Author Topic: Earth Day - 40 years of outrageous claims, ...  (Read 6442 times)

Offline North Pack

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1228
    • http://
Earth Day - 40 years of outrageous claims, ...
« on: May 10, 2010, 10:31:54 AM »
The founder of Earth Day, Senator Gaylord Nelson, famously proclaimed that,
.
“Dr. S. Dillon Ripley, secretary of the Smithsonian Institute, believes that in 25 years [1995], somewhere between 75 and 80 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct.”
.
  One of the more interesting statements made by Dr. Paul Ehrlich, author of the largely discredited book The Population Bomb, was that “at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years.” The esteemed Dr. Ehrlich also warned that air pollution would “take hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few years alone.”
.
 North Texas State University professor Peter Gunter echoed Ehrlich’s predictions of death. He said, “Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China and the Near East, Africa. - By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine.”
.
 In one of its 1970 issues, Life Magazine wrote that “Scientists have solid experimental and theoretical evidence to support… the following predictions:
.
In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution… by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half…”
.
Man-made climate change was around back then, but it wasn’t global warming that they were worried about, it was global cooling.  ... Kenneth Watt, professor emeritus at the University of California at Davis, warned,...
.
 â€œThe world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.”
.
Credit: Casey Research

Offline Gene_SC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11378
    • http://www.airguntoys.com
Re: Earth Day - 40 years of outrageous claims, ...
« Reply #1 on: May 10, 2010, 11:28:29 AM »
Well all I can say is it was cooler here this winter....:)
THE ONES I SLEEP WITH: BSA Lightning XL, AA TX-200, AA ProSport, BSA Ultra, HW-97K, Crosman NPSS .177, FX Cyclone, HW-30 Nicle Plated, AA-S200, Crosman Marauder, CZ-634, R-9 DG, Webley/Scott UK Tomahawk, Benji Kantana, Benji Marauder, Benji Discovery.....
....

Gene\'s Tunz n Toyz
Springer Tunin

Offline Big_Bill

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5615
    • http://
RE: Earth Day - 40 years of outrageous claims, ...
« Reply #2 on: May 10, 2010, 02:11:26 PM »


They pray on our fears, and then make a profit from their theoretical B.S.



If you would like to understand all the crazy weather changes, the Science Network made a show on how our HARP research works to control the weather through low range transmissions. And not only US, but Russia and a few other countries have this technology to change the weather for better or far worse ! Added Seeding of the clouds allows then to increase the destructive effects of their technology.



And perhaps the 6 degree shift of our planet that has occurred because of the Tsunami and the Volcanic eruption have something to do with all of this crazy weather.



Bill

Life Member of The United States of America
Life Member of the National Rifle Association
Member Air Guns Addicted Anonymous
SHOOT SAFE ! - SHOOT WELL ! - SHOOT OFTEN !
Always Use A Spring Compressor ! and Buy the GREAT GRT-III & CBR Triggers, cause they are GRRRREAT !

Offline North Pack

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1228
    • http://
Re: Earth Day - 40 years of outrageous claims, ...
« Reply #3 on: May 11, 2010, 02:09:49 AM »
Predictions by these folks = worthless exercise & nothing more.

Offline bodiej

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 337
    • http://
Re: Earth Day - 40 years of outrageous claims, ...
« Reply #4 on: May 11, 2010, 08:13:53 AM »
Just think of all the tax-paid grant money that went into those stats and claims!

Offline geiger

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 256
Re: Earth Day - 40 years of outrageous claims, ...
« Reply #5 on: May 25, 2010, 03:31:56 PM »
The overpopulation issue is worrying. You see...for now when most of the world still lives in the "19 th century", there is less pressure on resources. It's been calculated that if all people on this world wanted to have a living standard like in the US we'd need 4 more Earths. Technology will help for part of the problem.

