The Sky is Not Falling

[Crowdog]

The sky is not falling
Environmental alarmists stretch facts and ignore efforts to address problems

By CHRIS VARGAS

From the Thursday, March 10, 2005 Commentary Section of the Orange County Register

It's time for a new perspective on all the ominous warnings about global warming, scarcity of resources, overpopulation, deforestation, etc: Yes, we do have problems with the environment that we must address. But some of these problems no longer exist or never did, and our technological advances are doing a good job of addressing the others. Yet the doomsayers act as if the problems are ignored, which is just not true.

For one example, after hearing scary talk about global overpopulation for most of our lives, it is now predicted by U.N. and independent researchers that the world's population will stabilize by midcentury, then start declining. Why? Technological advances have yielded great affluence, and affluent families tend to be smaller.

The plunging fertility rate is already creating problems with Europe's social welfare programs. There aren't enough workers joining the job force to pay for benefits. But this phenomenon is not limited to developed countries. The fertility rate is also dropping in Third World nations as they become richer.

Along with talk about overpopulation, we also used to hear that if big industrial nations kept up their insatiable demands for limited resources, we would run out ofthose resources. Instead, thanks to technology, we enjoy abundance, not scarcity.

For another example, the green movement would have us believe that because of our indifference to environmental preservation, we are mowing down our forests to feed our rapacious industries.

But that's false, according to Jack Hollander, professor emeritus of energy and resources at UC Berkeley. "Technological advances [have] contributed to saving the American forests. As new fossil-fuel-powered agricultural machines were introduced early in the 20th century, farmers were able to produce crops more efficiently, so they needed less land for a given output," Hollander wrote in his book, "The Real Environmental Crisis: Why Poverty, Not Affluence, is the Environment's Number One Enemy."

What happened in Vermont is a good example. In the 1700s, Vermont was almost totally covered with forest, yet by 1850 so much clearing had taken place for agricultural use that the forest cover had dropped to 35 percent. People feared that Vermont would become a wasteland. Today, however, Vermont's forest cover has sharply rebounded to the point where it is now seen in 77 percent of the state.

In the United States as a whole, over 300 million acres of forest were lost between 1600 and 1920 due to farming and the use of wood for cooking and heating. Forest acreage began to stabilize around the turn of the 20th century and has been expanding since 1920. At present, total forest acreage is 737 million acres - almost three-quarters as much as in 1600.

Since the 1950s, timber growth has consistently exceeded harvest. The wood supply in the United States will be available indefinitely because industry and government continue to invest in efficient forest management techniques and technologies.

For a third example, let's look at global warming. Robert C. Balling Jr., a climatology professor at Arizona State University, points out that the Kyoto Treaty isn't so much about preventing this supposed phenomenon asit is about vindicating a political process that led to a dubious U.N. and world "consensus." This process has made it difficult for sound science to triumph in evaluating whether the threat is real, but what is known is hardly a cause for alarm, Balling and other respected scientists contend.

The key point here is that the possibility of global warming isn't just being ignored by Kyoto critics, as Kyoto supporters say. Instead, it's being taken seriously by scientists whose own research leads them to question the consensus.

Unfortunately, the environmental movement is now more about protecting its fund-raising efforts than protecting the environment. Whatever the facts, greens aim to scare people into thinking environmental catastrophe is right around the corner - and that only your dollars will allow them to stop it.

But the reality isn't that scary at all, and when real problems pop up, they are being dealt with, not ignored.

[400exrules]

but what about the aliens:eek:

[punker69q]

ok, those are some facts and opinions, but you should not take those as granted because you think the same way. I admit it is always easier to think that some scientist opinion is right when it reprensent yours...

You should read more studies and post them too, not only the ones that represent what you think. I study in a school that is affiliated with the university of montreal and scientist here have made studies that prove the opposite.

My point is not to disagree with this study or agree with the ones that are at the opposite, but I think everyone should inform themselfes and adopt a opinion somewhere in the middle of those extremes. Everyones should do efforts to reduce the pollution they produce, but not go crazy with this...

On the other side, their is also really bad effects of global warming, like the ice in the north pole that are melting, which is pushing the polar bear more to the south, causing north animal dififculty to find food (they were used to hunt on the ice) etc etc etc

[PHAT400]

Originally posted by punker69q

On the other side, their is also really bad effects of global warming, like the ice in the north pole that are melting, which is pushing the polar bear more to the south, causing north animal dififculty to find food (they were used to hunt on the ice) etc etc etc [/B]

The polar ice cap's have melted before... this is the world growing and changing. We are not to blame for everything. While I agree that human's have certainly contributed to many thing's that do not help our world, we are not however guilty of causing the END OF THE WORLD caused by industrialization.

Soap box is open..

