It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Evidence of Impending Tipping Point for Earth... Is it too late?

page: 2
45
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 06:04 PM
link   
reply to post by elevenaugust
 


Good post, so don't get me wrong... but I might start caring about stuff like this when government sponsored GMO foods and genetic engineering of livestock, poultry, and fish stop. The very people that are "warning" us about ruining the Earth's biosphere are the same one's helping destroy the food supply, water, and the rest of the biosphere for population control reasons. This is all just propaganda used for fear mongering and for making people feel guilty for destroying the Earth, when in fact the Earth is just fine. That way, when "they" release their biotoxins and kill 90% of the population they can say "see, we told you so" and blame it on the very people that they are killing.




posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 06:21 PM
link   
reply to post by elevenaugust
 


S,F&


You have far more patience than I. Hats off.



posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 06:29 PM
link   
What people fail to take into account is the exponential growth in technological advances....

Where it is true to say that when concerning the natural enviroment that if things were to continue as they are today, we would be heading for disaster..... IF scientific and technological advances were to also remain as they are today....

I find those doom sayers concerning the enviroment are glass half empty people.

It won't be long before we have weather modification technology, not to mention super cheap and cleano power generation....

Two of the main factors in our ailing enviroment....

So take heart and think positive thoughts!!

Korg.



posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 06:35 PM
link   
Well then there should be a population ban for a couple years where your not alowed to have kids unless its your only chance to due to what ever problems your body might have, also put a waiting list on babies, when someone dies who ever is next in line is alowed to have a baby



posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 06:36 PM
link   
but then again, without mass population growth our ecno would probably crash even faster with less work and profiet to make



posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 07:09 PM
link   
The sad thing is how many people know this already.

We have a moment of caring when we read stuff like this thread, then we go about our lives barely changing anything, maybe buy green product here and there to alleviate our guilt or maybe point the finger at rich people or politicians, anyone but ourselves.

Meanwhile it just keeps getting worse.



posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 07:13 PM
link   
From today's Daily Mail (UK).

www.dailymail.co.uk... html

Bio- diversity blah overpopulation blah man is killing the earth blah we need a one-world government bl................wait a minute, what did he just say?? one world government??

It is my belief that we ARE approaching a global tipping point, millions WILL die, but it has nothing to do with the environment or bio-diversity, and everything to do with the imminent collapse of debt based currencies.

More psycho-terrorism from UN Agenda 21/ NWO.



posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 07:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by WanderingThe3rd
Well then there should be a population ban for a couple years where your not alowed to have kids unless its your only chance to due to what ever problems your body might have, also put a waiting list on babies, when someone dies who ever is next in line is alowed to have a baby


Yeah, lets just ban sex all together.

And if anyone gets pregnant lets just kill them.



Good luck with that



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 12:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by pasiphae
we're screwed and the fact that the media doesn't even talk about climate change anymore doesn't help the situation. people have become complacent and fox news has TOTALLY screwed up any hope we had of trying to slow this down.

i was hoping to have grandchildren but by the time my kids are ready to have kids they probably won't want to bring kids into this world.


If you continue to believe the lie of Anthropogenic Global Warming, you shouldn't have any children, much less grandchildren...

Climate Change has occurred naturally for 4.6 billion years on Earth, and will continue to happen long after we are gone...

The worse thing that could really happen is if/when CERTAIN scientists begin to mess around with nature in their delluded belief that they know better than nature what should be happening right now...

There is not ONE IOTA of proof that atmopheric CO2 causes the warming claimed by the environlunatics.

In fact, as other members and I have shown time and again in the past, atmospheric CO2 levels at this moment are EXTREMELY LOW. For most of Earth's history, atmospheric CO2 levels have been from 3 up to 8 times higher than they are now, if not higher.

Actual scientific experiments have shown that 1,200 -1,500ppm of atmospheric CO2 content in the atmosphere would be beneficial to all life on the planet, and would increase growth, and yields/harvests from 25% -60%...

Right now atmospheric CO2 levels are 380ppm-390ppm...

Inform yourself better before you start claiming that we need to tamper with mother nature...



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 12:57 AM
link   
reply to post by elevenaugust
 


You know, one of the things your so called "expert scientists" seemed to have overlooked is that they claim that the state shift in the terrestrial ecosystems are ALL being caused by anthropogenic causes... But they are forgetting that the Earth has been undergoing Climate Change, and during such changes terrestrial ecosystems are going to NATURALY have "state shifts"...

The fact that these scientists seem to be blaming all of nature changes to anthropogenic causes and that we need to do something tells me this whole "scientific study" is nothing more than garbage to further the agenda of these people.



