Two-thirds of world's resources 'used up'

[-Cp]

I don't know if I believe this article - it is, afterall, on a UK website..

The human race is living beyond its means. A report backed by 1,360 scientists from 95 countries - some of them world leaders in their fields - today warns that the almost two-thirds of the natural machinery that supports life on Earth is being degraded by human pressure.
The study contains what its authors call "a stark warning" for the entire world. The wetlands, forests, savannahs, estuaries, coastal fisheries and other habitats that recycle air, water and nutrients for all living creatures are being irretrievably damaged. In effect, one species is now a hazard to the other 10 million or so on the planet, and to itself.

Read the rest at:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,1447863,00.html

 

[dmp]

I can tell you that today there is more forrest land than 100 years ago, in the USA...thanks to re-planting efforts, etc.

 

[dilloduck]

I don't know if I believe this article - it is, afterall, on a UK website..

The human race is living beyond its means. A report backed by 1,360 scientists from 95 countries - some of them world leaders in their fields - today warns that the almost two-thirds of the natural machinery that supports life on Earth is being degraded by human pressure.
The study contains what its authors call "a stark warning" for the entire world. The wetlands, forests, savannahs, estuaries, coastal fisheries and other habitats that recycle air, water and nutrients for all living creatures are being irretrievably damaged. In effect, one species is now a hazard to the other 10 million or so on the planet, and to itself.

Read the rest at:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,1447863,00.html

DANG---I'm relatively rich cause my gas tank is over half full!! :teeth:

 

[freeandfun1]

I remember in the 70's being told over and over and over again that by 2000 we would be out of just about all of our natural resources. I am kinda get'n sick of the hearing "wolf". Now, that does not mean that we have an infinite supply, I am not that stupid. But geeze, they need to quit trying to scare the hell out of everybody.

 

[Annie]

I remember in the 70's being told over and over and over again that by 2000 we would be out of just about all of our natural resources. I am kinda get'n sick of the hearing "wolf". Now, that does not mean that we have an infinite supply, I am not that stupid. But geeze, they need to quit trying to scare the hell out of everybody.

I remember in the 70's in an Ecology class, being made to drive to Horicon, WI, to see the Canadian Geese nesting grounds. It was freezing and raining. Stupid birds were in a marshlike area. It was 5am, having had to leave IL around 3 I think. All this for an 'endangered bird'.

Freaking birds are all over here now. Park districts and schools and golf clubs trying to destroy their eggs. They don't migrate they stay here year round. Can't go outside without stepping in green pooh. Damn things attack people during mating time. Ugly bird. Butterflies are back too.

 

[KarlMarx]

I remember in the 70's in an Ecology class, being made to drive to Horicon, WI, to see the Canadian Geese nesting grounds. It was freezing and raining. Stupid birds were in a marshlike area. It was 5am, having had to leave IL around 3 I think. All this for an 'endangered bird'.

Freaking birds are all over here now. Park districts and schools and golf clubs trying to destroy their eggs. They don't migrate they stay here year round. Can't go outside without stepping in green pooh. Damn things attack people during mating time. Ugly bird. Butterflies are back too.

Canadian geese were endangered? I did not know that. Well, where I work, they are all over the place, and the facilities people are trying to come up with ways to keep them out (there is a very large pond on the plant grounds with some woods so it attracts them, naturally). A local university (Binghamton University) had a big problem with them. They like to hang out on the soccer fields between games and left their droppings behind. During games and practices an occassional player would slip on one and get hurt. They were trying to figure out a way to keep them off the field.

Binghamton University, or "BU" as we call it, has always been very left of center. So it's interesting when their self interest is threatened, all the ecological platitudes and political correctness go out the window.

heh heh heh!

 

[Annie]

Canadian geese were endangered? I did not know that. Well, where I work, they are all over the place, and the facilities people are trying to come up with ways to keep them out (there is a very large pond on the plant grounds with some woods so it attracts them, naturally). A local university (Binghamton University) had a big problem with them. They like to hang out on the soccer fields between games and left their droppings behind. During games and practices an occassional player would slip on one and get hurt. They were trying to figure out a way to keep them off the field.

Binghamton University, or "BU" as we call it, has always been very left of center. So it's interesting when their self interest is threatened, all the ecological platitudes and political correctness go out the window.

heh heh heh!

Well as I said, they were endangered back in the 70's, even now, we can't shoot the dang things, though they seem to outnumber the people. I still hate the prof that made us go to that swamp!

 

[KarlMarx]

I don't know if I believe this article - it is, afterall, on a UK website..

The human race is living beyond its means. A report backed by 1,360 scientists from 95 countries - some of them world leaders in their fields - today warns that the almost two-thirds of the natural machinery that supports life on Earth is being degraded by human pressure.
The study contains what its authors call "a stark warning" for the entire world. The wetlands, forests, savannahs, estuaries, coastal fisheries and other habitats that recycle air, water and nutrients for all living creatures are being irretrievably damaged. In effect, one species is now a hazard to the other 10 million or so on the planet, and to itself.

Read the rest at:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,1447863,00.html

I didn't read the article..... but here are some points that I believe are relevant.....

