[CaptBubba]

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr.PD I still say there are too many people on this planet. Don't make me go back to the buffalo analogy.

It will work itself out, it allways has. Some disease or war or famine will come and take out 1/3 the population. Because we have such concentrated centers of population and are within a day's travel by airplane, 40 cities could be exposed before the first person checks into the emergency room. There are other, slower diseases too, like HIV. Think about the plauges, which we now know we fairly simple can be cured with a single shot of antibiotics. It wouldn't have to be some exotic disease either, something like the flu could mutate and suddleny become fatal in 10% of all cases.

Don't try to blame population growth on the developed contries. I think the numbers fo the US show that the population would actually be decreasing if it weren't for the constant flow of both legal and illegal immigrants. I'm pretty sure the numbers for Europian nations are similar.

 

[squirt]

Anyone for some Soilent Green?

 

[fyrfytrhoges]

I try as hard as I can not to reply to these types of threads but, it seems to me alot of the people posting in this thread are the kind of people who also believe in the statistics that say that there are thousands of acres of rainforest disappearing every minute, statistics that are fraudulent but passed off as being true by left-wing environmental extremist groups. Facts that can not be proven without using confusing and deceptive tactics that "cook the books" so to speak, it all becomes a self fullfilling prophecy from there. I have seen very convincing arguments that argue to the contrary of almost everything that has been posted in this thread, but for the most part people who are convinced that we are going to starve ourselves by eating all the fish in the sea, or fry ourselves by creating a hole in the ozone layer are not capable of having their minds changed anyway, they just believe what they want to no matter what evidence is presented to them.

I would also like to acknowledge tripsright for that insight, I agree with almost everything said.

 

[dougli]

I just want to say "Thank you" to people like TripsRight and the others who take the time to type in thought-provoking responses to such threads. It is very time-consuming to do so, but people do appreciate your replies. Nobody wins, and nobody loses; it's just worth it for the sake of airing different viewpoints.

 

[CaptBubba]

Quote:

Originally posted by fyrfytrhoges I try as hard as I can not to reply to these types of threads but, it seems to me alot of the people posting in this thread are the kind of people who also believe in the statistics that say that there are thousands of acres of rainforest disappearing every minute, statistics that are fraudulent but passed off as being true by left-wing environmental extremist groups. Facts that can not be proven without using confusing and deceptive tactics that "cook the books" so to speak, it all becomes a self fullfilling prophecy from there. I have seen very convincing arguments that argue to the contrary of almost everything that has been posted in this thread, but for the most part people who are convinced that we are going to starve ourselves by eating all the fish in the sea, or fry ourselves by creating a hole in the ozone layer are not capable of having their minds changed anyway, they just believe what they want to no matter what evidence is presented to them. I would also like to acknowledge tripsright for that insight, I agree with almost everything said.

This is very true. I think that this is happening because it is an easy way to get money for just about any cause. Say the world is going to end and everyone will be willing to help find out how to "fix it", but say everything is going just fine and you get very little money. Unfortunatly this has gotten so bad that you almost have to act this way to get any funding.

What is interesting is that these people that are doing this hype are actually very smart if you think about it. Becuase the world wasn't going to end anyway they can say that they preventing the awful tradgedy from occuring even though it never was going to happen. The end result is that everyone treats them as heroes and they are much richer because of it. The problem is that some unknown professor will never invent some wizz-bang device (faster-than-light drive, fusion, ect) because all the funding that they needed had gone into phony research as to how humans are screwing everything up. If you try to go aganst the popular opinion you get ignored.

I also think the people who believe this stuff without questioning it are just lazy. They want the easy answer, even if it is wrong. It is much easier to say that "The world is warming and humans are to blame" than it is to say "Well, the world is warming, but accoring to scientific data the world reguarly changes global temeratures, and allthough humans may be exacerbating the situation there really isn't a whole lot we can do except sit back and wait." Even in your own post you somewhat succumbed to this line of though, categorizing this as all because of left-wing people.

Oh, and thanks to all of you for actually keeping this discussion logical. I don't mind someone disagreeing with what I have to say as long as they are willing to listen to my arguments. I think most of us here are skeptics (not cynics). That means that we are willing to change our minds about something if good evidence is given. Extraordanary claims require extraordinary support.