:cool:

[Crowdog]

Originally posted by punker69q
On the other side, their is also really bad effects of global warming, like the ice in the north pole that are melting, which is pushing the polar bear more to the south, causing north animal dififculty to find food (they were used to hunt on the ice) etc etc etc

:rolleyes:

[Pinky]

"On the other side, their is also really bad effects of global warming, like the ice in the north pole that are melting, which is pushing the polar bear more to the south, causing north animal dififculty to find food (they were used to hunt on the ice) etc etc etc"


As far as global warming goes, we have not had the ability or the technology to accurately track temperature changes over long periods. No reputable scientist will put his 100% stamp on that. They are not sure whether this is a problem created MAINLY from industrialization, or if it is a cycle that the planet goes through every few centuries.

[rivermobster]

I study in a school that is affiliated with the university of montreal and scientist here have made studies that prove the opposite.

really? like what? the opposite of what? inform us of the studys you speak of that are the opposite of the original post!

sign me,

eagerly waiting for your informed, fact backed reply...

[Out_Sider]

i think ppl DEFINATLY over react about the environment.. the world changes as tiem goes to better suit itself. tree huggers need to see our side of the story instead of brainwashing ppl to think the world is gonna explode if we dont give them cash for their worthless company.. and i also think our government (U.S.) needs to read the original constitution so they can relize how much of it they're ignoring....

[Crowdog]

Some environmental groups use tactics based more on emotion than scientific evidence. Global warming is but the latest rallying cry for green groups. But the scientific community is divided and undecided about the extent of the threat of global warming. The facts don't support the claims many groups make. Consider the following:

Between 1970 and 1999 carbon monoxide emission levels fell by over 29%.
Unhealthy air days in Los Angeles fell from 173 in 1990 to 27 in 1999.

Automobile emissions decreased by 31% between 1970 and 1999 even though vehicle miles traveled increased 140%.

The United States has experienced no net loss in wetlands since 1980.

Over 17,000 scientists signed a petition stating that, "There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of greenhouse gases is causing or will cause catastrophic heating of the earth's atmosphere."

The Nature Conservancy has 61 chapters, a staff of over 1200 and an annual budget exceeding $230 million.

In 1999, companies and foundations gave an average of $9.6 million every day to environmental organizations.

In fiscal year 2000 the federal government spent $267 billion enforcing environmental regulations.

On average it takes 10 or more years to plan and build a new runway at America's airports primarily because of cumbersome environmental permitting requirements.

Suing on behalf of endangered species has become another "cash cow" not unlike suing cigarette companies. Four firms filed over half of all such suits brought from 1995-2000 totaling $31.6 million in attorney fees.

The environmental group, Southwest Center (now the Center for Biological Diversity (http://www.crowley-offroad.com/center_for_biological_diversity.htm) ) filed a lawsuit against the federal government an average of every 32 days from 1994-1999.

Former Secretary of the Interior, Bruce Babitt proclaimed that one of the biggest hurdles in protecting endangered species was the flood of lawsuits brought by environmental organization.


Source: www.Green-Watch.com

[Quad18star]

It is proven that the world does go through cylces where the weather changes ( proven by core samples from rock , soil and ice from glaciers) and it has also been proven that our world has changed more in the last 200 years than it has in the past centuries . Scientists are able to predict approximate temperatures from a few thousand years ago with different scientific techniques ( don't ask me how but they can) and from these findings , they are able to tell that our temperatures are at some of the highest this world has ever seen .

What causes a lot of this warming .. the green house effect ?? Well pollution definately plays a large role in it . Pollution has depleted our Ozone which is a safeguard to helping regulate the Earth's temperature . This is why we are seeing tougher regulations concerning how much pollution is allowed to be emitted into our atmosphere .

Large forestry companies are cutting down thousands upon thousand of acres of Rain Forest each day . The Rain Forests are what supply more than 3/4 ( if I recall correctly) of this world's clean air ... it helps to eliminate pollution also .

The Polar ice caps are melting at an astonishing rate ... and like one person had mentioned earlier ... the polar bears are actually starting to find their way lower into the main land than ever before . This is something that has never happened before .

People over react when they think that this world will explode .... but I don't think it's an over reaction to think that if we don't do anything to help change this world , that maybe there won't be a world to live in , in a few hundred years . And a few hundred years isn't that far away if you really think about it .

[wilkin250r]

The earth has its cycles. It's nature, it happens. While I don't think that we (as humans) should be the cause, I also don't think we should be the cure.

Yosemite National Forest serves as a pretty good example. For many years, whenever a fire started, fire crews put them out. This is reasonable, right? We want to preserve the forest. However, this allowed undergrowth, branches, and dead trees to accumulate (they would ordinarily be burned away periodically by natural fires).

Now, when a normal fire starts, it burns the undergrowth, may burn the bark of trees, but generally doesn't get large or hot enough to catch the actual trees on fire. Kinda like nature's way of raking the leaves off the lawn, the fire clears the ground, but leaves the trees alive, and gives a place for new seeds to germinate.

The fire prevention of Yosemite allowed undergrowth to accumulate, so that when a large fire DID start, it grew very quickly, and was impossible to put out. Not only that, with more fuel, the fire got large and hot enough to catch the TREES themselves on fire, killing hundreds of acres of natural forest.