You have to realize that when technology/living standard goes up, population should go down, otherwise there will be a mess. I'm for a smaller global population...but that's only because then we'd have more for everybody and especially us.
Yes...Alaska is quite empty, but would you really want to live in a world where every inch of land is fenced off or a house near by? What would that mean for hunters, there basically be no hunting because everything would theoretically be barred off.
With high technology we don't need 10 farm workers to pick up hay, now machines can do it easily with just 1 operator. Sure earth can sustain a few more people, but that would mean less for us all.

China almost drained on of it's biggest rivers because the need for irrigation water. People fail to realize that environmentalism is not just about for animal's and plant's  sakes, but primarily for ours. What we should achieve is the least destruction for the best living standard. And to be honest...a 5.7l SUV is not in line with this thought. For instance having a 2.0l will give you more or less the same standard but much less destruction, but it seems people put their head in the sand rather than face their ego.
Driving a 2.0l doesn't make you less of a man...if somebody thinks so...then he has issues, big issues.

Offline cmdrstp

  • GTA Donations
  • ******
  • Posts: 42
    • http://
RE: Earth Day - 40 years of outrageous claims, ...
« Reply #6 on: May 26, 2010, 06:57:55 PM »
Global warming is basically a control conspiracy tied with cap and trade. Control the energy and you control people. Simple. Junk science and propaganda. Talk to me about pollution, deforestation, over fishing, and such. I will listen. I can't think of anyone who would be against safeguarding our planet or it's resources. But, this global warming theory...I'm not buying.

Why did the Copenhagen summit fail to achieve any accord? It wasn't about saving the planet... it was nothing more than a money grab. Poor, underachieving, third world nations blaming, specifically, the US for being prosperous and demanding restitution for the actions of  Mother Nature. Requesting payment for any and all natural disaster that occur in their country. China wanted to be considered a "developing nation" and not subject to the same emission criteria as the US. Can not people see through this? Funny how Al Gore has been quiet after the exposure of intentional data skewing just prior to Copenhagen.

I certainly will never consider my lifestyle or that of other American's as selfish or wasteful. We should never apologize for being prosperous.

It amazes me how much the US helps any and all countries with all sorts of financial or security aid in the face of disasters, yet we are the cast as glutinous. Maybe these countries should use their hands to develop their nations rather than holding them out or shoving 'em in our pockets.

But, that's just me.
“Blessed be the Lord my strength which teacheth my hands to war and my fingers to fight…
My goodness and my fortress, my high tower and my deliverer…
My shield and he in whom I trust…\"

Offline geiger

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 256
RE: Earth Day - 40 years of outrageous claims, ...
« Reply #7 on: May 27, 2010, 03:35:28 AM »
Quote
cmdrstp - 5/26/2010  11:57 PM

Global warming is basically a control conspiracy tied with cap and trade. Control the energy and you control people. Simple. Junk science and propaganda. Talk to me about pollution, deforestation, over fishing, and such. I will listen. I can't think of anyone who would be against safeguarding our planet or it's resources. But, this global warming theory...I'm not buying.

Why did the Copenhagen summit fail to achieve any accord? It wasn't about saving the planet... it was nothing more than a money grab. Poor, underachieving, third world nations blaming, specifically, the US for being prosperous and demanding restitution for the actions of  Mother Nature. Requesting payment for any and all natural disaster that occur in their country. China wanted to be considered a "developing nation" and not subject to the same emission criteria as the US. Can not people see through this? Funny how Al Gore has been quiet after the exposure of intentional data skewing just prior to Copenhagen.

I certainly will never consider my lifestyle or that of other American's as selfish or wasteful. We should never apologize for being prosperous.

It amazes me how much the US helps any and all countries with all sorts of financial or security aid in the face of disasters, yet we are the cast as glutinous. Maybe these countries should use their hands to develop their nations rather than holding them out or shoving 'em in our pockets.

But, that's just me.



As much as i agree with you on the climate change issue, i don't on the wasteful lifestyle.

