PDA

View Full Version : Predictions from first Earth Day, 1970



DarrinS
10-27-2008, 09:44 AM
“...civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind,” biologist George Wald, Harvard University, April 19, 1970.

By 1995, “...somewhere between 75 and 85 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct.” Sen. Gaylord Nelson, quoting Dr. S. Dillon Ripley, Look magazine, April 1970.

Because of increased dust, cloud cover and water vapor “...the planet will cool, the water vapor will fall and freeze, and a new Ice Age will be born,” Newsweek magazine, January 26, 1970.

The world will be “...eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age,” Kenneth Watt, speaking at Swarthmore University, April 19, 1970.

“We are in an environmental crisis which threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation,” biologist Barry Commoner, University of Washington, writing in the journal Environment, April 1970.

“Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from the intolerable deteriorations and possible extinction,” The New York Times editorial, April 20, 1970.

“By 1985, air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half...” Life magazine, January 1970.

“Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make,” Paul Ehrlich, interview in Mademoiselle magazine, April 1970.

“...air pollution...is certainly going to take hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few years alone,” Paul Ehrlich, interview in Mademoiselle magazine, April 1970. Ehrlich also predicted that in 1973, 200,000 Americans would die from air pollution, and that by 1980 the life expectancy of Americans would be 42 years.

“It is already too late to avoid mass starvation,” Earth Day organizer Denis Hayes, The Living Wilderness, Spring 1970.

“By the year 2000...the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America and Australia, will be in famine,” Peter Gunter, North Texas State University, The Living Wilderness, Spring 1970.

DarrinS
10-27-2008, 09:47 AM
By the way, the last couple of years were pretty freakin cold and it looks this this year may be colder than the previous two.


"Coincidentally", the current cooling trend coincides with a period of very low solar activity.

whottt
10-27-2008, 09:49 AM
These are the same people that are voting for Obama...so props :tu

Shastafarian
10-27-2008, 09:53 AM
So is over-fishing imagined? How about rapid deforestation? Are those things imagined? And there is increased famine. If it wasn't for the development of bio-engineered crops there would be a helluva lot more people starving. "Global Warming" is a misnomer. It's Global Climate Change.

DarrinS
10-27-2008, 10:01 AM
So is over-fishing imagined? How about rapid deforestation? Are those things imagined? And there is increased famine. If it wasn't for the development of bio-engineered crops there would be a helluva lot more people starving. "Global Warming" is a misnomer. It's Global Climate Change.


Of course it is. That way it's never be wrong. :rolleyes


I'm just pointing out that past predictions were wrong. Predictions from THIS DECADE that were based on computer models are ALREADY wrong.


Computer modeling also indicated that sub-prime based securities were a reasonbly safe investment.

Shastafarian
10-27-2008, 10:04 AM
So is over-fishing imagined? How about rapid deforestation? Are those things imagined? And there is increased famine. If it wasn't for the development of bio-engineered crops there would be a helluva lot more people starving. "Global Warming" is a misnomer. It's Global Climate Change.


Of course it is. That way it's never be wrong. :rolleyes



*sigh* or it means that global climate is intricate and it would take the sun growing larger/getting closer or hundreds of years of CO2 emissions to heat up the entire globe 365 days a year to the point that deniers would be able to wear shorts in Alaska in January.

whottt
10-27-2008, 10:04 AM
So is over-fishing imagined? How about rapid deforestation? Are those things imagined? And there is increased famine. If it wasn't for the development of bio-engineered crops there would be a helluva lot more people starving. "Global Warming" is a misnomer. It's Global Climate Change.


Who gives a shit? If we are so stupid we strip the planets ability to sustain us...we deserve our fate. Don't act like our continued survival is a plus for the planet...because it really isn't...we're a fungus on this planet. We are eating it...consuming it...

It's contradictory to be both a humanitarian and an environmentalist IMO.



BTW...if I had known you were going to remove me from your sig I wouldn't taken you off ignore.

Shastafarian
10-27-2008, 10:06 AM
Who gives a shit? If we are so stupid we strip the planets ability to sustain us...we deserve our fate. Don't act like our continued survival is a plus for the planet...because it really isn't...we're a fungus on this planet. We are eating it...consuming it...

It's contradictory to be both a humanitarian and an environmentalist IMO.



BTW...if I had known you were going to remove me from your sig I wouldn't taken you off ignore.

:lol Why? What ducks said deserved to be there.

AntiChrist
10-27-2008, 10:06 AM
*sigh* or it means that global climate is intricate and it would take the sun growing larger/getting closer or hundreds of years of CO2 emissions to heat up the entire globe 365 days a year to the point that deniers would be able to wear shorts in Alaska in January.


:lmao


Or, maybe, just maybe, the Earth gets hot, then gets cold, then gets hot, then gets cold (are you seeing a trend?)

