The Human Footprint Is Not Small or Harmless

[Oddball]

Correlation does not equal causation and computer models don't count for diddly-poo, Reverend Malthus.

The causation has long been established. That was done in 1858 by Tyndall.

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

Vostok ice cores disagree.

 

[Old Rocks]

Correlation does not equal causation and computer models don't count for diddly-poo, Reverend Malthus.

The causation has long been established. That was done in 1858 by Tyndall.

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

Vostok ice cores disagree.

Disagree with what? Flap yap on your part, as you never even looked at the site. Not only that, you don't even have any idea of what the American Institute of Physics is. Wonderful to see 'Conservatives' posting their willfull ignorance for all to see.

 

[Oddball]

Vostok ice cores prove conclusively that CO2 lags temperature increases, rather than being the driver of them.....This is a fact you cannot deny.

Well, you do deny it, but that just makes you the frootloop cultist that you are,.

 

[SSDD]

'

Beginning with work by Joseph Fourier in the 1820s, scientists had understood that gases in the atmosphere might trap the heat received from the Sun. As Fourier put it, energy in the form of visible light from the Sun easily penetrates the atmosphere to reach the surface and heat it up, but heat cannot so easily escape back into space. For the air absorbs invisible heat rays (infrared radiation) rising from the surface. The warmed air radiates some of the energy back down to the surface, helping it stay warm. This was the effect that would later be called, by an inaccurate analogy, the "greenhouse effect."

This may come as a surprise to you since you warmers don't do much thinking on your own, but Fourier's quaint 19th century premise was quite quickly disproven by another 19th century scientist. Do a bit of research (if you have the brains for that sort of thing) on professor Wood's experiment. It disproved fourier's hypotheisis. Amazing that warmists don't know this stuff.

 

[SSDD]

And yet, resources are more plentiful now than at any time in history.

Natural resources are most usefully measured in relative terms, per human.

Per human, natural resources are at their lowest level in history and decreasing. Especially fresh water. What keeps ratios as high as they are is massive amounts of carbon turned into energy but the path to the grid consumes almost an equal amount of carbon.

Humanity is likely to experience some kind of global correction that could start tomorrow or in fifty years. When it is over the human footprint will be realigned in a number of ways.

Nice try, but of what good is a resource if you can't make use of it.
? There are a greater amount of resourses available to the individual today than at any time in history.

 

[boedicca]

I am very much a Daoist. I do not approve of bustling about trying to change the world. Humans are remarkably ineffectual creatures, but often with ridiculously grandiose pretensions. What they strive for, they usually fail to accomplish, and the more their striving, usually the more spectacular their failure.

Moreover, it is clear to me that present human society is doomed: the inertia of human folly is so great that it will not happen that humanity will avoid hurtling over the precipice into the abyss.

The Dark Side of Climate Change: It's Already Too Late, Cap and Trade Is a Scam, and Only the Few Will Survive

Yes, Lovelock is essentially correct. It is too late to avert catastrophic global heating -- and all the other social ills and environmental catastrophes which will sweep down upon an unprepared humanity during the course of this century. Humans, as usual, have been about as idiotic as they possibly can be, and now it is time to face the consequences. Now is the time to be thinking about triage.

I look with contempt on all attempts to prevent the disaster -- they are simply wasted effort. I feel no human fellowship with most of my fellow hominids: I regard them as garbage apes. They are determined to commit suicide, and I wish them all success. I am only interested in that small minority which can understand their situation, and who are willing to make changes in their lives to deal with it. Any plans I have for future social amelioration center around dealing with the aftermath of the approaching disaster.

Once we change our focus from averting catastrophe to minimising it, there is much that we can do.

The real saviours of the future world will be those who are skilled in triage.
.
.

Translation: you are full of self-loathing.

 

[boedicca]

I'll also note that looking at one's fellow humans as with contempt is not very Buddha-like.

 

[Pop23]

If only they would leave it at that !!

Life could be so pleasant, if only people were as sensible as I am!! · ·

If only they would leave it at that !!

How far would you go, to make them?

I am very much a Daoist. I do not approve of bustling about trying to change the world. Humans are remarkably ineffectual creatures, but often with ridiculously grandiose pretensions. What they strive for, they usually fail to accomplish, and the more their striving, usually the more spectacular their failure.