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 04:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
reply to post by elevenaugust
 
You know, one of the things your so called "expert scientists" seemed to have overlooked is that they claim that the state shift in the terrestrial ecosystems are ALL being caused by anthropogenic causes... But they are forgetting that the Earth has been undergoing Climate Change, and during such changes terrestrial ecosystems are going to NATURALY have "state shifts"...

You might be right, but it doesn't matter in fact. It could have an anthropogenic cause or not, what I see is that our ecosystem is degraded more than ever in human history.
To debate whether it have an anthropogenic cause or not is not the deal here, as the results will be the same.

Anyway, the main things that concern me are:

The loss of biodiversity

...which is a fact and that is due to human activity, especially habitat destruction.
The fact that natural extinctions occurs along the Earth history shouldn't be used as an excuse for Humans to stay inactive.


Human activity has increased the extinction rate by at least 100 times compared to the natural rate.




...that IS the cause of human activity, with the dramatic extinction of species that we will NEVER see again. This one for example:




Scientists have concluded that the freshwater baiji dolphin, only found in China is now ‘likely to be extinct’ after an extensive 6 week study of the dolphin’s habitat when they failed to spot any in the Yangtze river.

The team of researchers claim that unregulated fishing has been blamed for the main cause to their disappearance reports BBC News .


Overpopulation

The loss of biodiversity is one of the effect of human overpopulation...


Although the rate of population growth has been declining since the 1980s, the United Nations has expressed concern on continued excessive population growth in sub-Saharan Africa. As of June 8, 2012 the world human population is estimated to be 7.018 billion by the United States Census Bureau, and over 7 billion by the United Nations.
Most estimates for the carrying capacity of the Earth are between 4 billion and 16 billion. Depending on which estimate is used, human overpopulation may or may not have already occurred. Nevertheless, the rapid recent increase in human population is causing some concern. The population is expected to reach between 8 and 10.5 billion between the year 2040 and 2050. In May 2011, the United Nations increased the medium variant projections to 9.3 billion for 2050 and 10.1 billion for 2100.





The recent rapid increase in human population over the past two centuries has raised concerns that the planet may not be able to sustain present or larger numbers of inhabitants.
Steve Jones, head of the biology department at University College London, has said, "Humans are 10,000 times more common than we should be".
The InterAcademy Panel Statement on Population Growth has stated that many environmental problems, such as rising levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide, global warming, and pollution, are aggravated by the population expansion. Other problems associated with overpopulation include the increased demand for resources such as fresh water and food, starvation and malnutrition, consumption of natural resources faster than the rate of regeneration (such as fossil fuels), and a decrease in living conditions.
However, some believe that waste and over-consumption, especially by wealthy nations, is putting more strain on the environment than overpopulation.


That leads me to the next point:

Food waste

This is an unbearable scandal, especially when you know that:

- Today, chronic hunger affects over 900 million people worldwide
- Most of the world's hungry live in developing countries, where they account for 16 per cent of the population
- The number of people who are overweight has surpassed the number who are undernourished
- More than 90 per cent of UK families admit to wasting food.



But this is mainly not due to us, but rather to the industrial production process (Production - Food processing - Retail)

Let alone its cost....


When asked to estimate the cost of food wasted over a year, the average amount was £270. Actually, it’s thought that the average family with children wastes more like £680 each year. And despite tightening our belts during the recession, we’re still spending more than we need to by failing to eat all of the foods we buy.

edit on 9-6-2012 by elevenaugust because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 12:49 PM
link   
Plastics and other contaminants in the Ocean is very real problem.

This is another good video clip discussing the issue of plastics in our seas.




posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 03:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by OptimusSubprime
The very people that are "warning" us about ruining the Earth's biosphere are the same one's helping destroy the food supply, water, and the rest of the biosphere for population control reasons.


No. Not 'the very same people'.

Unless you think all 'scientists' are the same?



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 04:02 PM
link   
I really don't think overpopulation is the problem. Our planet can sustain a lot more people, the problem is the suppression of TECHNOLOGY. Technology is the answer. More efficient use of resources and land, and free or clean energy would solve these problems IMO.



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 07:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by elevenaugust

Anyway, the main things that concern me are:

The loss of biodiversity

...which is a fact and that is due to human activity, especially habitat destruction.
The fact that natural extinctions occurs along the Earth history shouldn't be used as an excuse for Humans to stay inactive.


Again you are blaming all on mankind... BTW, if you were really that caring about all this you wouldn't have a computer... You wouldn't have the latest ipod/cell phone and other technologies which need plastics, but you do...

So, in fact you are one of those people who wants EVERYONE ELSE but yourself, "to do something about it even if it means forcing people into doing what they don't want to do"...



