I believe this has been a topic for the last hundred years or so at least and the answers I've seen are that it's not a real concern because we will evolve, technology will improve, we will find a way..perhaps while living with the minimum amount of efficiency to survive..like has happened over many generations. Recycling is one thing that comes to mind, fusion, alternative fuel..all good things that can be adopted full scale when needed..once developed.
When I say Earth I'm obviously including all living beings in it.HeavyMetalDave wrote:
Earth wont DO anything, she'll be just fine.
Its mankind that that will fade away, just like the dinosaurs.
Earths only fear is either colliding with the sun, or into another marble floating around it.
No matter what WE do, earth doesnt care, she'll just keep on spinnin round and round and round and .....
Have a nice day.
The earth will do fine, once we humans have wiped ourselves out. The trouble is that most of the population growth is in all the wrong places. People who can afford it are generally not having children and people who cannot afford it are breeding like flies. Oddly enough, that means the western world will die out as they are overrun, but then we are the ones doing the worst polluting, so that delays things a little. But eventually we will die out, all our struggles through life will have come to nothing and the earth will then be able to relax and repair itself. It will mourn the loss of the many species that died along the way (not just the popular ones like Tigers, Condors etc but also the little known ones like the Giant Land Snail, the Raso Lark or the Sicilian Fir - for more info, see http://www.iucnredlist.org/ ), but it will not regret the loss of humans.
sergeriver wrote:
-Population increase rate is higher every year: How can limited resources feed all the people?
Agriculture
-Endangered species: can we save them? Or there will be another massive extinction?
We'll save them. It's obvious that, at least the US govt, have taken steps to insure that no species becomes extinct due to human involvement. Not that it's perfect, but we're trying.
-Water scarcity: as population grows, the use of clean water grows, how do we solve this issue?
Ocean + Desalination plants = water for everyone
-Energy Demand: How can we provide enough energy to an increasing population without damaging the
environment?
Nuclear reactors
-Pollution: in a planet that's more polluted everyday, how can we get fresh air, food and clean water?
Institute an insane recycling program. Create laws that force people to recycle and start using more and creating more items made from recycled materials.
-Global Warming: How do we stop higher temperatures, rising sea levels, and who knows what unpredictable weather issues like another Ice Age?
Another Ice Age won't happen while we're still in existence. There'll be no 'Day After Tomorrow' shit. Even if one comes, we'll adapt and live underground and shit. We as a species are extremely adaptable (Darwinism at it's best).
What can be done to reverse all the above?
Follow my simple steps... Jenkinsbball FTW!!!
Last edited by Jenkinsbball (2006-10-13 11:56:09)
1st: They're planning on making bases on the moon within 30 years (or if not definately should), but I doubt they'd house many people.sergeriver wrote:
At the actual population growth rate, human activities threaten the future of Earth.
In the last century humans had polluted or over-exploited most ecosystems on which life depends.
The major issues that Earth is challenging now are:
-Population increase rate is higher every year: How can limited resources feed all the people?
-Endangered species: can we save them? Or there will be another massive extinction?
-Water scarcity: as population grows, the use of clean water grows, how do we solve this issue?
-Energy Demand: How can we provide enough energy to an increasing population without damaging the environment?
-Pollution: in a planet that's more polluted everyday, how can we get fresh air, food and clean water?
-Global Warming: How do we stop higher temperatures, rising sea levels, and who knows what unpredictable weather issues like another Ice Age?
What can be done to reverse all the above?
2nd: A lot will die out. People care less and less each day and only give a damn about themselves.
3rd: I don't really have a comment but I don't think it's a problem atm
4th: Windmills, Solar Power...Bush talks about it but never instates it.
5th: Pollution needs to be lowered, ASAP. It's causing global warming, and if you haven't seen the C02 levels, they're the highest ever. By a LOT, too. That's not natural.