Having uninsulated homes or driving inefficient cars,... there is a point where prosperous lifestyle turns to gluttony. If the US halved all it's car consumption the living standard would remain quite the same and resource usage for that part would be halved. The trick is in efficiency, something that is more efficient will do the same job with less resources used.

What you're saying is that if all americans would go back to riding horses instead of cars..obviously that's not the same.

Nature and man is not separate, we're all in this together. Just like the saying, what goes around comes around.

Offline cmdrstp

  • GTA Donations
  • ******
  • Posts: 42
    • http://
RE: Earth Day - 40 years of outrageous claims, ...
« Reply #8 on: May 27, 2010, 05:26:16 PM »


I must be living in a different part of the country because I don't see many people wasting much of anything, especially utilities. Oh sure, maybe there are ways we can all be more efficient. And, I don't know one person who views conservation of resources as anything but ethical and necessary.

However, what would be the standard? How does one compare lifestyle standards between different cultures, economies, geography, populations, etc. Can't compare one's gas consumption from one who lives in a city to another who lives rurally. This is magnified between industrialized countries and one's with a third world status. I certainly would never want a European, Asian, African, or any other standard of living other than what our country offers. It also would never work. Take a train system for instance. Works fine in Europe, Asia, and even some US cities. It would never fly in the US for many reasons.

I, also, find it ironic that The US is at the top of the list when it comes to waste. Yes, are consumption of energy is one of the highest but, so are our EPA regulations. So, is our contribution to the world. We have the highest standard of living on every level (medical, economic, lifestyle, etc.). I appreciate having the world's best medical, collegiate educational opportunities, food/water supply and quality, etc. within a few miles of myself. That costs energy.



I believe our lifestyle, standard of living has some room for improvement but, the overwhelming benefits of our society justify our energy needs and should be a gold standard for the world to emulate.There is a reason most dream of a life here.



Find me a truck to tow my boat for 50 MPG and I'm buying! Hell, I wish they ran on nuclear fuel rods! But, to label the US as the biggest offender is to compare apples to oranges.



And, this cap and trade BS is not to conserve resources...it's to control economies.



Stephen

“Blessed be the Lord my strength which teacheth my hands to war and my fingers to fight…
My goodness and my fortress, my high tower and my deliverer…
My shield and he in whom I trust…\"

Offline geiger

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 256
RE: Earth Day - 40 years of outrageous claims, ...
« Reply #9 on: May 28, 2010, 04:25:33 PM »
Quote
cmdrstp - 5/27/2010  10:26 PM



I must be living in a different part of the country because I don't see many people wasting much of anything, especially utilities. Oh sure, maybe there are ways we can all be more efficient. And, I don't know one person who views conservation of resources as anything but ethical and necessary.

However, what would be the standard? How does one compare lifestyle standards between different cultures, economies, geography, populations, etc. Can't compare one's gas consumption from one who lives in a city to another who lives rurally. This is magnified between industrialized countries and one's with a third world status. I certainly would never want a European, Asian, African, or any other standard of living other than what our country offers. It also would never work. Take a train system for instance. Works fine in Europe, Asia, and even some US cities. It would never fly in the US for many reasons.

I, also, find it ironic that The US is at the top of the list when it comes to waste. Yes, are consumption of energy is one of the highest but, so are our EPA regulations. So, is our contribution to the world. We have the highest standard of living on every level (medical, economic, lifestyle, etc.). I appreciate having the world's best medical, collegiate educational opportunities, food/water supply and quality, etc. within a few miles of myself. That costs energy.



I believe our lifestyle, standard of living has some room for improvement but, the overwhelming benefits of our society justify our energy needs and should be a gold standard for the world to emulate.There is a reason most dream of a life here.



Find me a truck to tow my boat for 50 MPG and I'm buying! Hell, I wish they ran on nuclear fuel rods! But, to label the US as the biggest offender is to compare apples to oranges.



And, this cap and trade BS is not to conserve resources...it's to control economies.



