Sarge, I really don’t know if anybody has ever studied this, but at a rough guess I would say it is probably balanced out by the lack of animals that used to live in all the bits of the world that we have covered in concrete.Come on you co2 not the problem peops i expected a deluge of Sarge you are talking crap about human breathing and connecting the two global warming and population control
world population
Sarge wrote:
Thats a good point steve however the pro co2 climate change scientists did measure the effect on the climate that cows farting had 
as for less animals now i am not so sure these feed lots are full of cows and sheep and pigs for human consumption and in far denser groups than before : .
as for the areas concreted over it isnt growing trees that store co2 and most of the increase in concrete is for human habitation
answer cull the humans less humans less concrete more animals more trees
The bit in your post which is telling though is quote Sarge, I really don’t know if anybody has ever studied this, (or thought about it apparently going on the lack of response from both sides of the argument )
Thats what surprised me culling the population is not the main reason for this thread thats a way down the track anyway but i am interested in why i have never heard of this connection at all in the global warming debate
More humans more concrete more cars more factories ad infinitum and more breathing less humans less concrete less cars less factories minus finitum less breathing
any ideas WHY it is never mentioned or is it because noone wants to scare the public
as for less animals now i am not so sure these feed lots are full of cows and sheep and pigs for human consumption and in far denser groups than before : .as for the areas concreted over it isnt growing trees that store co2 and most of the increase in concrete is for human habitation
answer cull the humans less humans less concrete more animals more trees
The bit in your post which is telling though is quote Sarge, I really don’t know if anybody has ever studied this, (or thought about it apparently going on the lack of response from both sides of the argument )
Thats what surprised me culling the population is not the main reason for this thread thats a way down the track anyway but i am interested in why i have never heard of this connection at all in the global warming debate
More humans more concrete more cars more factories ad infinitum and more breathing less humans less concrete less cars less factories minus finitum less breathing
any ideas WHY it is never mentioned or is it because noone wants to scare the public
A Greatfull Guest of Thailand
-
DawnHRD
- Legend
- Posts: 2627
- Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2005 10:39 pm
- Location: Not always where I want to be
Sorry Sarge. I thought you were trying to make a serious argument about population control (ie more people using all the resources = less for the poor = unrest, wars, famine etc), but you're actually making a point about global warming because humans breathe & fart? Am I correct in that?
Well, in that case, that's me bowing out of this one. Even while on the Chang I can't seriously debate that. And so far today I've only had juice & coffee...
Well, in that case, that's me bowing out of this one. Even while on the Chang I can't seriously debate that. And so far today I've only had juice & coffee...
"The question is not, can they reason? Nor, can they talk? But, can they suffer?" - Jeremy Bentham, philosopher, 1748-1832
Make a dog's life better, today!
Make a dog's life better, today!
I fathered 4 children to the same woman my x wife all adults now, and had a vasectomy so i can not have any moor then years later she wants a divorce ,and i can not have a baby with second wife . There is a down side to permanent contraption.
Last edited by nevets on Sun May 06, 2007 11:18 am, edited 1 time in total.
No dawn it is the fact that it has never been mentioned that i dont follow
it IMO has obviously got to have a huge impact on climate change if the co2 scenerio has anything to do with it quote dawn(ie more people using all the resources = less for the poor = unrest, wars, famine etc),resource being oxygen bang on but it will be climate change which will cause famines through lack of food production so why is there no mention of population growth less food more people
answer cull the people
at some point population control will be a huge nay a megahuge problem/nettle the humans will have to grasp and deal with because i can guarantee in spades education personal responsibility self control just is not going to cut it and forceable population control will be used
I still do not understand and so far noone has even tried to give an answer as to why population growth is not mentioned in the climate debate
it IMO has obviously got to have a huge impact on climate change if the co2 scenerio has anything to do with it quote dawn(ie more people using all the resources = less for the poor = unrest, wars, famine etc),resource being oxygen bang on but it will be climate change which will cause famines through lack of food production so why is there no mention of population growth less food more people
answer cull the people
at some point population control will be a huge nay a megahuge problem/nettle the humans will have to grasp and deal with because i can guarantee in spades education personal responsibility self control just is not going to cut it and forceable population control will be used
I still do not understand and so far noone has even tried to give an answer as to why population growth is not mentioned in the climate debate
A Greatfull Guest of Thailand
-
redzonerocker
- Rock Star
- Posts: 4777
- Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 3:55 pm
- Location: England
climate change
what chance do we ordinary everyday people have of proving or disproving the theories of climate change/global warming? when the top scientists of the world fail to agree on the causes?
since the beginning of the earth there have been several phases ie the ice age & the great floods, there was no global warming involved.
sticking to the population control theme, sarges methods may be a bit extreme.unfortunately,sometimes extreme measures have to be taken for human survival.
just glad i probably won't be around to witness it!
since the beginning of the earth there have been several phases ie the ice age & the great floods, there was no global warming involved.
sticking to the population control theme, sarges methods may be a bit extreme.unfortunately,sometimes extreme measures have to be taken for human survival.
just glad i probably won't be around to witness it!