 

[Outdoor Man]

Dougli.

When they stop putting that much money into was industries.
Look how much money you will have to live.
And then you are complainig about a few milions spended on Salmon????????????
Nature is in balans, with the salmon.
Human always disbalance nature.

Mr PD.
The reason the Bufalo almost ectincted is not because there are to much people.
It's because white man startet to kill yhem for sport.
Not for a living.

An old indian saying is.

"Why kill more bisons (Tatonka) when I can live on one.

The indians knew how to keep nature in balance.
Then Columbus came.

Peter.

 

[fyrfytrhoges]

outdoorman, is there an indian saying that explains why we have such a life expectancy these days, using indians as an example is flawed. the reason indian populations were so small is partly due to the fact that infant mortality rates were much higher and life expectancies were much shorter in those days. disease and death went hand in hand back then, technology, no matter how much you don't like it has afforded us a much much higher standard of living, I suggest if you are so biased against humans, and by your signature you are, that you should give up all your worldly possessions including the evil computer, and move out into the wilderness and see how far you get, then come back from your journey and let us all know how it went, thats if you live to tell about it.

 

[Outdoor Man]

The reaon why many indians where killed is because of no resistance of European diseaces like the pokkes (how do you write that) and because white man loved to kill them..

Know your history man!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Before that, indians had a much longer live rate then when the european came.

Peter.

 

[fyrfytrhoges]

outdoor man- sorry but that's just ridiculous.

I'm also sorry for something else, that I went against my own personal policy of not posting in political, moral, religious threads.


((Evil technology lovin, indian killin, environment pollutin, right wing conspiracy participatin white man picks up his ball and goes home. see ya)

 

[Outdoor Man]

Fyrtyrhoges said:
I'm also sorry for something else, that I went against my own personal policy of not posting in political, moral, religious threads.

That's because you can't defent your statement and you're short minded.

Open your eyes.

Peter.

 

[mbriant]

I'm glad there are optimisitic people in the world. I guess I fall into the lazy, uninformed, gulible less optimistic group. Perhaps if the Audubon Society and Nature's Conservancy purchased and operated the entire world, I'd feel better. Unfortunately, there's trillions of more acres of land and ocean that isn't being treated so gently.

In the meantime, the world's natural resources ARE being depleted. The air IS getting more poluted. Rainforest IS being destroyed at a rapid rate. ( No, I don't necessarily believe the exact acreage per day figures I hear, but I also don't automatically dismiss it as not happening) Fish stocks ARE disappearing. Lakes and rivers ARE dead and dying.

Lake Erie was once known for it's "Lake Erie Perch". Large fleets of fishing boats caught them for hundreds of years. Now those boats are docked and are all out of business. Lake Erie Perch have been fished to the point of near extinction. That same scenerio is being played out in Lakes, Seas, and Oceans all over the world right now. Spanish, Portugese, Japanese, Russian, and other nations fleets sail all the way to North America to fish it's coastline because their historical fishing grounds have been fished out. The Canadian Government is paying unemployment insurance to thousands of east and west coast fisherman, and the people who packaged and marketed the fish, because the fish are gone.

Perhaps certain economic principles and theories, if they were possible to implement, would help. But that's not what is happening right now. If some people choose to believe the scientific reports that document these facts are some sort of fraudulent conspiracy propogated by environmental groups to raise funds, that's unfortunate.

Sure, there are always going to be individual examples of success stories (although a couple thousand Buffalo we've managed to repopulate is a drop in the bucket compared to the millions that used to roam North America) and there's going to be some exageration and perhaps personal gain made by the odd conservationalist, but realistically, things aren't good.

Taking a "wait and see" attitude, or worse still, denying that there's anything wrong and everything will simply work itself out, are ignoring the obvious.

 

[gaineso]

The "Environmental Terrorists" are definitely out of control here in the Sunshines on the Manatees State. Their own surveys, along with the State and Feds, say that the population of Manatees is higher now than ever in history.