Stephen



Well, insulating your house would be a huge improvement. Actually it's the best available method to reduce heating costs significantly. And there are more methods in our everyday life. Using efficient appliances, lights,... the snag are those leisure activities which are hard to change. Maybe getting a smaller TV rather than a big a**, power hog plasma TV. Or better yet, ditch TV and go do something better. You see it's all those little things and habits that people got so accustomed to they wouldn't want to give it away.
Too few people when buying stuff, ask themselves..."do i really need this?" The problem is the whole hyper-consumption culture. Instead of seeking pleasure with less things, people now see pleasure only in owning stuff. Buying stuff just for the sake of owning it rather than for an actual need.
I'm not saying you have no right to this stuff...technically you do, but it's a matter of self restraint, and until people don't realize this i doubt things will go for the better.
BTW if this sounds hippie, it really isn't...being more humble can be a virtue in certain situations.

If we're talking technicalities then the US is 13th on the HDI (human development index). In the US you have both the very rich and the very poor.
It's really hard to try and dispute the measure of living standards. Sure you can own a big swimming pool, three cars, a large house...but it all comes down to how much are you willing to sacrifice in order to impact your environment less. Your answer is probably NONE. Sure you can do that...but you do realize there are physical limits how much one can put stress on resources? Right now we're using more resources that can be recycled back by the Earth. The US so much so that it has to import resources from other places in order to sustain the standard you have.

You have to realize even this that your/our standard is based on borrowed labor.

To keep things short...the word sustainable is not just some fancy hippie concept. At the rate were going now the Earth will not be able to keep up. Sooner or later it will come to a halt, it's not just speculation but a measurable quantity.
Just picture if every Chinese person would like to drive a 5.7l SUV, and live the way the average US citizen would...the world resources would collapse.

The end of our prosperity will come whether we like it or not. Essentially because of people exclaiming stuff like "We should drill off-shore wells to get the oil we need to drive our 6l SUVs", instead of "Gee, what if i get a more efficient car?".
It just can't go on and on and on, with people having that mentality. We have only one world and i don't see any sign that we'll be drilling the moon for oil anytime soon. ;)
It's not very well known that the Chinese are buying up every available oil field in Africa and in other places where the US hasn't yet reached. Or that most prosperous oil fields have peaked or will soon.

A great war for resources will come, bet on it...we're stirring the pot as we speak.
 

As for the 50MPG truck...i presume you're joking. Because that number is almost unachievable, even the smallest European eco cars can't get that good mileage.

The Nissan Navara (EU version) for instance can do 27MPG, can tow 3t and reach 110mph, 190HP.
Let's take the Ford Ranger which is a small truck for US standards...if we take the 4.0l version, it does 18MPG, tows 2.7t, 200HP.
And take into account Ford has been working on better mileage in the recent years, in the past it probably was even worse.

We have the technology to help us deal with this problem, but until people stick to the consumption habits of the past...we're digging our own graves so to speak.

Offline airiscool

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1623
    • http://
RE: Earth Day - 40 years of outrageous claims, ...
« Reply #10 on: May 31, 2010, 02:37:02 AM »
Running out of resources? There's alot of info being left out to keep the panic levels up.

How many here are old enough to remember the near constant chant from the experts back in the mid 70's that the world would run out of oil in 25 years ? And that was back when most households only had one car. Since then we have how many more cars, trucks, buses, airplanes, boats, ATVs, personal water craft, weedwackers, leaf blowers that were not around then ??? And it's not just us - how many cars did China have in the mid 70's compared to today.

Running out of enough planet ?
In the late 60's and early 70's, we were bombarded with fear of "over population" in America. In '71, while on a night flight coast to coast, looking out the window- there was alot of countryside with no lights anywhere.... and that was back when this country had over one hundred million fewer inhabitants !!! Where'd all that over-population panic go ????

Ozone layer.
Anyone remember the  panic about that ozone hole over the South Pole that just happened fix itself before they could finish banning/removing all the chemicals that were said to be distroying it ?

