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.

 

Study predicts imminent irreversible planetary collapse

page: 1
16
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 09:34 AM
link   
This seems pretty stark.


Using scientific theories, toy ecosystem modeling and paleontological evidence as a crystal ball, 21 scientists, including one from Simon Fraser University, predict we’re on a much worse collision course with Mother Nature than currently thought.

In Approaching a state-shift in Earth’s biosphere, a paper just published in Nature, the authors, whose expertise spans a multitude of disciplines, suggest our planet’s ecosystems are careering towards an imminent, irreversible collapse.

Earth’s accelerating loss of biodiversity, its climate's increasingly extreme fluctuations, its ecosystems’ growing connectedness and its radically changing total energy budget are precursors to reaching a planetary state threshold or tipping point.

Once that happens, which the authors predict could be reached this century, the planet’s ecosystems, as we know them, could irreversibly collapse in the proverbial blink of an eye.

“The last tipping point in Earth’s history occurred about 12,000 years ago when the planet went from being in the age of glaciers, which previously lasted 100,000 years, to being in its current interglacial state. Once that tipping point was reached, the most extreme biological changes leading to our current state occurred within only 1,000 years. That’s like going from a baby to an adult state in less than a year,” explains Arne Mooers. “Importantly, the planet is changing even faster now.”

The SFU professor of biodiversity is one of this paper’s authors. He stresses, “The odds are very high that the next global state change will be extremely disruptive to our civilizations. Remember, we went from being hunter-gatherers to being moon-walkers during one of the most stable and benign periods in all of Earth’s history.

“Once a threshold-induced planetary state shift occurs, there’s no going back. So, if a system switches to a new state because you’ve added lots of energy, even if you take out the new energy, it won’t revert back to the old system. The planet doesn’t have any memory of the old state.”


www.sfu.ca...

Does anyone have more information about the science behind this study or the credibility of the researchers and/or the University?

I wonder does it take into account Fukushima or the BP oil spill?


edit on 12-6-2012 by KillerQueen because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 09:37 AM
link   
The scariest part:



The authors recommend governments undertake five actions immediately if we are to have any hope of delaying or minimizing a planetary-state-shift. Arne Mooers, an SFU biodiversity professor and a co-author of this study, summarizes them as follows.

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.”



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 09:39 AM
link   
Pay particular mention to the paragraph at the bottom of the article...




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.”


"... drastically lower our population very quickly."

Wow. There it is, in the open, for all to see. Environmental researchers calling for depopulation.

Let's see how China and India respond to that...



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 09:43 AM
link   
Talk about nwo agenda what the hell! I do wonder why wr cant be more in harmony though. We should have 100 mpg suvs now..



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 09:44 AM
link   
Well, wouldn't lowering the overall population be a good thing? If not lowering it, decreasing the current rate of growth?

I am NOT suggesting the rounding up and killing of people, whether by random, or by targeting certain 'groups'.

I AM suggesting however that people need to think more about the decision to have children. Yes, accidents happen, and I am not suggesting forced abortions, or anything of the sort. I also don't agree with a federally mandated "X child per household" rule either.

So, I guess I don't really have an actual game plan, but to me, it is obvious that our current path will lead to our destruction, that is, if Mother Nature doesn't have other plans in mind,



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 09:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Dreine
 


Additionally, to aid the depopulation efforts, they encourage people to move to 'higher population density areas'. A friend of mine posted this article on his FaceBook wall earlier and I didn't read it... I think it's time he and I had a talk and start getting ready for some nasty times ahead.

This type of talk, even in research circles, is very dangerous. Even moreso when they are brazen enough to publish it.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 09:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Dreine
 


Yes. It makes me seriously question who funded this study.

And is the threat of "imminent irreversible planetary collapse" how they are going to justify the alleged infamous Agenda 21?

"All of us are going to die unless we get rid of some of us."



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 09:48 AM
link   
Sounds like it was written by "Chicken Little".

Of course the planet is changing. It always has and always will.

The Earth is cyclical.

Predicting change is a pretty safe bet.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 09:49 AM
link   
reply to post by KillerQueen
 


I'm not backing up anyone who uses that idea for bad, but isn't that general thought, in theory very altruistic in nature?

