Reply With Quote
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.
“...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.
These are the same people that are voting for Obama...so props
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 uva lot more people starving. "Global Warming" is a misnomer. It's Global Climate Change.
[QUOTE=Shastafarian;2851257]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 uva lot more people starving. "Global Warming" is a misnomer. It's Global Climate Change.[/QUOTE]
Of course it is. That way it's never be wrong.
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.
*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.
Who gives a ? 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.
Why? What ducks said deserved to be there.
Or, maybe, just maybe, the Earth gets hot, then gets cold, then gets hot, then gets cold (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.
Or, maybe, just maybe, the Earth gets hot, then gets cold, then gets hot, then gets cols (are you seeing a trend?)
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.
SO THEY WERE RIGHT IN 1970!!!!!!!
AHHHHHHHAHHHHAHHHHHHHHAHHHAHHHHHHHAHHHHH!!!!!!!!!! !!!
.................................................. .............................
.................................................. ..............................
.................................................. .................................
oh, sorry.
Daydreaming about San Francisco being underwater there for a minute.
Yeah but I am enormously proud of my role in the discovery of Supermassive blackholes...even though that's not 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.
A massive black hole is what you're going to have on your ass on Nov 5th.
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.
You're not getting back in the sig unless you say something that isn't an attempt to get back in the sig.
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.
"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.
, who know how many people have died because we decided to start turning food into fuel.
Morality is relative.
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.
I thought Global Warming was a myth.
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?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