Deforestation.
The panic about loss of forest .. what they don't say is how much new forest is being grown back. In just NYS alone, it was only about 5% forested in 1900, today it's close to 70%. And that's with the increased demand for pulp wood (a big business here in Central NYS) for paper that using computers were said would reduce demand for paper and help "Save the Planet". Now, the  proliferation of computers are possably a bigger environmental risk than the deforestation they were suposed to help reduce.  Opps !

Global warming.
And they leave out that the Earth has been warmer many times in the past with no adverse affects. And, that alot of the benifits of global warming, such as areas of the world that would have increased crop yeald ... like maybe "Greenland" will be green again ... and growing grapes like it did back when the Vikings first went there and called it "Vinland" (Vine Land).

And do you hear anything about what we all learned in Middle School science class - the Earth being 70% covered with water, higher temps means more avaporation, which means more water vapor in the atmosphere, which means more clouds, which lowers surface temps. This planet has been here alot longer than we have and if you look back farther than the Global warming croud you'd see it  is very good at self regulating even during more extream conditions.  

The seas are rising.
A couple of years ago I went back to my old neighborhood on  Long Island's Great South Bay, which is tidal because it is open to the Ocean by large inlets. The tide marks on the docks where I used to fish as a kid were in the same place as they were 40 years ago.

Fear and panic are powerful motivators and are the number one tools used by extreamists - doesn't mean reasonable people need to be afraid  though.

Paul.

Benji Trail NPXL 1100, Gamo .22 Whisper, Crosman 760 Pumpmaster, Crosman 66 Powermaster, Crosman .22 revolver, Daisy model 102, Daisy early Model 25.

Offline geiger

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 256
RE: Earth Day - 40 years of outrageous claims, ...
« Reply #11 on: May 31, 2010, 12:13:41 PM »


Quote
airiscool - 5/31/2010  7:37 AM

Running out of resources? There's alot of info being left out to keep the panic levels up.

How many here are old enough to remember the near constant chant from the experts back in the mid 70's that the world would run out of oil in 25 years ? And that was back when most households only had one car. Since then we have how many more cars, trucks, buses, airplanes, boats, ATVs, personal water craft, weedwackers, leaf blowers that were not around then ??? And it's not just us - how many cars did China have in the mid 70's compared to today.

That's the point, the use of vehicles has gone up exponentially. I suggest you read on PEAK OIL. It explains that oil doesn't have to run out to cause massive problems. For now we've been living on cheap oil, not to far in the future cheap oil won't be available anymore.

Quote
Running out of enough planet ?
In the late 60's and early 70's, we were bombarded with fear of "over population" in America. In '71, while on a night flight coast to coast, looking out the window- there was alot of countryside with no lights anywhere.... and that was back when this country had over one hundred million fewer inhabitants !!! Where'd all that over-population panic go ????

Like i've said...yes, you can stuff a lot more people on the planet, but that would mean everybody get's less.

Quote
Ozone layer.
Anyone remember the  panic about that ozone hole over the South Pole that just happened fix itself before they could finish banning/removing all the chemicals that were said to be distroying it ?

Um, no.

On August 2, 2003, scientists announced that the depletion of the ozone layer may be slowing down due to the international ban on CFCs.[5]  Three satellites and three ground stations confirmed that the upper atmosphere ozone depletion rate has slowed down significantly during the past decade. The study was organized by the American Geophysical Union. Some breakdown can be expected to continue due to CFCs used by nations which have not banned them, and due to gases which are already in the stratosphere. CFCs have very long atmospheric lifetimes, ranging from 50 to over 100 years, so the final recovery of the ozone layer is expected to require several lifetimes.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ozone_layer





Quote
Deforestation.
The panic about loss of forest .. what they don't say is how much new forest is being grown back. In just NYS alone, it was only about 5% forested in 1900, today it's close to 70%. And that's with the increased demand for pulp wood (a big business here in Central NYS) for paper that using computers were said would reduce demand for paper and help "Save the Planet". Now, the  proliferation of computers are possably a bigger environmental risk than the deforestation they were suposed to help reduce.  Opps !