6th: See above
Almost all the people in here seem very optimistic. I assume you don't read National Geographic.
no move to ur anusCameronPoe wrote:
Move to the moon.
2 things... eithersergeriver wrote:
At the actual population growth rate, human activities threaten the future of Earth.
In the last century humans had polluted or over-exploited most ecosystems on which life depends.
The major issues that Earth is challenging now are:
-Population increase rate is higher every year: How can limited resources feed all the people?
-Endangered species: can we save them? Or there will be another massive extinction?
-Water scarcity: as population grows, the use of clean water grows, how do we solve this issue?
-Energy Demand: How can we provide enough energy to an increasing population without damaging the environment?
-Pollution: in a planet that's more polluted everyday, how can we get fresh air, food and clean water?
-Global Warming: How do we stop higher temperatures, rising sea levels, and who knows what unpredictable weather issues like another Ice Age?
What can be done to reverse all the above?
A. People actually becoming more conscious of their gluttonous and negligent behavior and actually choosing to conserve resources in their daily lives.
or....
B. A nuclear holocaust that kills a good portion of the human race off.
I think B is more likely, but I try not to think about it...
Anyway, I believe global warming is one of the most important issues we face today, but the craziness of so much of the world distracts us from it. Islam and the military industrial complex seem to be the main sources of human insanity.
No, global warming is only Al Gore's imagination dude.</sarcasm>Turquoise wrote:
2 things... eithersergeriver wrote:
At the actual population growth rate, human activities threaten the future of Earth.
In the last century humans had polluted or over-exploited most ecosystems on which life depends.
The major issues that Earth is challenging now are:
-Population increase rate is higher every year: How can limited resources feed all the people?
-Endangered species: can we save them? Or there will be another massive extinction?
-Water scarcity: as population grows, the use of clean water grows, how do we solve this issue?
-Energy Demand: How can we provide enough energy to an increasing population without damaging the environment?
-Pollution: in a planet that's more polluted everyday, how can we get fresh air, food and clean water?
-Global Warming: How do we stop higher temperatures, rising sea levels, and who knows what unpredictable weather issues like another Ice Age?
What can be done to reverse all the above?
A. People actually becoming more conscious of their gluttonous and negligent behavior and actually choosing to conserve resources in their daily lives.
or....
B. A nuclear holocaust that kills a good portion of the human race off.
I think B is more likely, but I try not to think about it...
Anyway, I believe global warming is one of the most important issues we face today, but the craziness of so much of the world distracts us from it. Islam and the military industrial complex seem to be the main sources of human insanity.
I plan to be dead in 50 years, so who cares?
Wasn't "2001 a Space Odyssey" made in 1968. Thats about 30 years ago.Poseidon wrote:
1st: They're planning on making bases on the moon within 30 years (or if not definately should), but I doubt they'd house many people.
I'll just address a few of the issues:
-Population increase rate is higher every year: How can limited resources feed all the people?
They can't at the moment. This is an excerpt taken from my brother's public speaking speech, he is in the State Finals. "1 in 6 people live in extreme poverty. Tonight over 1 billion people will go hungry. By this time tomorrow 25,000 people will have starved to death"
There are the resources available to feed these people, but they can't afford to get the food. That is what needs to change.
-Endangered species: can we save them? Or there will be another massive extinction?
We can save endangered species though the setting up of exclusion zones, such as the Kruger National Park. This is a reserve about the size of Whales. It allows the animals to exist in their habitat free from hunters.
Scientists can also take the DNA from animals and store it in a genetic seed bank. This will provide the DNA for in the future if proper cloning technology is developed.
-Energy Demand: How can we provide enough energy to an increasing population without damaging the
environment?
At the moment, using sustainable resources for providing energy is uneconomic. Countries such as China have large reserves of coal. It thus makes more economic sense to burn coal for electricity. A testament to this is the fact that China is opening new coal plants every week.
To save the planet, a global effort is required. It must be realized that economics won't matter when the planet is beyond the point of no return in environmental damage.
