial post! gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 20th, 2012 at 7:01am: Interesting video Grey...... Although it seems to be the standard' whiney eivronnutter 'back to the cave' philosophy that's been around since the 1960's.... I did expect better of you.... Yes, and?? Environmentalism isn't restricted to global warming, in fact it predates the agw argument by a couple of decades (or more)... The very first Earth Day in 1970 focused on over population and  global cooling fears...... Air pollution, water pollution, noise pollution (although I never got that one), logging, hunting, over fishing, topsoil depth, resource scarcity and numerous other things ( including the Tasmanian green movements protests AGAINST 'renewable' hydroelectricity projects from the late 60's until the early 80's..) were the major focuses of the early environmental movements around the world.... Global Warming/Climate Change came much later...

Yes, and, you were the first person to raise the Environment!

But, the video is not about that, it is about shortages in a whole range of areas and it is about Population levels, none of which you have addressed!

It_is_the_Darkness wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2012 at 5:41pm:

OK THEN. ONE WORD about such 'growth'. = SUPERNOVA and we all know what remains after that.  ;) x20 Rabbits are let loose in a large expanse of land that is securely fenced. It doesn't take long before the Rabbit population grows into thousands. Then the 'resources' run out and BOOM - the Rabbit Population collapses. This is to be expected. The amazing thing about this is that after the collapse. The Rabbit Population grows again but keeps a respectable rate and number that doesn't put a strain on the resources. Animals are amazing,.

Animals are smarter than people?  ;D Well I'd like to think so, but animal populations stabalise due to various environmental factors such as predator numbers. It aint through the policy of a decision making group :-)



Quote:

I believe recycling will become more and more popular

I did enjoy that one  ;D

perceptions_now wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2012 at 12:33am:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 22nd, 2012 at 11:33pm: perceptions_now wrote on Feb 22nd, 2012 at 10:27pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 22nd, 2012 at 2:09pm: Grey wrote on Feb 22nd, 2012 at 1:25pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Feb 21st, 2012 at 9:48pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 20th, 2012 at 12:52pm: I guess I'm a little cynical about these sorts of things... After all, I've been through the 'only an inch of topsoil' famine caused extinction of humanity by 1970 (1975, 1980, oh wait, 1990) And the 'only enough oil for 3 months' things in 1973, 1979, 1985, 1995, 2001 etc etc... And my parents, grandparents and uncles/aunts have told me about the various 'end of the world, next Thursday' things from their childhoods, although, those were usually due to the 'decay' of contemporary society (votes for women was going to cause it, so was promiscuity, splitting the atom, the invention of motorcars, the decline in church attendance, the approaching millennium (1900) and pretty much everything else)..... It seems there are ALWAYS groups around, predicting the fall of man.....since the 50's it's been environmental, rather than the older 'wrath of god' type though.... About the only common thread is, all the predictions have failed, and many have failed miserably... Well said. Doomsday scenarios have been around for thousands of years. This is just the latest. This thread topic is not 'global warming'. It's the future prospects stemming from continued exponential growth. Do we have 'exponential growth deniers' ? Are they the same people? I know Grey, nothing in my post, or destroyer's response, was about 'global warming'.... Doc Jolly was the one who mentioned GW, I just answered his comments... Just a small correction there Gizmo, it was actually you who first introduced the Environment (although admitedly mis-splelled), on the very first post after Grey's initial post! gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 20th, 2012 at 7:01am: Interesting video Grey...... Although it seems to be the standard' whiney eivronnutter 'back to the cave' philosophy that's been around since the 1960's.... I did expect better of you.... Yes, and?? Environmentalism isn't restricted to global warming, in fact it predates the agw argument by a couple of decades (or more)... The very first Earth Day in 1970 focused on over population and  global cooling fears...... Air pollution, water pollution, noise pollution (although I never got that one), logging, hunting, over fishing, topsoil depth, resource scarcity and numerous other things ( including the Tasmanian green movements protests AGAINST 'renewable' hydroelectricity projects from the late 60's until the early 80's..) were the major focuses of the early environmental movements around the world.... Global Warming/Climate Change came much later... Yes, and, you were the first person to raise the Environment! But, the video is not about that, it is about shortages in a whole range of areas and it is about Population levels, none of which you have addressed!

Overpopulation IS an environmental issue....

Population growth is a problem that's sorting itself out. What we should focus on is restructuring our economies so that there's less growth and productivity and more leisure time. It would help to not spend all the leisure time procreating obviously :-)

Save the Coral sea.

http://www.avaaz.org/en/save_the_coral_sea_4_aus/?cl=1614202481&v=12830