1. It's the Guardian.... that should be a red flag to anyone (no pun intended). Do you honestly believe that they would run a story that wouldn't say that? And it's a newspaper.... don't you think there's a tiny bit of exaggeration?
2. 1,300 scientists agree with this assessment. The implication being that the scientists arrived at this conclusion without coercian and with absolutely no preconceived bias. Which, as we all know, is probably not true.
3. All these scientists, what are their areas of expertise? Climatology? Economics? Women's studies? Gay and Transgendered Studies?
4. The unspoken implication is that ALL resources are used up. The reality is all resources that are economically feasible to exploit. When the price of oil goes up, guess what happens? There is an abundance of oil, and why? Because many wells that were not economically feasible to pump from or drill suddenly become so since the oil companies have more money to spend on exploration.
5. "Experts" have been saying that the world has been on the verge of exhausting its resources for decades (I remember in 1970, hearing a news anchor report that by 1985, all known resources would be exhausted and pollution would end life on the planet). Why are these chicken littles suddenly right?
6. Who funded the study? "Whackos for a Pristene Environment"? "Center for returning Humanity to the Stone Age"? or a group that has no interest iin the conclusion one way or the other? That makes a big difference.

 

[Annie]

I didn't read the article..... but here are some points that I believe are relevant.....

1. It's the Guardian.... that should be a red flag to anyone (no pun intended). Do you honestly believe that they would run a story that wouldn't say that? And it's a newspaper.... don't you think there's a tiny bit of exaggeration?
2. 1,300 scientists agree with this assessment. The implication being that the scientists arrived at this conclusion without coercian and with absolutely no preconceived bias. Which, as we all know, is probably not true.
3. All these scientists, what are their areas of expertise? Climatology? Economics? Women's studies? Gay and Transgendered Studies?
4. The unspoken implication is that ALL resources are used up. The reality is all resources that are economically feasible to exploit. When the price of oil goes up, guess what happens? There is an abundance of oil, and why? Because many wells that were not economically feasible to pump from or drill suddenly become so since the oil companies have more money to spend on exploration.
5. "Experts" have been saying that the world has been on the verge of exhausting its resources for decades (I remember in 1970, hearing a news anchor report that by 1985, all known resources would be exhausted and pollution would end life on the planet). Why are these chicken littles suddenly right?
6. Who funded the study? "Whackos for a Pristene Environment"? "Center for returning Humanity to the Stone Age"? or a group that has no interest iin the conclusion one way or the other? That makes a big difference.

Remember Carson's, Silent Spring?
or
Ehrlich's, The Population Bomb?

I grew up reading that tripe.

 

[KarlMarx]

Remember Carson's, Silent Spring?
or
Ehrlich's, The Population Bomb?

I grew up reading that tripe.

Speaking of "Silent Spring" ---- hasn't the elimination of DDT been blamed for the large number of deaths due to malaria worldwide?

 

[bintmundo]

malaria kills more than any tsunami, yet a ban on spraying has increased the prevalence of malaria worldwide. Why should Americans care? as long as they still have gas for their SUVS?

 

[CSM]

malaria kills more than any tsunami, yet a ban on spraying has increased the prevalence of malaria worldwide. Why should Americans care? as long as they still have gas for their SUVS?

Exactly right. This American does NOT care about a ban on spraying swamps. I DO care about gas for my SUV! Happy now?

 

[freeandfun1]

malaria kills more than any tsunami, yet a ban on spraying has increased the prevalence of malaria worldwide. Why should Americans care? as long as they still have gas for their SUVS?

WTF? Please explain what gas and DDT have in common? An ignorant post.

 

[Annie]

Speaking of "Silent Spring" ---- hasn't the elimination of DDT been blamed for the large number of deaths due to malaria worldwide?

Yes. Something that should be addressed.

 

[Said1]

Yes. Something that should be addressed.

Even Greenpeace agrees that it should be used - in moderation of course!

 

[Nienna]

Remember Carson's, Silent Spring?
or
Ehrlich's, The Population Bomb?

I grew up reading that tripe.

Wasn't overpopulation used as one of the big arguments for legalizing abortion? Forty-something million babies dead since Roe, and they wonder why Social Security is in trouble? People are the most important natural resource. Not that we shouldn't care for our environment, but all these scare tactics... please.

 

[Adam's Apple]

Interesting, thought-provoking article about the U.N. environmental report.

It's the End of the World and I Feel Fine
By Jonah Goldberg for National Review
April 1, 2005

It’s the End of the World as We Know It...and, yes, I feel fine. As does the U.S.

Excerpted article -

So let's get back to the bad news, the world is coming to an end. O.K., not quite. But the coverage of the United Nations new "Millennium Ecosystem Assessment" report was very close to a doomsday scenario, complete with references to "running out" of resources and the rest. And let's be fair, unlike the situation in America and Europe, there are some enormous environmental problems in the world. Even if you're a global-warming skeptic, there's no disputing that such problems as overfishing are real.

But fear not. There's some unexpected good news. The United Nations seems to have some good ideas (!) for how to solve these problems. Tim Worstall of TechCentralStation was the first, and perhaps only, commentator to notice that the U.N. report entertains the possibility that market mechanisms — property rights, credits, trade — are solutions to environmental ills, not causes of it.

If the United Nations is actually serious — fingers crossed! — this would constitute enormous progress and a sign that the global environmental community has finally conquered what I call the cultural contradictions of environmentalism. Broadly speaking, environmentalists want to end poverty, hunger, and disease, but they also want to keep indigenous cultures unchanged. But you can't have both simultaneously. It is the natural state of indigenous cultures, after all, to be constantly vulnerable to disease and hunger, and no man fighting to keep his children alive cares about "biodiversity."

For decades, environmentalists pointed to various calamities and boasted that they were identifying the problems, which is the first step for providing a solution. But they were wrong; environmental distress is a symptom of political and economic corruption. There's reason to hope the United Nations has finally recognized the real problem, and that's great news.

For full article
http://www.nationalreview.com/goldberg/goldberg.asp