They have tripled in the last 20 years. Injuries by boats pretty much stay even, up one year and down the next. The percentage of injuries by boats keeps decreasing. Natural causes are killing the vast majority of Manatees that die each year.

There are over a million boaters in Florida, and probably half that many people who make their living in some way related to those boats. If the save the Manatee Nazi's have their way, the boats will all be gone.

One area of the St' Johns River, a beautiful 300 mile North flowing river, has a 25 mile long Manatee zone 200 miles from the ocean. There was a report that someone saw a "Sea Cow" in 1947. It is agreed by almost all involved that it was an alligator. NO MANATEE HAS BEEN SEEN SOUTH OF LAKE GEORGE IN HISTORY.
It's still large areas of idle speed and 25 MPH.

Just ranting a little, because I love the outdoors and all the critters in it. I just want to be allowed to get out and enjoy it without the Enviro Nazi's all over me. I don't want to kill any animals. I fish catch and release. I don't hunt, although I will NOT condem those who do. I think all animals are neat and I damn sure don't want to hit a 1,000 pound Sea Cow with my boat.

PETA=== People Eating Tasty Animals

 

[redshifter]

Quote:

Originally posted by Outdoor Man (Who hates those screw*** tourists who come to Amsterdam only for drugs. The Netherlands is more than Amsterdam en drugs).

i hope you take this the right way, peter. it is meant as a joke.

(may not be safe for work)

 

[dougli]

Originally posted by Outdoor Man
Dougli.

When they stop putting that much money into was industries.
Look how much money you will have to live.
And then you are complainig about a few milions spended on Salmon????????????
Nature is in balans, with the salmon.
Human always disbalance nature.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Outdoor Man, I think humans are a part of nature. Therefore we cannot disbalance nature. This earth is for us and our needs too. But more than that. A human is worth more than a salmon. And the reality of life is that humans will always have industry, and salmon never will. So our priorities should be humans first, then fish, birds, snakes, ants, etc. etc. Certainly it is foolish for humans to mess up their own house, so to speak. It's important for us to do what is sensible to keep from poisoning ourselves right off this planet. But there's no point in turning things upside down to do it, such as taking water (and thus food) away from people so that fish can swim in it for a few weeks. It's a matter of keeping perspective. And by the way, it seems to be a part of nature that species occasionally even die off. It's not the end of the world.

 

[Mr.PD]

Quote:

Originally posted by Outdoor Man Mr PD. The reason the Bufalo almost ectincted is not because there are to much people. It's because white man startet to kill yhem for sport. Not for a living. An old indian saying is. "Why kill more bisons (Tatonka) when I can live on one. The indians knew how to keep nature in balance. Then Columbus came. Peter.

Yes that is true. I was trying to show how too many people have an adverese effect on our world. I figured everybody knew about how the white man nearly wiped out the buffalo. We did not need to mention that the indian used the animals for food and the whites used them for another use all together. Please do not confuse the issue with facts.

Actually TripsRight I wasn't refering to modern day buffalo. Just the history. Also, must disagree with private ownership being the solution. Business can never be trusted to do anything other than what is on their own agenda. Quote:

The Audubon Society earns millions in royalties, and is able to buy more land, and maximized the total use value of the Rainy Refuge. How about NATURE'S CONSERVANCY? It has 680,000 members, and has annual revenue of $274 Million. It owns 25 Million acres of wilderness reserves, and extracts value from those reserves without harm, by selling hiking, camping, etc, rights. The Audubon Society & Nature's Conservancy's (sorry for the grammar if that's wrong ) have used the free market correctly, and have maximized the use of the land they own.

This is a prime example. The agenda of the Audobon Society and Natures Conservancy is to lock up land and keep the majority out. That is what they have done. Sure they leased oil rights, it adds money to further their agenda. Also the idea of paying to go on a hike or go camping is so aristocratic.
Don't mind me..............I still have a problem with land owners charging a fee to hunt or leasing the land to a hunt club. And going to a building and paying a fee to dump all the junk that has accumulated in my yard. What happened to the good old days when we went to the land fill with out separating everthing?
BTW ai0tron's post made me change my mind about him. I now like him much more.