A global effort on the part of governments is required to change the mentality that environmental imperialism is the correct way to use the earths resources. It is not. We cannot continue in the current state of things and expect everything to be "all right". We need to use the earths resources sustainably.
Governments need to sign environmental treaties, such as the Kyoto Protocol. I find it ridiculous that governments site "insufficient scientific data" as a cause for not committing to protecting the environment. In 1992, the Australian government signed an Inter-government Agreement on the Environment stating:
'Where there are threats of serious or irreversible environmental damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing measures to prevent environmental damage.'
That should be the line that every government adopts.
I could go on and on, but if you have not got the hint by now, there is no hope.
Mcminty.
Australia begs to differ.Stingray24 wrote:
Water scarcity? The population will not outgrow our water supply. The quantity of water on Earth is static - 326 million cubic miles. One cubic mile contains 1,000,000,000,000 (one trillion) gallons of water. About 70 percent of Earths surface is covered by water. Ninety-seven percent of Earth's water is in oceans. The remaining three percent is freshwater. http://www.dcr.state.va.us/sw/amznstuf.htm 3% of 326 comes to 9.78. So by those calculations, we have almost 10 trillion gallons of fresh water on earth. I’m not too worried we’re going to run out. The earth’s natural water cycle keeps us supplied. Another interesting fact from the site above: Eighty-five percent of the water in the atmosphere (water vapor) evaporates from our oceans. Plant transpiration also adds water to the air. Most trees give off about 70 gallons of water a day. One acre of corn gives off 4,000 gallons per day.
Deslination: Expensive and inefficient at the present time. Give it another 15 years.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
Im pretty sure its 2012.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
the mayan calendar ends in 2013 so I dont really have too many plans past that date...
It's good to know that someone else is worried.mcminty wrote:
Wasn't "2001 a Space Odyssey" made in 1968. Thats about 30 years ago.Poseidon wrote:
1st: They're planning on making bases on the moon within 30 years (or if not definately should), but I doubt they'd house many people.
I'll just address a few of the issues:
-Population increase rate is higher every year: How can limited resources feed all the people?
They can't at the moment. This is an excerpt taken from my brother's public speaking speech, he is in the State Finals. "1 in 6 people live in extreme poverty. Tonight over 1 billion people will go hungry. By this time tomorrow 25,000 people will have starved to death"
There are the resources available to feed these people, but they can't afford to get the food. That is what needs to change.
-Endangered species: can we save them? Or there will be another massive extinction?
We can save endangered species though the setting up of exclusion zones, such as the Kruger National Park. This is a reserve about the size of Whales. It allows the animals to exist in their habitat free from hunters.
Scientists can also take the DNA from animals and store it in a genetic seed bank. This will provide the DNA for in the future if proper cloning technology is developed.
-Energy Demand: How can we provide enough energy to an increasing population without damaging the
environment?
At the moment, using sustainable resources for providing energy is uneconomic. Countries such as China have large reserves of coal. It thus makes more economic sense to burn coal for electricity. A testament to this is the fact that China is opening new coal plants every week.
To save the planet, a global effort is required. It must be realized that economics won't matter when the planet is beyond the point of no return in environmental damage.
A global effort on the part of governments is required to change the mentality that environmental imperialism is the correct way to use the earths resources. It is not. We cannot continue in the current state of things and expect everything to be "all right". We need to use the earths resources sustainably.
Governments need to sign environmental treaties, such as the Kyoto Protocol. I find it ridiculous that governments site "insufficient scientific data" as a cause for not committing to protecting the environment. In 1992, the Australian government signed an Inter-government Agreement on the Environment stating:
'Where there are threats of serious or irreversible environmental damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing measures to prevent environmental damage.'
That should be the line that every government adopts.
I could go on and on, but if you have not got the hint by now, there is no hope.
Mcminty.
simple- wipe out china, africa and india, then take their stuff.