Moreover, it is clear to me that present human society is doomed: the inertia of human folly is so great that it will not happen that humanity will avoid hurtling over the precipice into the abyss.

The Dark Side of Climate Change: It's Already Too Late, Cap and Trade Is a Scam, and Only the Few Will Survive

Yes, Lovelock is essentially correct. It is too late to avert catastrophic global heating -- and all the other social ills and environmental catastrophes which will sweep down upon an unprepared humanity during the course of this century. Humans, as usual, have been about as idiotic as they possibly can be, and now it is time to face the consequences. Now is the time to be thinking about triage.

I look with contempt on all attempts to prevent the disaster -- they are simply wasted effort. I feel no human fellowship with most of my fellow hominids: I regard them as garbage apes. They are determined to commit suicide, and I wish them all success. I am only interested in that small minority which can understand their situation, and who are willing to make changes in their lives to deal with it. Any plans I have for future social amelioration center around dealing with the aftermath of the approaching disaster.

Once we change our focus from averting catastrophe to minimising it, there is much that we can do.

The real saviours of the future world will be those who are skilled in triage.
.
.

Lemme guess, theater major?

 

[Dugdale_Jukes]

And yet, resources are more plentiful now than at any time in history.

Natural resources are most usefully measured in relative terms, per human.

Per human, natural resources are at their lowest level in history and decreasing. Especially fresh water. What keeps ratios as high as they are is massive amounts of carbon turned into energy but the path to the grid consumes almost an equal amount of carbon.

Humanity is likely to experience some kind of global correction that could start tomorrow or in fifty years. When it is over the human footprint will be realigned in a number of ways.

Nice try, but of what good is a resource if you can't make use of it.
There are a greater amount of resourses available to the individual today than at any time in history.

Which is not the same thing as "more plentiful" than at any time in history. Depletion/renewal rates make that sort of claim ridiculous.

Not to mention that in the realm of "individual" experience, averages insult aware people. Ask a starving child what averages mean to them.

My post pointed out that fact as well as increased depletion costs/implied risks and a certainty (although perhaps not in the time frame in my post).

 

[numan]

Translation: you are full of self-loathing.

I thought I made it quite clear that it is not I whom I loathe. · ·

.

 

[numan]

'
I consider the majority of hominids on this planet to be loathsome parasites, but I think that there are a few good people.

If someone is sincerely willing to make radical changes in their lifestyle in order to avoid ecological disaster, then I would regard him or her as a true human being. All the others I regard as worthless trash.

So, there are a few human beings on this planet; not many, but a few. I would estimate the human population to be about one per cent of the hominids who clutter up this planet. By chance, or by serendipity, this is roughly the optimum human population for the world.

And what about the rest of the hominid apes? Well, after most of them have wiped themselves out through their own stupidity and short-sightedness, the remnant hominid population could be re-located to Australia as a nature preserve of primitive humanity. There the hominids could be much happier than they are now. While real human beings on the rest of the planet soared to fabulous heights of culture and wisdom, the failed humans could fulfill their true natures, chipping flints and throwing sticks at kangaroos.

All that is needed to render the hominids happy and harmless is to isolate their children from any exposure to human language for a generation or two. Then there would be little difference between them and the chimpanzees of Gombe, or the gorillas of East Africa.
.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

You are a hater and a wanna be mass murderer and you want us to take you serious? Tell us again how you worship Buddha.

 

[tjvh]

'
THE HUMAN FOOTPRINT IS NOT SMALL OR HARMLESS

Biomass

The total biomass of planet Earth (the total mass of all plants and animals and other organisms all over the world, on land and in the seas) is about 75 billion tonnes.

The total biomass of the human species is about 250 million tonnes, or about one part in 300 of the total biomass.

If the total biomass of 75 billion tonnes were to be spread evenly over the 500 million square kilometres of the surface of the Earth, it would form a film approximately one-tenth of a millimetre thick.

Quantifying and mapping the human appropriation of net primary production in earth's terrestrial ecosystems

In any one year, humans utilize, alter or consume between one-tenth to one-twentieth of the total biomass of the Earth, depending on how you analyze the figures.
.

So what? What are you going to do about it? If you drive a car, or cook with gas and electricity I'd say you're a hypocrite.