I agree RNR but what i find fascinating is that no nil zero have i heard anyone directly refer to population growth in the climate change debate they go on about suvs cars factories which will all increase as the population grows thus making it worse and i am sure humans breathing would have more effect on the ozone layer than cows farting which they did bother to research none of the research either way makes sense to me and yet my personal experiences tell me it is happening
It is this (for me) huge ommission which i am really trying to understand
As for how they will cull i think people have their heads buried in the sand and say nature will deal with it (sorry humans are nature)or i dont care i am glad i wont be here (my stance and perfectly understandable) but a bit gutless as now when the human race is a long way from having to implement it is the best time to discuss it rationally IMHO
It is this (for me) huge ommission which i am really trying to understand
As for how they will cull i think people have their heads buried in the sand and say nature will deal with it (sorry humans are nature)or i dont care i am glad i wont be here (my stance and perfectly understandable) but a bit gutless as now when the human race is a long way from having to implement it is the best time to discuss it rationally IMHO
A Greatfull Guest of Thailand
I believe the % increase in population growth is going down each year.
We as humans can do very little to manually adjust what happens.
Radical religions could make a big impression with a few nasty bombs.
Lack of arable soil could make a long term impact.
Famine in countries like Africa could wipe out a lot and also affect the fertility of the population.
It is almost certain that in the not too distant future we are going to lose a lot from pandemic. Aids, Flues of various types, and probably a few things we dont know about yet.
Natural disasters ,massive earthquake in heavily populated city could easily happen. Severe flooding could cause new diseases.
Not much we can do except hope it doesnt happen to us.
We as humans can do very little to manually adjust what happens.
Radical religions could make a big impression with a few nasty bombs.
Lack of arable soil could make a long term impact.
Famine in countries like Africa could wipe out a lot and also affect the fertility of the population.
It is almost certain that in the not too distant future we are going to lose a lot from pandemic. Aids, Flues of various types, and probably a few things we dont know about yet.
Natural disasters ,massive earthquake in heavily populated city could easily happen. Severe flooding could cause new diseases.
Not much we can do except hope it doesnt happen to us.
You only live once.
None really steve it was a thread i thought would make other members think and i asked from op for others views the culling side has unfortunately come to the for but what i wanted queried and answered was WHY have i never heard anyone mention population growth as a cause for climate change
To me it just does not make sense to not mention the major reason for more co2 emissions be it the growth in cars factories power usage etc which are all driven by population growth
If climate change is due to human activities which is the claim of one side population GROWTH must have even more effect on the climate
If it is just a normal natural cycle why has noone on that side of the debate tried to debunk my 15 immigrants in a cargo container analagy
Oz i belive you are right the %age growth is declining but the overall population is still growing and since the 2nd world war has exploded
I dont agree we humans cannot do much to adjust it Iraq is doing its share already plus i will just say that the usa and russia and china all have their own Porton downs
I agree with all the rest and at the right time i will give a Sarges martian view of the natural disaster which will bring it all back into balance
To me it just does not make sense to not mention the major reason for more co2 emissions be it the growth in cars factories power usage etc which are all driven by population growth
If climate change is due to human activities which is the claim of one side population GROWTH must have even more effect on the climate
If it is just a normal natural cycle why has noone on that side of the debate tried to debunk my 15 immigrants in a cargo container analagy
Oz i belive you are right the %age growth is declining but the overall population is still growing and since the 2nd world war has exploded
I dont agree we humans cannot do much to adjust it Iraq is doing its share already plus i will just say that the usa and russia and china all have their own Porton downs
I agree with all the rest and at the right time i will give a Sarges martian view of the natural disaster which will bring it all back into balance
A Greatfull Guest of Thailand
Thanks a bunch steve only bit missing is the worlds population and i dont understand dipstick of that formulae but obviously someone does there is also no doubt a calculation/formulae for how much oxygen a single leaf/tree makes in a day and the scientists could work it all out and have an absolute answer
They cant because humans are increasing and humans are depleting the trees a doobley entendre
Here is a stupid analagy but lets say that cows and pigs and chickens farting was proved conclusively to be causing global warming how long before the culls started and everybody suddenly became born again vegitarians PDQ IMO
advocate if you were one of the fifteen in a container and you had a gun how many would suffocate and how many die of gunshot wounds and how many would walk out of it
They cant because humans are increasing and humans are depleting the trees a doobley entendre
Here is a stupid analagy but lets say that cows and pigs and chickens farting was proved conclusively to be causing global warming how long before the culls started and everybody suddenly became born again vegitarians PDQ IMO
advocate if you were one of the fifteen in a container and you had a gun how many would suffocate and how many die of gunshot wounds and how many would walk out of itA Greatfull Guest of Thailand
Sarge, before you start culling prematurely, have a read of this:
Q. Should we be concerned with human breathing as a source of CO2?
A. No. While people do exhale carbon dioxide (the rate is approximately 1 kg per day, and it depends strongly on the person's activity level), this carbon dioxide includes carbon that was originally taken out of the carbon dioxide in the air by plants through photosynthesis - whether you eat the plants directly or animals that eat the plants. Thus, there is a closed loop, with no net addition to the atmosphere. Of course, the agriculture, food processing, and marketing industries use energy (in many cases based on the combustion of fossil fuels), but their emissions of carbon dioxide are captured in our estimates as emissions from solid, liquid, or gaseous fuels.
Q. Should we be concerned with human breathing as a source of CO2?
A. No. While people do exhale carbon dioxide (the rate is approximately 1 kg per day, and it depends strongly on the person's activity level), this carbon dioxide includes carbon that was originally taken out of the carbon dioxide in the air by plants through photosynthesis - whether you eat the plants directly or animals that eat the plants. Thus, there is a closed loop, with no net addition to the atmosphere. Of course, the agriculture, food processing, and marketing industries use energy (in many cases based on the combustion of fossil fuels), but their emissions of carbon dioxide are captured in our estimates as emissions from solid, liquid, or gaseous fuels.