Shastafarian
10-27-2008, 10:07 AM
:lmao


Or, maybe, just maybe, the Earth gets hot, then gets cold, then gets hot, then gets cols (are you seeing a trend?)

Well what you have said is so scientific I can't help but agree! The earth gets hot, then cold, then hot again? Damn I need to go back to school and learn that brand of science.

TheMadHatter
10-27-2008, 10:07 AM
Technology will advance one day to the point where we are no more of a fungus to the earth than any other animal. In the meantime, anything we can do to preserve this planet is something we must do.

DarrinS
10-27-2008, 10:12 AM
Technology will advance one day to the point where we are no more of a fungus to the earth than any other animal. In the meantime, anything we can do to preserve this planet is something we must do.


We can no more solve the problems of the people of 2108 than the people of 1908 could have solved our current problems.


I agree that we should do what we can, but I don't see Miami or San Fransisco being underwater any time soon.

101A
10-27-2008, 10:14 AM
By the way, the last couple of years were pretty freakin cold and it looks this this year may be colder than the previous two.


"Coincidentally", the current cooling trend coincides with a period of very low solar activity.

SO THEY WERE RIGHT IN 1970!!!!!!!

AHHHHHHHAHHHHAHHHHHHHHAHHHAHHHHHHHAHHHHH!!!!!!!!!! !!!

101A
10-27-2008, 10:17 AM
We can no more solve the problems of the people of 2108 than the people of 1908 could have solved our current problems.


I agree that we should do what we can, but I don't see Miami or San Fransisco being underwater any time soon.



.................................................. .............................
.................................................. ..............................
.................................................. .................................

oh, sorry.

Daydreaming about San Francisco being underwater there for a minute.

whottt
10-27-2008, 10:33 AM
:lol Why? What ducks said deserved to be there.


Yeah but I am enormously proud of my role in the discovery of Supermassive blackholes...even though that's not shit compared to my theories on what Quasars are.


Look you can laugh about it...but I came up with that idea entirely on my own. Even if if had been theorized by Atronomers previously...my conclusion was arrived at independently of any established theories as I was completely ignorant of any other theories of that nature at that time, thus it was my own idea.

ElNono
10-27-2008, 10:34 AM
Yeah but I am enormously proud of my role in the discovery of Supermassive blackholes...even though that's not shit compared to my theories on what Quasars are.


Look you can laugh about it...but I came up with that idea entirely on my own. Even if if had been theorized by Atronomers previously...my conclusion was arrived at independently of any established theories as I was completely ignorant of any other theories of that nature at that time, thus is was my own idea.

A massive black hole is what you're going to have on your ass on Nov 5th.

whottt
10-27-2008, 10:36 AM
My favorite bit of 70's alarmism is that Boric Acid is going to cause roaches to become extinct, and since they potentially hold the key to curing cancer, their extinction could be a disaster to the field if scientific research and the whole of humanity.

I'm not joking about this either.

Shastafarian
10-27-2008, 10:36 AM
Yeah but I am enormously proud of my role in the discovery of Supermassive blackholes...even though that's not shit compared to my theories on what Quasars are.


Look you can laugh about it...but I came up with that idea entirely on my own. Even if if had been theorized by Atronomers previously...my conclusion was arrived at independently of any established theories as I was completely ignorant of any other theories of that nature at that time, thus is was my own idea.

You're not getting back in the sig unless you say something that isn't an attempt to get back in the sig.

byrontx
10-27-2008, 10:51 AM
I prefer to err on the side of caution, and do what seems morally right, by moving to sustainable models for energy and food production. I would hate for my 4 yo son to get to thirty and see that we triggered a true collapse of the environment fifteen years previously and scheduled our destruction without realizing it. No one denies that the Earth goes through cycles, the debate is whether or not human contribution may cause a tipping point.

DarrinS
10-27-2008, 10:55 AM
I prefer to err on the side of caution, and do what seems morally right, by moving to sustainable models for energy and food production. I would hate for my 4 yo son to get to thirty and see that we triggered a true collapse of the environment fifteen years previously and scheduled our destruction without realizing it. No one denies that the Earth goes through cycles, the debate is whether or not human contribution may cause a tipping point.



Your son's great grandkids won't witness the destruction of the Earth.

101A
10-27-2008, 11:03 AM
I prefer to err on the side of caution, and do what seems morally right, by moving to sustainable models for energy and food production. I would hate for my 4 yo son to get to thirty and see that we triggered a true collapse of the environment fifteen years previously and scheduled our destruction without realizing it. No one denies that the Earth goes through cycles, the debate is whether or not human contribution may cause a tipping point.


"Morally" right?

By limiting the technology available to grow food - mine energy, etc...it creates a supply of that which is not natural; then it also raises the cost to transport it. There are millions (billions) of people starving in the world, while we implement policies which make it more expensive, or even impossible to get food to them; all based on questionable science to "save" the planet from something that may, or very well may not, be happening.


