Water Wars

I don't disagree, the climate has been changeing since we crawled out of a rockpool.
It's a money making scam these days, no one like to mention that there are too many non-productive mouths to feed as it's not a big vote winner.
When you are mature enough, to talk about the biggest problem we face, overpopulation, then I will listen.
Nah, fcuk it, I've no interest in your witterings.
Whatever your feelings about HtI - please give it a rest.This is an interesting thread, and I don't want to see it locked because you cannot be civil.
Thank you.
 
Whatever your feelings about HtI - please give it a rest.This is an interesting thread, and I don't want to see it locked because you cannot be civil.
Thank you.
Why would you think it would be locked because my bone of contention is that:
A. 'Climate Emergency' is a fantasy pushed by those with an agenda
and
B. The biggest threat to humans on this planet is overpopulation for the resources we have..

Excitable people these climate emergency wonks.

Please discuss overpopulation in areas that cannot sustain human habitation. It's been done before, see Las Vegaso_O
 
Only if you want to be.

If you have something to really contribute crack on but you have literally just posted an intention to troll notice.
I've said I will disagree where I consider I should disagree. Are you saying this is a closed thread where you can only agree that there is a 'Climate Emergency'?
That's weird and a bit like the Green Party.
 
Curious how "too many people" becomes a problem because we can see them, but melting icecaps, disappearing glaciers, rising sea levels, and record breaking temperatures are NOT a problem, because, err... well, they clearly are a figment of people's imagination, because, err...
 
Curious how "too many people" becomes a problem because we can see them, but melting icecaps, disappearing glaciers, rising sea levels, and record breaking temperatures are NOT a problem, because, err... well, they clearly are a figment of people's imagination, because, err...
Do you think humans are responsible for the climate change of which you speak?
 
@Northern_Biff and @HectortheInspector both have valid points. As John Kettley said on the radio, climate is changing all the time but yes global warming is happening. We are still emerging from a mini ice age when the Thames was frozen over. Are humans increasing heat and greenhouse gases? Yes. Do they exceed what nature is doing? Maybe. Chopping down rain forests certainly is causing problems. Much of the landscape is man modified. That affects a lot of things.

Too many people? Can the land they inhabit support them? If not what to do? Subsidise human expansion by providing free food? I'm not talking about relief for starving people subjected to occasional famine. Zimbabwe should be roughly as productive in food per hectare as Botswana but it isn't. What is happening to South African food production since farmer s have been forced away or murdered? The water and resources are mismanaged.
Lessons are not being learned.

The UK gets reasonable rainfall but the water supply in many areas is prone to leaks. Water bowsers and stand pipes were a feature in the 70s and occasionally since. That and trying to push much higher volume through Victorian infrastructure in some places.
 
@Northern_Biff and @HectortheInspector both have valid points. As John Kettley said on the radio, climate is changing all the time but yes global warming is happening. We are still emerging from a mini ice age when the Thames was frozen over. Are humans increasing heat and greenhouse gases? Yes. Do they exceed what nature is doing? Maybe. Chopping down rain forests certainly is causing problems. Much of the landscape is man modified. That affects a lot of things.

Too many people? Can the land they inhabit support them? If not what to do? Subsidise human expansion by providing free food? I'm not talking about relief for starving people subjected to occasional famine. Zimbabwe should be roughly as productive in food per hectare as Botswana but it isn't. What is happening to South African food production since farmer s have been forced away or murdered? The water and resources are mismanaged.
Lessons are not being learned.

The UK gets reasonable rainfall but the water supply in many areas is prone to leaks. Water bowsers and stand pipes were a feature in the 70s and occasionally since.
I live in Cumbria....die, southern Jessie's!
 
Last edited:
Is your assessment hinged on the idea of over population and management of our human existence, or the planet aging?
I'll come back tomorrow, as I really must dash.
Ageing? What lunacy is this? The planet is billions of years old, and I don't think that human activity is going to account for much in geological timescales. In another billion years, the only residue of human existence will be some weird chemistry in a thin layer of rock, some artificially cut diamonds, and possibly some eroded deep space junk.

The global climate is a changeable, and surprisingly volatile thing. The fossil record suggests that it is prone to chaotic behaviour, and tipping into new states at short notice.
The next point is that the triggers for these tipping points are not well understood. Sometimes catastrophic events, like huge volcanic eruptions, (Deccan Traps) sometimes slower things like changing oceanic currents.

Next, humans. Humans have been having landscape level environmental impacts almost from the point we mastered fire. Populations were tiny, and remained so until recently.
Industrial human activity has put so much GHG in the atmosphere in a geological eyeblink, that the effects are only starting to feed through now. We could (and probably have) hit one of those climate tipping points, and just haven't noticed yet.

