Gore speaks on global warming... on coldest day in 50 years?

[covermye]

My misunderstanding your post was simply predicated on your misunderstanding of my post. Now that that's cleared up, it's all good.

???I don't think I understand???

 

[Joe DeFuria]

But we have trended an uptick in the rate of extinction due to our activities on this planet.

Source?

But we can limit our impact on the environment as well.

Agreed. the question is, at what cost. (Not just dollars, but human lives and human quality of life...)

I'd wager that in addition to your (assumed) claim of an uptick in the rate of extinction of animals, there has been an uptick in the rate of human population.

 

[Natoma]

But we have trended an uptick in the rate of extinction due to our activities on this planet.

Source?

There are quite a few. You'd probably just pass it off as environmental-chomsky-reading-gay-sex0ring-bleeding-heart-tree-hugging-bush-hating-ohm-speaking-nature-loving-america-hating silliness.

But if not, you can read up on this subject at the Sierra Club. Do a search for "extinction" in their search field.

But we can limit our impact on the environment as well.

Agreed. the question is, at what cost. (Not just dollars, but human lives and human quality of life...)

Actually many of the laws we have on the books would do the job of reducing pollutants in our environment. It's a matter of enforcing them and providing the funds to the EPA for that enforcement.

I'd wager that in addition to your (assumed) claim of an uptick in the rate of extinction of animals, there has been an uptick in the rate of human population.

It's surprisingly not a direct corrolation. I thought so at first, but one of the articles you can read talks about the rate of ecological collapse around the globe and how it has accelerated in the last decade. The global collapse of the coral reefs for instance is one such example of this.

 

[Joe DeFuria]

There are quite a few. You'd probably just pass it off as environmental-chomsky-reading-gay-sex0ring-bleeding-heart-tree-hugging-bush-hating-ohm-speaking-nature-loving-america-hating silliness.

Probably....

But if not, you can read up on this subject at the Sierra Club. Do a search for "extinction" in their search field.

Yup! environmental-chomsky-reading-gay-sex0ring-bleeding-heart-tree-hugging-bush-hating-ohm-speaking-nature-loving-america-hating silliness.

Actually many of the laws we have on the books would do the job of reducing pollutants in our environment. It's a matter of enforcing them and providing the funds to the EPA for that enforcement.

That doesn't answer the question of "at what cost."

It's surprisingly not a direct corrolation.

Who said itwould be a direct corrleation?

I thought so at first, but one of the articles you can read talks about the rate of ecological collapse around the globe and how it has accelerated in the last decade.

Of course change has accelerated in "recent history." Look at technological advances and population explosion in "recent history."

Of course, "change" is inherently bad to environmental-chomsky-reading-gay-sex0ring-bleeding-heart-tree-hugging-bush-hating-ohm-speaking-nature-loving-america-haters.

 

[Natoma]

There are quite a few. You'd probably just pass it off as environmental-chomsky-reading-gay-sex0ring-bleeding-heart-tree-hugging-bush-hating-ohm-speaking-nature-loving-america-hating silliness.

Probably....

But if not, you can read up on this subject at the Sierra Club. Do a search for "extinction" in their search field.

Yup! environmental-chomsky-reading-gay-sex0ring-bleeding-heart-tree-hugging-bush-hating-ohm-speaking-nature-loving-america-hating silliness.

See? I know you too well Joey Joe Joe.

Actually many of the laws we have on the books would do the job of reducing pollutants in our environment. It's a matter of enforcing them and providing the funds to the EPA for that enforcement.

That doesn't answer the question of "at what cost."

The last estimates I saw a couple of years ago ranged anywhere from a $20 Billion - $50 Billion increase on a yearly basis in order to implement all the laws and regulations that are currently on the books.

Then again, the same can be said for the money required to implement our food safety laws effectively. Unfortunately we appropriate funds to other things like war in iraq. But I digress.

It's surprisingly not a direct corrolation.

Who said itwould be a direct corrleation?

Uhm, I did?

"It's surprisingly not a direct corrolation. I thought so at first....."

I thought so at first, but one of the articles you can read talks about the rate of ecological collapse around the globe and how it has accelerated in the last decade.

Of course change has accelerated in "recent history." Look at technological advances and population explosion in "recent history."

Of course, "change" is inherently bad to environmental-chomsky-reading-gay-sex0ring-bleeding-heart-tree-hugging-bush-hating-ohm-speaking-nature-loving-america-haters.

The articles give examples of the rate of ecological collapse accelerating in the last decade however. There hasn't been much technological advances in the last decade or population explosion in the last decade that would account for the acceleration in ecological collapse.

