Read! GBR will vanish in your lifetime (most likely)

[Anonymous]

Reductions of greenhouse gasses may be a good thin but legislating reductions when no viable alternatives are available is a knee-jerk reaction by the other side. This is what I am talking about by extremists on both sides causing the problems. When we identify a problem be it in the environment or elsewhere rather than ignoring (business interest) or forcing change with no alternatives (environmental extremists) we should develop viable alternatives and then implement them in a manner that will improve the situation and promote industry as well.

Who can argue that the air quality in major cities doesn't cause health risks to the population. Yet business extremists resist change and environmental extremists want to shut everything down. Both sides need to work together to find and implement solutions. The public isn't served by stopping progress and industry, neither is it served by damning the environment and business as usual.

If society is ruled by greed then business will maximize profits at the expense of all else. If society is ruled completely by ideals progress stops because perfect processes don't exist. Business working with environmentalists to find real, cost effective solutions is what has to happen. Once the cost effective solutions are found then they should be required but not before. It would be nice if we could trust business to voluntarily implement these solutions but there is that greed thing that gets in the way.

Burt,

I don’t think it’s that black and white. Most of the things we do as humans are driven by hormones. The urge to join a group, to have children, to be successful and to look down on others unlike yourself are all survival traits. This competitive nature and rapid breeding pattern has overpopulated our world, while greed and idealism were but sub-plots.
If this world only had to support 3 billion humans, living in extreme luxury, with education and jobs for everybody, we could co-exist nicely with the world and other species. But no, our urges dictate that we grow exponentially. We will kill most other species and then we will die. Our quality of life continues to decline but we take no action. How much greed and idealism will effect that, I don’t know.

"Our quality of life continues to decline"??????????????

Where the heck do you live?

My quality of life, that I provide for my children and my wife far surpass what was provided for me when I was young. My parents had old cars without airconditioning and doors that were different colors. I also remember waiting in the backseat of my parents car in the 70's, under that turd Carter, for gas in the 90 degree heat. I wore hand me downs and no name brands when I was a kid and my kids get new clothes every year. I drive new cars every few years without worry. The quality of life in America is at it's greatest point ever and should get even better with future generations, as long as we do not limit ourselves too much.

When I was young I remember playing soccer under the Throggs Neck Bridge in Queens, NY and the water was SH*T brown. Now the water is blue again thanks to conservation and recycling programs. I also remember the beaches on the east coast were plagued with garbage and hypo needles and they were closed for whole seasons. The conservation and general caring is huge, but we also must put humans first more times than not. I am a true conservative, in both environment and politics, so I believe that we must put people first and at the same time find an environmentally friendly approach to doing so.

 

[Anonymous]

Nice world view! Did you know there are other countries in the world? Some lack clean water and others are in a constant state of starvation. Let’s have another 2-3 billion, it won't put any more pressure on our resources. Of course that won't mater, if you get yours.

 

[bfessler]

Nice world view! Did you know there are other countries in the world? Some lack clean water and others are in a constant state of starvation. Let’s have another 2-3 billion, it won't put any more pressure on our resources. Of course that won't mater, if you get yours.

I don't even know what to think of this statement. Are you trying to say that we are somehow responsible for people starving in other countries? At least in the US the population growth rate has slowed considerably and conservation is a big part of our culture. We can't dictate how other countries act but we can set the example. I also have to agree that we have to put Humans first and that part of putting humans first is finding environmentally friendly methods. The quality of life has generally risen consistently in the US with a few setbacks but the trend is generally upward and as Americans we don't just turn a blind eye to the problems of other countries. We reach out wherever we can to try to educate and reduce the suffering of people throughout the world.

 

[Anonymous]

Profit cannot be the only driving force in a society. Greed is responsible for most every vice, child exploitation, illegal drugs, organized crime to name a few. While the desire to obtain wealth can be a good thing it is a two edged sword and must be kept in check by certain standards and decency. The unfortunate truth is that if greed is the guiding force in a persons life then bad things are virtually unavoidable. You see it everywhere. People will exploit whatever and whomever they wish to achieve their desires.