Originally posted by elevenaugust

Human activity has increased the extinction rate by at least 100 times compared to the natural rate.



Care to actually show PROOF of this claim?...

How do you separate the natural changes that occur during Climate Changes, in which biodiversity of the planet has to adapt or die, and the ones caused by humans?...

I am SURE you can't separate it, and posting the claims from another environlunatic is not going to change the fact that you are exagerating, and shifting "all the blame on mankind"...

Humans are predators, and as such there will always be some biodiversity loss because of humans, just like there will be biodiversity loss due to other predators...

If forest rangers allowed wolves and their packs to gorw in size unrestricted they would completely exterminate their prey.

Same thing happens with other predators.

Mankind is not the only predator living, and existing on Earth, so some biodiversity is lost because of other predators, and that's not counting the fact that during NATURAL CLIMATE CHANGES all life has to adapt, or die... and we have been undergoing a NATURAL CLIMATE CHANGE since the 1600s...



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 04:15 PM
link   
Great thread.


Originally posted by 11:11
I really don't think overpopulation is the problem.


But the team of researchers does, at least in part.

In this article one of the participants states:


Society globally has to collectively decide that we need to drastically lower our population very quickly. More of us need to move to optimal areas at higher density and let parts of the planet recover. Folks like us have to be forced to be materially poorer, at least in the short term. We also need to invest a lot more in creating technologies to produce and distribute food without eating up more land and wild species. It’s a very tall order.”


They also call for a global leadership to make these resource decisions which is nothing short of Agenda 21or, in other words, environmental fascism.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 06:03 PM
link   
reply to post by elevenaugust
 

Sorry, but the Earth is neither overcrowded nor "over-stressed."

You can fit the entire population into a space smaller than Maryland.
More than 20,000 new species are discovered every year.

You can live in fear of myth or you can adapt.

Good luck.

jw



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 06:05 PM
link   
The global elite have been working on this idea for quite some time now. Maybe their plans aren't so nefarious after all.

Once they have the whole worlds population depending on one monstrous crop seed producer it will be very easy to effectively reduce the global population down to almost nothing in a season or two.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 06:12 PM
link   
reply to post by jdub297
 





Sorry, but the Earth is neither overcrowded nor "over-stressed."



Please, tell us how you came to that conclusion. Have you put a lot of thought into that statement? I do not want to be rude, but maybe you should get out more. You may be able to fit all the humans into an 8 kilometer ball, but there is a pile of garbage floating in the pacific the size of texas. You could probably cover the continent of North America with all of the materials man has resurrected from the earth and used as building materials. The amount of forest that has been changed into cropland could probably cover twice that amount of land.

We have to stop using that argument for our children's sake or they are going to be in for a HELL of a ride.
edit on 12-6-2012 by Quauhtli because: made my ball a little smaller



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 06:45 PM
link   

reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 





Again you are blaming all on mankind... BTW, if you were really that caring about all this you wouldn't have a computer... You wouldn't have the latest ipod/cell phone and other technologies which need plastics, but you do...


Aww, give it a break buddy. Either his children are going to further his research and save the planet with their computers, or yours are going to be using them to play games. Either way the odds that your grand children are going to be using them is pretty slim...




Originally posted by elevenaugust
Human activity has increased the extinction rate by at least 100 times compared to the natural rate.



Care to actually show PROOF of this claim?...


Humans driving extinction faster than animals can evolveHumans driving extinction faster than species can evolve

It's right in the article and it's actually between 100 and 1000 times faster.



The IUCN created shock waves with its major assessment of the world's biodiversity in 2004, which calculated that the rate of extinction had reached 100-1,000 times that suggested by the fossil records before humans.





How do you separate the natural changes that occur during Climate Changes, in which biodiversity of the planet has to adapt or die, and the ones caused by humans?...

I am SURE you can't separate it, and posting the claims from another environlunatic is not going to change the fact that you are exagerating, and shifting "all the blame on mankind"...

Humans are predators, and as such there will always be some biodiversity loss because of humans, just like there will be biodiversity loss due to other predators...

If forest rangers allowed wolves and their packs to gorw in size unrestricted they would completely exterminate their prey.

Same thing happens with other predators.

Mankind is not the only predator living, and existing on Earth, so some biodiversity is lost because of other predators, and that's not counting the fact that during NATURAL CLIMATE CHANGES all life has to adapt, or die... and we have been undergoing a NATURAL CLIMATE CHANGE since the 1600s...




This is not about the wolves in Yosemite, it's about the effect that huge metropolitan areas and the loss of natural habitat to Round Up Ready soaked crops have on the environment.

edit on 12-6-2012 by Quauhtli because: /



new topics

top topics



 
45
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join