Think of a group of Gazelle being circled by lions. A few will engage the lions willingly, to allow the group to survive. So, by definition, this idea is a very good idea to ensure the survival of the lot. However, like most things, it can be used for evil. So, if this is used as a cover to a more devious plan, I don't agree with it. If I was faced with a situation where I had to sacrifice myself for, hell, even just my family, I would. No one person has more 'value' than a collective population.

Not sure if I've made my point entirely clear. If this sparks any questions, let me know and I will do my best to clarify.
edit on 12-6-2012 by Daemonicon because: spelling



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 09:49 AM
link   
The fools running the governments should be the first to be depopulated. Right after whoever had the balls to publish this



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 09:54 AM
link   
this aint true science

true science will find better solutions to the problem..

migrating to other earth like planets for example...

this is only fear mongering



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 09:55 AM
link   
It is easy to blame population, that takes it out of our hands and away from any responsibility we have here in the west. It is their fault. Those pesky over-breeders are to blame. NO.

It is what we have done. We have trashed the place. Even the computers we are so proud of, are massive pollution devices we cannot get rid of except by sending them off to poison poor people in other lands who are so desperate for money they will do anything. It isn't them, it is you and me! It is the industrialized nations who are killing it all and we have taught the whole world to be like us.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 09:57 AM
link   
we have to instead of focusing our science on modern weapons..we focus on space travel only...we unite globally scientifically with one aim...how we can beat the vast distances of space and time



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 09:58 AM
link   
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for sustainable living and environmental protection. I do believe we should try to curb the birthrate a bit to allow for science to catch up in regards to finding new energy sources/environmental preservation.

Scientists tend to be very careful with their wordsmithing when publishing papers, so keep that in mind.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 10:00 AM
link   
One can learn much from a bowl of petunias.

Its ok. It happens.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 10:01 AM
link   
This "solution" seems fairly provocative as well.


Folks like us have to be forced to be materially poorer, at least in the short term.


Forced?

Convenient as well given the current state of global economics.

We have to know who funded this study.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by KillerQueen
reply to post by Dreine
 


Yes. It makes me seriously question who funded this study.

And is the threat of "imminent irreversible planetary collapse" how they are going to justify the alleged infamous Agenda 21?

"All of us are going to die unless we get rid of some of us."


Of course it is. These people all work for the same team that uses FEAR as the herding technique.
Welcome to the dark side of people who believe that they are god.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 10:05 AM
link   
Thank you for posting this OP.

I used to post the exact same theory, just as an intuitive hunch, that we need to stop having so many kids and that we've become a disease on earth.

You should have seen the egotism in the replies. People get all self centered and think that they can do what they want and that it wont affect the whole. Well guess frickin what, i was right all along and said years ago that studies would come out to prove so.

Were gonna enter a period of mass global famine.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 10:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Daemonicon
 


I would agree with you. I do think nature has all of the mechanisms in place to control population. Look at the flu, and any pandemic plague or disease that has significantly affected human life. The thing is, we've circumvented all of these with our technology. I know that if we didn't have modern technology I wouldn't be here, and a lot of other people wouldn't either.

Our technology sort of derails nature's course. And, it's allowed us to modify the global environment. Nature (in my opinion) is a reactionary mechanism, not an intelligent force. Because it can't anticipate or plan, I'd agree with the article. It has no memory. It simply goes from one elementary step to the next as things continuously change and form what we see as the overall result.

With the necessary mechanisms in place to keep populations limited, and with no technological intervention, I would suspect the populations would remain low and relatively balanced. However, with our inherent desire to thrive we have brought an imbalance to the system. Nature, being what it is, will simply react and produce the next result. Even if we find it undesirable, we really did put ourselves in this position.

I don't advocate culling crowds, but in theory it would be a solution to at least one of the problems. However, if we're already passed the tipping point it wouldn't really do us any good.

Maybe the human civilization was simply playing a game of tip the cow with or planet. I've heard people say the tipping part is fun, but I've never heard of anyone un-tipping cattle...



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 10:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by heineken
this aint true science

true science will find better solutions to the problem..

migrating to other earth like planets for example...

this is only fear mongering


Haha i was thinking that too. If the official story on mars is true we should be terraforming it right now. Or the moon. In fact nasa mentioned plans to do a one way trip to mars a while back. Id probably go. Atleast youd be able to contact earth from there, unlike the thread about the arks...



new topics

top topics



 
16
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join