 

[nelg]

The Sierra Club. After all their spewing on about urban sprawl and low density housing, they had the audacity to oppose a condominium project near my house for the flimsiest of reasons. Truth be told I would wager their reasoning to be fund raising and membership drive.

 

[Natoma]

Yea people can be hypocritical at times. I love the environmentalists in Massachusetts at Cape Cod who rail and rail and rail against pollution and power plants, but don't want to see wind farms in their, relatively speaking, back yards. Quite funny.

Why did the sierra club oppose that condominium btw?

 

[nelg]

Of course, "change" is inherently bad to environmental-chomsky-reading-gay-sex0ring-bleeding-heart-tree-hugging-bush-hating-ohm-speaking-nature-loving-america-haters.

Add to that "leather sandal wearing vegetarian socialist."

 

[nelg]

Why did the sierra club oppose that condominium btw?

They stated that the rain water run off from its flat roof would pollute the river that is behind the building site.

 

[Natoma]

Of course, "change" is inherently bad to environmental-chomsky-reading-gay-sex0ring-bleeding-heart-tree-hugging-bush-hating-ohm-speaking-nature-loving-america-haters.

Add to that "leather sandal wearing vegetarian socialist."

Hey now that was my line. Don't go attributing that to Joe.

 

[Natoma]

Why did the sierra club oppose that condominium btw?

They stated that the rain water run off from its flat roof would pollute the river that is behind the building site.

:?

You're kidding right? Seriously, what was the reason.

 

[nelg]

You're kidding right?

No. That was it.

Edit. DEVIL POST

 

[Natoma]

Damn that's nasty.

 

[Silent_One]

Natoma wrote:

Actually many of the laws we have on the books would do the job of reducing pollutants in our environment. It's a matter of enforcing them and providing the funds to the EPA for that enforcement.

Joe wrote:

That doesn't answer the question of "at what cost."

And there in is the problem. Natoma has no true idea at the so-called "costs". He's never dealt with the DEP, or the EPA, or the other enviromental agencys and their enforcement practices. Throwing a "cost" of x number of dollars does little to understand how the agencys work. But it sure sounds good!

 

[Natoma]

I could have sworn I said the last figures I read ranged from $20 Billion to $50 Billion..... Didn't I write that sometime somewhere? Forgive me, my mind slips away from me.

 

[DemoCoder]

The extinctions happening recently pale in comparison to the shock mega-extinctions of the past. I just can't get that excited over some of the breed variants disappearing beside the "zoo-tourism" aspect.

Call me when we lose enough algae to affect our oxygen supply. The extinctions only matter to me if they can threaten my existence. The earth is a life support system for me, nothing more, nothing less. Not every species is critical to preserving the biosphere. Some diversity is good of course as protection against disease, but there's a lot of hysteria in environmental circles. Just what would be the total net impact if all Rhinos, large cats, and Monkeys went extinct? Probably close to zilch for the biosphere.

 

[Natoma]

I think the point is that we, being the "most intelligent" and dominant species of life on the planet, have control over our environment. And that with that power comes *hands waving in the air* greaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat *hands waving in the air* responsibility *Ooooooooooo*.

We should not be so selfish when these extinctions are occurring and they don't necessarily have to, if we're more considerate about our environment.

But ok, if you want to look at it from a purely humanistic slant. There are many species of plant that have been found in the jungles that have strong medicinal properties which pharmaceuticals then use to synthesize new treatments for disease and other ailments. You do realize that somewhere out there in all that deforestation, we could have bulldozed into extinction a cure for AIDS or a topical cream cure for Melanoma?

Much of the world's rice comes from only a few genetic lines as many other forms of wild rice have been destroyed to make room for the rice we cultivate today. You know as well as I do the problems that arise from cloning basically. Entire crops could be decimated by a singular pest, or contagion.

We're learning so much about poisons used by other animals, that may have pain relief properties for quality of life improvements of our species, many times more powerful than our current drugs. Spider silk has a tensile strength greater than steel, if we can learn to synthesize it properly. Who knows what else is in nature that we haven't discovered, or merely overlooked and destroyed?

We are definitely part of this earth, and yes, changes in our biosphere do affect us, even when we don't realize it.

All this of course if your last post wasn't an exercise in sarcasm.

 

[RussSchultz]

I'm only upset about extinctions if they were tasty.

/just kidding.

 

[Tahir2]

I'm only upset about extinctions if they were tasty.

/just kidding.

Cod.. at least here in the UK the price of cod has soared.. but that is for entirely different reasons to global warming etc etc.. or is it?

 

[nelg]

I'm only upset about extinctions if they were tasty.

/just kidding.

Sounds like you are a P.E.T.A. Member. People for Eating of Tasty Animals.