Hell, who know how many people have died because we decided to start turning food into fuel.

Morality is relative.

Shastafarian
10-27-2008, 11:05 AM
Hell, who know how many people have died because we decided to start turning food into fuel.


I would wager 0. There is enough food on earth to feed every living person. Politics (and not the sort that fight over oil) get in the way.

101A
10-27-2008, 11:12 AM
I would wager 0. There is enough food on earth to feed every living person. Politics (and not the sort that fight over oil) get in the way.


http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/04/global-food-shortages-spreading.php

Shastafarian
10-27-2008, 11:17 AM
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/04/global-food-shortages-spreading.php

I thought Global Warming was a myth.

Wild Cobra
10-27-2008, 11:36 AM
By the way, the last couple of years were pretty freakin cold and it looks this this year may be colder than the previous two.


"Coincidentally", the current cooling trend coincides with a period of very low solar activity.
Yep, I've been tying "Global Warming" (and cooling) to the sun for far longer than I've been a member here. Will any of the liberals here acknowlege I was right in a few years?

101A
10-27-2008, 11:36 AM
I thought Global Warming was a myth.

No, the globe warms; man just probably doesn't have much to do with it; that big, glowing, nuclear orb in the sky, amazingly, does.

Linked a liberal site, so you could trust the source.

We weren't talking about global warming.

Shastafarian
10-27-2008, 11:39 AM
No, the globe warms; man just probably doesn't have much to do with it; that big, glowing, nuclear orb in the sky, amazingly, does.

Linked a liberal site, so you could trust the source.

We weren't talking about global warming.

Then what is causing the food shortages? I maintain that there is enough food produced to feed everyone. How that food is allocated is what causes famines.

DarrinS
10-27-2008, 11:41 AM
You know what I've always wondered?


What is the optimal temperature of the Earth?

101A
10-27-2008, 11:42 AM
Then what is causing the food shortages? I maintain that there is enough food produced to feed everyone. How that food is allocated is what causes famines.


As I said; the US converting great quantities of Corn (used to be food) into ethanol is part of the problem. You said, "no way". I linked an article that cited it as a factor.

101A
10-27-2008, 11:43 AM
You know what I've always wondered?


What is the optimal temperature of the Earth?

Are we hosting the summer, or winter, olympics?

Life does MUCH better when it warms up.

Shastafarian
10-27-2008, 11:45 AM
No, the globe warms; man just probably doesn't have much to do with it; that big, glowing, nuclear orb in the sky, amazingly, does.

Linked a liberal site, so you could trust the source.

We weren't talking about global warming.

New sources of irrigation water are even more scarce than new land to plow. Meanwhile, the backlog of agricultural technology that can be used to raise cropland productivity is dwindling. And the rising price of oil is boosting the costs of both food production and transport while at the same time making it more profitable to convert grain into fuel for cars.

Beyond this, climate change presents new risks. Crop-withering heat waves, increasingly destructive storms, and the melting of the Asian mountain glaciers that sustain the dry-season flow of that region’s major rivers are combining to make harvest expansion more difficult. In the past the negative effect of unusual weather events was always temporary; within a year or two things would return to normal. But with climate in flux, there is no norm to return to.


And I still maintain that there is enough FOOD being produced to feed everyone. If that food was being properly allocated it wouldn't matter that we are converting grain to fuel.

boutons_
10-27-2008, 11:58 AM
the sun is the sole, predominant culprit.

man's activities are totally innocent, non-causative, so Carry On.

thanks for the right-wing ideological clarification.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIqLsGT2wbQ

101A
10-27-2008, 12:50 PM
New sources of irrigation water are even more scarce than new land to plow. Meanwhile, the backlog of agricultural technology that can be used to raise cropland productivity is dwindling. And the rising price of oil is boosting the costs of both food production and transport while at the same time making it more profitable to convert grain into fuel for cars.

Beyond this, climate change presents new risks. Crop-withering heat waves, increasingly destructive storms, and the melting of the Asian mountain glaciers that sustain the dry-season flow of that region’s major rivers are combining to make harvest expansion more difficult. In the past the negative effect of unusual weather events was always temporary; within a year or two things would return to normal. But with climate in flux, there is no norm to return to.


And I still maintain that there is enough FOOD being produced to feed everyone. If that food was being properly allocated it wouldn't matter that we are converting grain to fuel.

YOU said Ethanol accounted for NO starvation; that is the ONLY part of that article I read. I don't give a shit what it says about climate change; I figure it's full of crap - I simply linked it for the other piece.

It's cold here today, btw.

PixelPusher
10-27-2008, 12:58 PM
You know what I've always wondered?