There have to be checks and balances to assure that people behave responsibly.

I consider myself a moderate capitalist. I don't think anything should be taken from the rich and redistributed to the poor, but I also don't think the rich should be able to prevent the poor from achieving their dreams either. I believe in hard work and an honest return on your investment. Again I say that the extremists on both the left and right cause the problems and it is the checks and balances that keep us grounded and on the right path. Too much restriction is a bad thing. No restriction is just as bad.

Oh my goodness, do we need more folks like you in the Sump and in government. How... balanced.

I would like to expand upon your first paragraph regarding greed and the resultant exploitation to point out that it is the greed and exploitation conducted by a corporate BoD that often does the most harm, and not just environmentally. Small businesses, what used to be the American paradigm, can respond most quickly to a changing market and market demands. Corporations have advertising they've already paid for and specials planned for the coming year, they're not so flexible. Plus, they may have stockholders to answer to.

I'm planning on being scuba certified to dive Greenland's first reefs, in about fifty years or so. If I can't hobble onto the boat then they can wheel me.

 

[Lars]

Looks like the conspiracy may be starting to unravel:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/en...nglia-emails-the-most-contentious-quotes.html

 

[Anonymous]

Looks like the conspiracy may be starting to unravel:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/en...nglia-emails-the-most-contentious-quotes.html

Why should we be shocked? They have a lot to gain by lying as well. Who was the politician in the 80's who had a conference on global warming in the summer and had the A/C shut off so everybody attending would sweat?

 

[Anonymous]

Reductions of greenhouse gasses may be a good thin but legislating reductions when no viable alternatives are available is a knee-jerk reaction by the other side. This is what I am talking about by extremists on both sides causing the problems. When we identify a problem be it in the environment or elsewhere rather than ignoring (business interest) or forcing change with no alternatives (environmental extremists) we should develop viable alternatives and then implement them in a manner that will improve the situation and promote industry as well.

Who can argue that the air quality in major cities doesn't cause health risks to the population. Yet business extremists resist change and environmental extremists want to shut everything down. Both sides need to work together to find and implement solutions. The public isn't served by stopping progress and industry, neither is it served by damning the environment and business as usual.

If society is ruled by greed then business will maximize profits at the expense of all else. If society is ruled completely by ideals progress stops because perfect processes don't exist. Business working with environmentalists to find real, cost effective solutions is what has to happen. Once the cost effective solutions are found then they should be required but not before. It would be nice if we could trust business to voluntarily implement these solutions but there is that greed thing that gets in the way.

Burt,

I don’t think it’s that black and white. Most of the things we do as humans are driven by hormones. The urge to join a group, to have children, to be successful and to look down on others unlike yourself are all survival traits. This competitive nature and rapid breeding pattern has overpopulated our world, while greed and idealism were but sub-plots.
If this world only had to support 3 billion humans, living in extreme luxury, with education and jobs for everybody, we could co-exist nicely with the world and other species. But no, our urges dictate that we grow exponentially. We will kill most other species and then we will die. Our quality of life continues to decline but we take no action. How much greed and idealism will effect that, I don’t know.

What's your answer?
Limits on children?
Kill some people?
Limit health care?(Obamacare may keep the blood from your hands)
Hormone shots to curb the breeding hormones?

I am being somewhat sarcastic, but what do we do then?

I'd like to hear some real suggestions rather than belly aching.

 

[bfessler]

It's interesting that if you keep telling the same lie long enough, throw in some anecdotal evidence and keep a straight face people will eventually begin to believe it. I'm all for finding better, cleaner, more efficient ways of doing things but lets not bankrupt ourselves doing it. When people manipulate the truth for their own good it becomes hard to know who to trust. I'm not a scientist so I have to rely on the honest dissemination of information. You only have to look at the air quality in our major cities to know we need to do something about pollution but take a drive outside the metropolitan areas and you can tell the world isn't coming to an end. We just need to make sound decisions for improving the quality of our environment, not destroy everything that has been done in the past and start over. I'm all for giving incentives for companies that invest in environmentally friendly processes and products and phasing out old dirty technology as new and better options become available. When better options become available then support for old technology should be dropped. At this time it will be financially necessary to invest in new technology because the old is simply not available any longer. Those who fail to invest in new technologies will have their businesses fail and thats the fate of short sited companies.