Conversely, a new analysis of satellite images reveals that  deforestation of the Amazon rainforest is twice as fast  as scientists previously estimated.



Despite these uncertainties, there is agreement that destruction of  rainforests remains a significant environmental problem. Up to 90% of West  Africa's coastal rainforests have disappeared since 1900.  In South  Asia, about 88% of the rainforests have been lost.  Much of what remains of the world's rainforests is in the Amazon basin, where the Amazon RainforestThe regions with the highest tropical deforestation rate between 2000  and 2005 were Central America—which lost 1.3% of its  forests each year—and tropical Asia.  In Central America, two-thirds of lowland  tropical forests have been turned into pasture since 1950 and 40% of all  the rainforests have been lost in the last 40 years.  Brazil  has lost 90-95% of its Mata Atlântica forest.[102]  Madagascar  has lost 90% of its eastern rainforests.  As of 2007, less than 1% of Haiti's  forests remained.  Mexico,  India, the Philippines, Indonesia,  Thailand,  Myanmar, Malaysia,  Bangladesh,  China, Sri Lanka, Laos, Nigeria, the Democratic Republic of the  Congo, Liberia, Guinea, Ghana and  the Côte d'Ivoire, have lost large areas of their  rainforest.  Several countries, notably Brazil,  have declared their deforestation a national emergency. covers approximately 4 million square  kilometres.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deforestation



Deforestation is a more of a local problem, you might not deforestate US forests like in the past, but that's because now you're importing the wood. Deforestation is not a grave issue, but despite that i shouldn't just be ignored.




Quote
Global warming.
And they leave out that the Earth has been warmer many times in the past with no adverse affects. And, that alot of the benifits of global warming, such as areas of the world that would have increased crop yeald ... like maybe "Greenland" will be green again ... and growing grapes like it did back when the Vikings first went there and called it "Vinland" (Vine Land).



Global warming is nothing to really worry about. I believe that humans can impact the atmosphere, but CO2 is the least of our problems.




Quote
And do you hear anything about what we all learned in Middle School science class - the Earth being 70% covered with water, higher temps means more avaporation, which means more water vapor in the atmosphere, which means more clouds, which lowers surface temps. This planet has been here alot longer than we have and if you look back farther than the Global warming croud you'd see it  is very good at self regulating even during more extream conditions.  



Water vapor is one of the strongest greenhouse gas, however it depends how it is dispersed. But like i've said, global warming is the last on my list.

Quote
The seas are rising.
A couple of years ago I went back to my old neighborhood on  Long Island's Great South Bay, which is tidal because it is open to the Ocean by large inlets. The tide marks on the docks where I used to fish as a kid were in the same place as they were 40 years ago.



Same here, rising sea levels are a minor problem, nothing to be really worried IMO.





Quote
Fear and panic are powerful motivators and are the number one tools used by extreamists - doesn't mean reasonable people need to be afraid  though.

Paul.





Ignoring it altogether is not rational either.



Refusing to acknowledge that one's habits can be damaging is also very short sighted.







Let me give you an example. The US main source of oil is Canada. Canada gets almost 50% of it's oil from oil sands and i don't have to tell you what a major mess this process is. Many nearby places have been made inhospitable because of it, Indian reserves mostly. You have three choices how to play your role in this situation.



1. F*** them, i want my oil, so i can drive my SUV.



2. I'm gonna sell my car and start using my bicycle from now on.



3. I'm getting a fuel efficient car and reduce unnecessary oil consumption.





Option 1 i guess is what the average US person thinks (or doesn't think, for that matter). Option 2 is for treehuging hippies, which is also stupid. The third option is the most rational one, doing your small part and still retain most of the living standard like before.



Which one do you choose?