By human intervention, trying to "save" the trees, we ultimately killed the very thing we were trying to preserve. In much the same way, if Mother Earth wants to melt the polar ice caps, I say we let her. She's pretty smart, and has been managing the process a lot longer than we have.

[ACHI]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Quad18star

The Polar ice caps are melting at an astonishing rate ... and like one person had mentioned earlier ... the polar bears are actually starting to find their way lower into the main land than ever before . This is something that has never happened before .

I just read an article on msnbc about the holes in the ozone over this area that have been found recently. If i can find a link ill post it. But a bunch of scientist that are studying solar winds beleive this was caused by solar winds. Some how we have unusaully strong winds in the past few years and it is throwing the ozone in the area out of wack. This may accually explain why that area has has such an increase in temp in such a short time.

[Quad18star]

Wilkin .... I agree with you that we should let nature do it's own thing ... and like you said ... it's been doing it for way longer than we have been around .

But like I said earlier ... I think we should play a role in protecting our environment for future generations . Atleast try to fix the mistakes we made . The Earth did not create the automobile or the huge factories that put out tons of waste each year ... we created that ourselves ... and just now are we starting to realise that if we don't change our ways of thinking and how we go about thing , this world won't last much longer .

[PHAT400]

Honestly.....? I'm more concerned about the earth meeting it's demise in an unnatural way... Not the slow deterioration that human's are acused of but the nuclear decimation of earth by a select few human's with an attitude..

:o

[wilkin250r]

True, we certainly don't want to go around exagerating problems, but I honestly don't believe the problems are nearly as bad as activists would like us to think.

Factories produce tons of waste and pollutants, automobiles produce tons of pollutants. Do you know what else produces tons of pollutants? Forest fires and volcanoes. A single large forest fire or volcano erruption produces more pollutants in a few days than a whole slew of factories will produce in they're entire lifetime. I would like to see the statistics of what WE (as humans) produce vs. what NATURE produces. I have a feeling that we aren't nearly as significant as we would like to think.

[dober250R]

It's frickin freezing outside, if there is global warming going on, i'm not seein it!! lol. Maybe these scientists should come life in michigan and canada. Then we'll see if they think it's warm. lol.

[punker69q]

Originally posted by dober250R
It's frickin freezing outside, if there is global warming going on, i'm not seein it!! lol. Maybe these scientists should come life in michigan and canada. Then we'll see if they think it's warm. lol.

Here in canada we had quite a strange winter. some day it was very cold and the day right after the snow was melting. Also I noticed strange things , like the river not to far from my house is only froze a couple of days par year and we cannot cross it with a snowmobile anymore, while we used to do so when I was young.

Anyway, my point is not to bash anyone or any point of view, but I think we should take a little of both kinds of those studies.

for the ones of you that can read french, here is a link to some work my university did : climate change (http://www.geog.umontreal.ca/donnees/geo3152/%20documents%20g%c3%a9n%c3%a9raux/sicc%20env.%20canada/projections.pdf)

I will try to find something in english, but now i'm drunk:blah:

I also agree with the peoples that are saying that the earth goes throught different temp cycles over time, but from what I have read, we have accelerated them.

Also, wilkin, the thing about volcanos and things like that is really true, but the way earth works is all about equilibrium, and if you pass that level things can go out of control quite quickly.

i've got a simple example about that. Solubility of different gas in water decrease as the temp rise (general rule) and their is many gas that have warming effects that are "trapped" in the oceans. As the temp rise more and more, those gas are released, which tend to amplify the temp rise.

Please, don't be offended by my comments, as I'm only trying to share some things that I know. If someone can prove me wrong, perfect, I won't be pissed of for that! And, crowdog, you should search for others types of number, not just the ones that prove your point of view. If you have any scientific formation, you should always now that when you are publishing something, you should try to prove your theory wrong, and if you can't then it's probably right.

[Crowdog]

Originally posted by punker69q
And, crowdog, you should search for others types of number, not just the ones that prove your point of view.

But why would I search for information that is obviously incorrect? :D

[dunnonuttin]

oh ok, was pretty sure it was falling yesterday but now im reasured;)

[punker69q]

Originally posted by Crowdog
But why would I search for information that is obviously incorrect? :D

hehe
:blah:

[blondie69]

Originally posted by dober250R
It's frickin freezing outside, if there is global warming going on, i'm not seein it!! lol. Maybe these scientists should come life in michigan and canada. Then we'll see if they think it's warm. lol.


Global warming doesn't nescessilarly mean that the earth is right warm all year long...it means the melting of the polar caps (cuz of the warming) but then making irregular weather patterns, as have been occuring recently. For example...all the snow was nearly gone around my place....we're getting a blizzard right now. Started a few hrs ago, and already got about 3-6 inches of the powdery stuff. If we obtain the rate of irregular weather patterns like we have...it's gonna be Day After Tomorrow on our ***'s...which is a scary thought.