Scientists and others that obscure the truth to promote their own ideas don't really practice true science letting the data lead to the truth. Those guilty of such practices should be exposed and removed from their positions. They are as guilty of damaging the economy in the name of greed for funding as wall street in their lust for profits. In my opinion what needs to be done to fix most of our problems is telling the truth, the whole truth not just what gets you what you want. It is a lack of integrity that has created the mess we find ourselves in today.

 

[Anonymous]

It's interesting that if you keep telling the same lie long enough, throw in some anecdotal evidence and keep a straight face people will eventually begin to believe it. I'm all for finding better, cleaner, more efficient ways of doing things but lets not bankrupt ourselves doing it. When people manipulate the truth for their own good it becomes hard to know who to trust. I'm not a scientist so I have to rely on the honest dissemination of information. You only have to look at the air quality in our major cities to know we need to do something about pollution but take a drive outside the metropolitan areas and you can tell the world isn't coming to an end. We just need to make sound decisions for improving the quality of our environment, not destroy everything that has been done in the past and start over. I'm all for giving incentives for companies that invest in environmentally friendly processes and products and phasing out old dirty technology as new and better options become available. When better options become available then support for old technology should be dropped. At this time it will be financially necessary to invest in new technology because the old is simply not available any longer. Those who fail to invest in new technologies will have their businesses fail and thats the fate of short sited companies.

Scientists and others that obscure the truth to promote their own ideas don't really practice true science letting the data lead to the truth. Those guilty of such practices should be exposed and removed from their positions. They are as guilty of damaging the economy in the name of greed for funding as wall street in their lust for profits. In my opinion what needs to be done to fix most of our problems is telling the truth, the whole truth not just what gets you what you want. It is a lack of integrity that has created the mess we find ourselves in today.

I like your point of view and agree with you almost in full. These "scientists" were predicting the future in the 70's and that was global cooling. I wonder how many of these current "scientists" were on board with that back then. You cannot not even get an accurate 5 day forcast, but these guys are telling us that the the temp in the future will be steadily high.

 

[Anonymous]

<<< is waiting for the MODS to step in and tell you politics aren't allowed topside... they're reserved for Sump fodder :lol:

 

[bfessler]

Here is an interesting article on what's really causing global warming.
http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/2007/2007_1-9/2007-9/pdf/06_709_sci.pdf

And another interesting site about global warming fact or fiction. This site has references to both sides of the arguement.
http://www.rense.com/Datapages/globwarmdat.htm

There are several interesting articles in this one.

 

[bfessler]

Here is an interesting Video.

http://www.abc.net.au/tv/swindle/

 

[Anonymous]

Got any articles that debunk the "myth" of ocean acidification why you're at it?

 

[Anonymous]

I am not sure how anyone is supposed to take info from a Lyndon Larouche or Jeff Rense website seriously.

 

[Len]

<<< is waiting for the MODS to step in and tell you politics aren't allowed topside... they're reserved for Sump fodder :lol:

Yes; Let's please refrain from political commentaries. Talking about the science of declining reefs, global warming, etc. is just fine.

 

[Anonymous]

This post should be in the sump anyway. There is no way to subtract politics out of this completely. People as a whole do not have the power to change things on their own and need Gov't to either pass legislation to limit the use of energy or population growth. Plus, many forein Gov't's like China refuse to get on board with lowering emissions and the like. These things are all part of the debate whether you want it to be or not.

 

[Anonymous]

You don't need to remove politics completely, but the tangential political commentary belongs somewhere else.

 

[Anonymous]

Just like the sump, only certain politics should be portrayed, and the rest is tangential commentary.