The human population is not so much huge, as just really badly distributed, and very badly managed. It is concentrated in coastal and river valley areas, where there is access to ocean resources and fresh water. These are also the areas most vulnerable to drought, flash flooding, and rising sea levels.

If you took the whole global land mass, and spread the population evenly, they would have trouble seeing each other.

The overpopulation issue is, as I have said, usually a fig leaf for the usual tired old racism. If you were really worried about overpopulation, then you should be clamouring for the introduction of the global Chinese one child policy and enforced sterilisation of the untermenschen. How very 1930's eugeneticist.

What you SHOULD be worried about is the the enforced migration of millions of people because their local environment is too degraded and resource poor to support them.
 
Curious how "too many people" becomes a problem because we can see them, but melting icecaps, disappearing glaciers, rising sea levels, and record breaking temperatures are NOT a problem, because, err... well, they clearly are a figment of people's imagination, because, err...
All a result of over-population and priorities not in the right place. Over-population is only an issue because of poor resource management and global waste & emissions we all produce that affects the Earth, had we thought ahead and put adequate sustainable infrastructure in place, then over-population isn't an issue. But with our current infrastructure, it is.

Not like we can do anything about population issues anyway, we can only hope that the upcoming environmental changes and policies that are being introduced aren't too little too late.
 
Why would you think it would be locked because my bone of contention is that:
A. 'Climate Emergency' is a fantasy pushed by those with an agenda
and
B. The biggest threat to humans on this planet is overpopulation for the resources we have..

Excitable people these climate emergency wonks.

Please discuss overpopulation in areas that cannot sustain human habitation. It's been done before, see Las Vegaso_O
Have your say by all means.As it happens I agree with your points on over population,I’m saying keep it to a sensible discussion.Thank you.
 
All a result of over-population and priorities not in the right place. Over-population is only an issue because of poor resource management and global waste & emissions we all produce that affects the Earth, had we thought ahead and put adequate sustainable infrastructure in place, then over-population isn't an issue. But with our current infrastructure, it is.

Not like we can do anything about population issues anyway, we can only hope that the upcoming environmental changes and policies that are being introduced aren't too little too late.

The effects on the glaciers and icecaps are part of an ongoing thaw phase as we exit the last ice age. However, we are pushing at an opening door with the emissions of Industrial GHG. We are accelerating a process that was already happening, but at a pace that the ecology (and us) can't cope with.

The linkage is not necessarily to overpopulation- it is to over -industrialisation.

The change from what was historically a wood, muscle, wind and water based energy economy throughout most of human history to a fossil fuel based one enabled us to make more stuff, but did not really kick off a huge population explosion.
That didn't occur until industry started feeding into agricultural production, which allowed a certain amount of land to feed more people.

The killer event was the Green Revolution. From 1950 to 1990 the population doubled, from 2.5 billion to 5 billion. That isn't because people shagged more. It was because their kids stopped starving to death, or dying of diseases from malnutrition.
The Green Revolution is a drive factor for climate change, and certainly a major driver of environmental problems. It enabled overpopulation.

Did it CAUSE climate change? No. The timescale is wrong. The climate was changing long before, but got worse when the first steam engine was lit.
 
Explains a lot. How close are you to Sellafield?
The effects on the glaciers and icecaps are part of an ongoing thaw phase as we exit the last ice age. However, we are pushing at an opening door with the emissions of Industrial GHG. We are accelerating a process that was already happening, but at a pace that the ecology (and us) can't cope with.

The linkage is not necessarily to overpopulation- it is to over -industrialisation.

The change from what was historically a wood, muscle, wind and water based energy economy throughout most of human history to a fossil fuel based one enabled us to make more stuff, but did not really kick off a huge population explosion.
That didn't occur until industry started feeding into agricultural production, which allowed a certain amount of land to feed more people.

The killer event was the Green Revolution. From 1950 to 1990 the population doubled, from 2.5 billion to 5 billion. That isn't because people shagged more. It was because their kids stopped starving to death, or dying of diseases from malnutrition.
The Green Revolution is a drive factor for climate change, and certainly a major driver of environmental problems. It enabled overpopulation.

Did it CAUSE climate change? No. The timescale is wrong. The climate was changing long before, but got worse when the first steam engine was lit.
The sentence I highlighted sums up your misunderstanding of the issue.
Why would we need industry if we didn't have a population that demanded industry?
Your childlike view of the world, living as a self sustaining small village is bizarre but unsurprising, given todays education standards.
 

Similar threads


Latest Threads

Top