Agnostic.com

2 3

LINK In 45 years, we have killed 60% of Earth’s wildlife | Condé Nast Traveller India | Trends

I have said it before, the next great extinction has already begum. It is just a question of whether or not humans will adjust their behaviors in order to prevent their own extinction.

Granted a human extinction won't likely happen in the liftimes of anyone now living, but the more we ignore climate change, the more likely it will (eventually) happen.

snytiger6 9 Nov 18
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

2 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

2

The only thing we can possibly do to stop our extinction is to simply curb our population growth. This one thing is behind every environmental problem we have.

population growth is actually slowing and halting in every industrialized countries. The carbon footprint of an individual in a poor country is hundreds times smaller than in industrialize countries. The actual answer is actually more complex.

Generally true, but if we don't control population, climate change will lower populations dramatically, as crop failures will result in famines.

@Lukian Yes, it is said the average US footprint is 10 times larger than the average global footprint. However, the numbers in many developing countries still overwhelm the available resources hence the famine and wars present in so many, and increasing countries. Africa has the highest fertility rate in the world. Israel has another high growth rate; from the Jewish side it comes from immigration and from the Arabic side the fertility rate is high so that they won't be overwhelmed by the influx of Jews.
One, very uncomfortable question is: what happens when a person(s) from a country with a low footprint immigrates to a country with a high footprint, like the US? It goes way up and is why immigration must be included in any discussion on environmental actions.

@JackPedigo famines in 3rd world countries are caused by greed from rich countries and local governments and corruption. Famine would never exist in the G20 because they hold much wealth and there is a political will to avoid it.
with the advances in farming in the last decade, feeding the world is not an issue, wealth distribution is.
Also religious zeal accompanied with the lack of access to contraception is fueling high birth rate in 3rd world countries. Many children born are not planned. Climate change, war fueled by greed and disease and, the dying baby boomers have already a large effect of population growth worldwide.
[ourworldindata.org]

Ironically, if the green energy becomes a overnight success, world population would resume towards an upward tick.

@Lukian Look into the Arab Spring. This was cause by a drought both in Egypt and Kansas. Wheat prices went up and the people of Egypt looked to their leader as the cause. Where has that gotten anyone in the Middle East. Right now Yemen is in the middle of the worst hunger and war episode ever. We can't keep looking to the evil rich countries as the cause. It is a matter of too much demand on too few resources. The population growth rate has slowed but it is still growing exponentially.
Definitely, the lack of contraception is a major problem and many leaders don't even want their citizens to know such a technology exists. Cultures like the one in Africa where men have several wives (I could tell you an unbelievable story that happened here) also create problems. One group, EngenderHealth [engenderhealth.org] is trying to do something about this and I support them.
The green revolution is not succeeding but still fools people that it is. The rise of GMO's is meant to be to feed the masses of hungry people. Where is that getting us?
This is an area I have been actively engaged in for over 25 years. I am still open to new ideas but have not heard any for a long time.

@JackPedigo we are debating on many fronts which reinforces the point that it is not as simple as world population control. I will keep my points brief
Egypt is not part of the G20 (but Kansas is)
Yemen is a proxy war (Saudi Arabia is part of the G20 as well as Russia for Iran) Syria is also a proxy way with G20 members controlling.
GMO has been vilified by Russia now 3rd world countries are rejecting this life saving technology
I read a lot but not actively engaged (I have a different paradigm)

@Lukian I agree it is complicated but it is also simple; we live on a planet with limited resources yet we continue to expand our numbers to the point those resources are used up. Now we have even influenced the climate. I actually see that doing things that enable this continued growth as being immoral because the longer it goes on the more people and other life forms that will ultimately be affected.
The comment about Kansas came from the film series "Years of Living Dangerously". We export much of our food to various countries and the film showed how the weather affected wheat crops all over the world which affected bread prices. My knowledge does not just come from reading but being a board member of various environmental groups, taking part in educational forums, giving and attending workshops and caring enough to change my own lifestyle. Oh, and trying to use reason over emotion when dealing with issues that are not comfortable.

4

This is a hard, hard truth. Even harder is the realisation that most people won't lift a finger to change this.

true but most people don't know where, how or afford to start?

@Lukian Most people are at least generally aware of a problem, but they simply don't want to be bothered with learning the details,and don't want to change their way of living to deal with it. If it wont' affect them in thier own lifetime, then they simply don't wan tto be bothered with details.

@snytiger6 Since Zero Population Growth (and the population arm of the Sierra Club) was bought out by industry to exclude immigration from the population formula the discussion on population growth has basically ceased. Again, a clear fact of the present economical ideology (an economical formula has been introduced based on sustainability) drowning out any serious environmental programs.

@snytiger6 I respectfully disagree. Implying the masses are lazy or unconcerned does not reflect the majority I think. People lack the tools, resources and money to make a difference which lead to helplessness. As an example: the masses would make too much energy and topple fossil fuels if each installed solar panels. Why is it not done?
Where I live, my garbage have been reduced by 75-80% when the municipality decided to switch to a 3 way collection: food/compostable waste. recycling and waste. I could not really initiate such a plan myself without a local government will to do so.
There are so many example...

@Lukian good points and you are correct.

@OpposingOpposum thank you!

You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:226024
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.