 

[tjvh]

'
I consider the majority of hominids on this planet to be loathsome parasites, but I think that there are a few good people.

If someone is sincerely willing to make radical changes in their lifestyle in order to avoid ecological disaster, then I would regard him or her as a true human being. All the others I regard as worthless trash.

So, there are a few human beings on this planet; not many, but a few. I would estimate the human population to be about one per cent of the hominids who clutter up this planet. By chance, or by serendipity, this is roughly the optimum human population for the world.

And what about the rest of the hominid apes? Well, after most of them have wiped themselves out through their own stupidity and short-sightedness, the remnant hominid population could be re-located to Australia as a nature preserve of primitive humanity. There the hominids could be much happier than they are now. While real human beings on the rest of the planet soared to fabulous heights of culture and wisdom, the failed humans could fulfill their true natures, chipping flints and throwing sticks at kangaroos.

All that is needed to render the hominids happy and harmless is to isolate their children from any exposure to human language for a generation or two. Then there would be little difference between them and the chimpanzees of Gombe, or the gorillas of East Africa.
.

Parasites? How tolerant you are of your fellow man. You need to seek professional help.

 

[Unkotare]

'


All that is needed to render the hominids happy and harmless is to isolate their children from any exposure to human language for a generation or two. Then there would be little difference between them and the chimpanzees of Gombe, or the gorillas of East Africa.
.

Hey, good job being stupid! You really seem to have a knack for it.

 

[numan]

'
Myxomatosis was introduced to the wild lagomorphs of Australia in the early '50's with spectacular declines of the rabbit population of well over 99%. However, there were enough rabbits with an immunity to the disease who survived, and very soon the rabbits were back to their original numbers.

I have often fantasized about genetically engineering a disease that would not be fatal, but which would sterilize 99% of the human population. If I were younger, I would be tempted to go into genetic engineering.

This, of course, presupposes that the human remnant would be more intelligent than rabbits --- a proposition about which I have serious doubts.
.

 

[Unkotare]

'


I have often fantasized about genetically engineering a disease that would not be fatal, but which would sterilize 99% of the human population..
.

Why would you want to do that? Do you fantasize about being the villain in some bad movie?

 

[numan]

Translation: you are full of self-loathing.

I'll also note that looking at one's fellow humans as with contempt is not very Buddha-like.

Uh...Hello? Daoism and Buddhism are quite different.
That is something that educated people know.

You are a hater and a wanna be mass murderer and you want us to take you serious? Tell us again how you worship Buddha.

You might wish to consider how useful an education might be to you.

Parasites? How tolerant you are of your fellow man. You need to seek professional help.

It is, indeed, of sociological interest that so many Americans (at least, so many of those who come from the lower classes) are so totally blind and deaf to irony.

I suppose it derives mainly from their low cultural level, though I suspect that some of it is a side-effect of their general tendencies to hysteria.
.

 

[Unkotare]

Uh...Hello? Daoism and Buddhism are quite different...
.

And YOU are clearly an adherent of neither.

 

[numan]

'
All other things being equal, I would have no objection to population diminishing by the usual historical processes of human idiocy. However, all things are not equal, and I would like to see human numbers brought down to, say, one percent of their present level, before humans completely destroy the natural world which future generations will inherit.

As I have mentioned elsewhere, I am much more humble about my intellectual attainments than most people are. I do not consider that any individual human can possibly know enough to chart out the future of the human race --- even an individual as erudite as I.

The disasters inflicted by overweening types like Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Bush are stark proof of the failure of people who have simplistic ideas about what is Good and Bad, and who can never have enough accurate information about what is happening around them.

I know whom I would like to see survive the culling of the human race --- obviously, they would be people like myself! · ·

However, a person with such a modest assessment of his own attainments as myself could never think that he knew it all, or that other types of human beings are not necessary to the optimal functioning of society. "It takes all kinds to make a world."

I subscribe to this apothegm:

The first rule of intelligent tinkering is to save all the pieces.

In the book, Life, the Universe and Everything, the story is told of a race which shipped all the useless people off its planet, in order to make a better society --- including telephone mouthpiece sterilizers. Soon afterward, the race went extinct due to a virulent epidemic disease which people caught from contaminated telephone mouthpieces! · ·
.