In article ,
"Aluckyguess" wrote:

"David Hare-Scott" wrote in message
...
Aluckyguess wrote:
If so should we limit the growth of the human population to save the
planet also?


In the long term this is an essential part of the solution because
we have many effects on the earth other than greenhouse gasses, many
resources that we need are running out and many pollutants that we
make, including greenhouse gasses, are harming the environment. You
can reduce the rate of using up resources and generating pollutants
per head but unless you do something about the number of heads too
you are only delaying the date of collapse as you cannot reach
stability. Those who suggest that there is no need to limit human
population
(say because of technological advances) will find that it is limited
for them, or for their descedants, nontheless. It will be limted by
the Four Horsemen.

My chemistry is week. However, this "Nathan Fiala" is an economist
not a chemist or biologist. After all, Does any economist of this
world know what they are saying, let alone how this world operates?


You do have to wonder.

David

We can not damage the earth, we can only damage ourselves. The planet
will heal itself its just a matter of time.

Is producing pollution that affects other organisms and climate not
harming the earth? Is the human-caused extinction of species not harming
the earth?

Nope

How long would you be prepared to wait for the eco-system to re-balance?
What do you think would be happening to humanity while you wait?

What is balance? What about the ice age. There were dinosaurs when they went
did that balance things.
You don't understand the big picture. We are insignificant, just a small
spec in time.
Humans will come and we will go.

Why do you think our eco-system is out of balance, Al gore?
This whole global warming thing is a crock. We should put money into more
important things.

What important things could the "insignificant, small
spec in time" invest in?

To the best of my knowledge, we are the only species that thinks and
communicates conceptually (symbolically, if you will). Maybe not the
jewel in the crown of bio-diversity but still not something to be
squandered by being herded over the edge of our own grave and into
extinction. If global warming is a "crock" and we resist it, we may look
silly. If global warming is real and we do nothing, we could be history.
What would you bet on, silly or gone?

In my travels, most of the people that I have met, just want to get
along. This attitude seems lost on governments, all of which seem to be
run by people with a sense of entitlement.
--

Billy
Kleptocrats Behind Bars
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7843430.stm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KVTf...ef=patrick.net