Just suppose the global warming zealots are correct, will you do you part to stop it by killing yourself?

Question

If the zeolots are correct and global warming is caused by mankind, the underlying cause is overpopulation.
If the World's population was much smaller we could burn all the fossil fuels we needed without increasing CO2 levels.
Therefore the only answer would be a dramatic reduction in the world population, would the zealots therefore volunteer to solve this alleged problem by killing themselves.

linlyons.
Typical zealot reply let someone else pay for your fantasies.

What on Earth gave you the right to judge that I am less ecologically friendly than yourselves?

Answer 1

It seems to me that you have a very high opinion of yourself.

You pose an ill-conceived and vitriolic question, the eloquence of which quite clearly domonstrates your contempt of people whose opinions differ to yours then you have the audacity to complain when people are judgemental towards you.

Population is not the underlying cause. Africa has 3 times the population of the US and produces a fraction of the pollution that the US does. Man's inability and refusal to use and seek alternative energy sources is the root cause of the human element of global warming.

Answer 2

Barrie - an interesting point. Population growth is a huge issue but not one that need impact on global warming. The issue regarding global warming is carbon emissions. If every one used 'green' energy global warming would not be a threat. We are going to have to rethink our energy usage policy (that means all of us) - things that we once took for granted, will no longer be so free and easy to use - and unlimited burning of fossil fuels and other carbon rich fuel sources is one of these. If we don't start to change the way we go about our lives then there are severe consequences that will manifest themselves at some point in the not too distant future - and the longer we leave it to act the greater these consequences become and the harder the landing we will have to deal with.

Unbridled population growth is like global warming in that it presents another set of huge potential consequences if we don't take action. However, unlike with global warming where we are faced with the choice of continuing to burn of fossil fuels or changing to more benign energy sources, with population growth we face the choice of unrestricted reproductive choice or having that choice taken away (like they have done in China). I would argue that the right to reproduce is far more prized than powering the lights in your home from an oil fired power station as opposed to a wind farm or a nuclear power station etc. So reining in population growth I think is a whole lot harder than sorting out global warming, but again if we carry on as we are then eventually we will reach a population plateau, caused by a lack of resources - a starvation equilibrium. And although none of the population projections show this, I suspect we will then see a population crash. Just imagine a world with diminishing resources, huge population migration (not 10 of thousands but 100's of millions or maybe more), mass starvation a constant, ever present evil, weather patterns going bonkers adversely affecting crop yields; the political and economic instability that must surely result. These are the consequences that in order to avoid we must act now. Some we will mitigate (global warming - hopefully), others we will not, but the consequences will come either way - it's up to us to minimise them as best we can by starting to make the necessary changes now.

I've seen you post on this site many times and I know that you are very sceptical regards these issues. With the voice of reason I ask you to read the links attached and to reconsider your current stance. These links are not filled with bogus science, in fact it's the best that we have and therefore worthy enough to take note of when engaging in the debate. If the 'zealots' are wrong then following their advice does no harm (in fact it creates the next big boom area economically - a green boom), but if the 'naysayers' are wrong then we will have doomed future generations to a very impoverished future. Surely caution on an issue such as this is the best policy irrespective of who eventually turns out to be right.

Answer 3

Hey! I think we are all saved. This just appeared in Yahoo's news headlines. Yippee! Bring on the UFOs. I've just written to President Bush urging him to come clean on our knowledge of these alien craft.

OTTAWA (AFP) - A former Canadian defense minister is demanding governments worldwide disclose and use secret alien technologies obtained in alleged UFO crashes to stem climate change, a local paper said Wednesday.

"I would like to see what (alien) technology there might be that could eliminate the burning of fossil fuels within a generation ... that could be a way to save our planet," Paul Hellyer, 83, told the Ottawa Citizen.

Alien spacecrafts would have traveled vast distances to reach Earth, and so must be equipped with advanced propulsion systems or used exceptional fuels, he told the newspaper.

Such alien technologies could offer humanity alternatives to fossil fuels, he said, pointing to the enigmatic 1947 incident in Roswell, New Mexico -- which has become a shrine for UFO believers -- as an example of alien contact.

"We need to persuade governments to come clean on what they know. Some of us suspect they know quite a lot, and it might be enough to save our planet if applied quickly enough," he said.

Hellyer became defense minister in former prime minister Lester Pearson's cabinet in 1963, and oversaw the controversial integration and unification of Canada's army, air force and navy into the Canadian Forces.

He shocked Canadians in September 2005 by announcing he once saw a UFO.

Answer 4

Wow I hate people like you. Can't you see what's happening to the earth, it is DEFINELTY global warming you deusch. There's ice caps melting in Alaska, our temperatures are rising more and more every year, and were using up valuable resources for the greedy sake of making money and for are horribly government. We need to recycle, and yes we are over populated and people need to stop popping out so many kids. By 2020, there's suppose to be 9 billion people. We can't take care of all those people? We could come up with another solution to running our cars besides gases, two women came up with solutions for the car in the 1930's, and secretly the government had them both killed. Your kind is destroying the earth, not realizing the problems that are ahead of us, and weren't raised right to help this earth caus' this is our home.

Answer 5

Oh what a great solution. I think Al Gore should set the example...