What is the optimal temperature of the Earth?
"optimal" is a relative term, in this case relative to the needs of billions of Homo Sapiens like you and me.

Are we hosting the summer, or winter, olympics?

Life does MUCH better when it warms up.
Life needs water as much as it needs heat. Amazon = full of life, Sahara = eh, not so much.

Everyone is still busy bitching about mean temperature and how much hotter/colder this year was compared to last year, ect. What ultimately matters is how climate change affects precipitation on a global scale. In this country, we've already stretched our freshwater resources to their limits (here's looking at you Nevada/Arizona/New Mexico/Southern California).

101A
10-27-2008, 01:08 PM
"optimal" is a relative term, in this case relative to the needs of billions of Homo Sapiens like you and me.

Life needs water as much as it needs heat. Amazon = full of life, Sahara = eh, not so much.

Everyone is still busy bitching about mean temperature and how much hotter/colder this year was compared to last year, ect. What ultimately matters is how climate change affects precipitation on a global scale. In this country, we've already stretched our freshwater resources to their limits (here's looking at you Nevada/Arizona/New Mexico/Southern California).


Where the fuck is the water gonna go?
If the caps melt, there is a hell of a lot MORE water; even if it's in the ocean, it's gonna evaporate - then fall back down as......fresh water!!!

Ice Ages kill a bunch of life; warm periods throughout history kicks ass for life. Their finding a bunch of dinosaur bones up in NORTHERN ALASKA!!!! And not furry - eskimo types either; Life spread much further than now.

Wild Cobra
10-28-2008, 02:50 PM
Any thoughts on the new ocean that's going to form in Africa?

Shastafarian
10-28-2008, 02:52 PM
Any thoughts on the new ocean that's going to form in Africa?

In the Great Rift Valley?

Tully365
10-28-2008, 03:02 PM
“...civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind,” biologist George Wald, Harvard University, April 19, 1970.

By 1995, “...somewhere between 75 and 85 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct.” Sen. Gaylord Nelson, quoting Dr. S. Dillon Ripley, Look magazine, April 1970.

Because of increased dust, cloud cover and water vapor “...the planet will cool, the water vapor will fall and freeze, and a new Ice Age will be born,” Newsweek magazine, January 26, 1970.

The world will be “...eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age,” Kenneth Watt, speaking at Swarthmore University, April 19, 1970.

“We are in an environmental crisis which threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation,” biologist Barry Commoner, University of Washington, writing in the journal Environment, April 1970.

“Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from the intolerable deteriorations and possible extinction,” The New York Times editorial, April 20, 1970.

“By 1985, air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half...” Life magazine, January 1970.

“Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make,” Paul Ehrlich, interview in Mademoiselle magazine, April 1970.

“...air pollution...is certainly going to take hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few years alone,” Paul Ehrlich, interview in Mademoiselle magazine, April 1970. Ehrlich also predicted that in 1973, 200,000 Americans would die from air pollution, and that by 1980 the life expectancy of Americans would be 42 years.

“It is already too late to avoid mass starvation,” Earth Day organizer Denis Hayes, The Living Wilderness, Spring 1970.

“By the year 2000...the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America and Australia, will be in famine,” Peter Gunter, North Texas State University, The Living Wilderness, Spring 1970.


By the way, the last couple of years were pretty freakin cold and it looks this this year may be colder than the previous two.


"Coincidentally", the current cooling trend coincides with a period of very low solar activity.


You know what I've always wondered?


What is the optimal temperature of the Earth?

We don't always see eye to eye on things, but I've gotta give you props for this thread. Well done, IMO.

DarrinS
10-28-2008, 03:14 PM
We don't always see eye to eye on things, but I've gotta give you props for this thread. Well done, IMO.


I'm just sick of the whole global warming issue -- especially as a political issue.

When I saw Leonardo de Crapio hand Gore that Nobel prize and say "You are a true champion for the cause", I thought I was going to throw up.

Cry Havoc
10-28-2008, 03:16 PM
Hahaha, it's funny. My stepdad and I have been having a running discussion (agreement) that the Earth is on a global warming "trend", rather than a man-made collision course with disaster. I have to agree with a lot of the sentiments here.

That said, we should still care for our planet. Ya only get one!

Tully365
10-28-2008, 03:42 PM
I'm just sick of the whole global warming issue -- especially as a political issue.

When I saw Leonardo de Crapio hand Gore that Nobel prize and say "You are a true champion for the cause", I thought I was going to throw up.

For me, the whole question of whether the earth is warming or cooling and whether it's a short term thing or a long term thing is really not important politically. The question should be simpler and more straight-forward: Do we want the earth to be more polluted or less polluted? That's what it all boils down to for me.

ratm1221
10-28-2008, 03:52 PM
Bottom line is your f'in up my air. I'm going to come drive a pickup truck around in your house with the windows closed and see how you like it.