Challenge and Response. Can you refute this statement?

Question

Challenge:
"The problem is the environmentalist side where their definition of progress is regression of man's progress to before the industrial revolution."

Response:
If we don't limit growth, the regression will be forced on us.

The world is finite. If we allow unlimited population growth and development eventually resources will be depleted and the ability of the biosphere to regenerate itself will be diminished to the point where it will no longer function.

However you believe this came into being, it is the current unalterable state of affairs on this planet. You cannot change the laws of physics or violate the laws of thermodynamics. No matter how much you or I wish it were not so, how much you believe we can circumvent the limits, how much you believe some magic will save us before its too late, every bit of objective science only reinforces the fact that we are bound to and by the environment we live in.

Why not choose an alternative before its too late?

"The world is not finite"
The earth is a bounded sphere. Irrationality however, knows no bounds.

“The world population can fit into Texas” This is just silly and hardly worth it but here goes anyway. Even if you could solve all the logistical problems like water supply and sewage removal, it would still take the resources of the rest of the world to support them.

“Technology will save us”
The idea that an improved technology can circumvent fundamental limits is a fallacy. We are many generations away (or perhaps an infinite distance away) from such a complete understanding of the natural world that we could substitute technology for natural systems. Every intervention attempted so far has led to an even more intractable problem. Antibiotics lead to resistance bugs. More fertilizer leads to ocean dead zones. More energy use leads to climate change and other unforeseeable problems.

A current, peer reviewed theory states that 3 of the 5 mass extinctions were not caused by asteroids, they were caused by CO2. When the level reaches 900 ppm the chemistry of the oceans changes leading to a flip in the chemocline. Anerobic bacteria are currently found only in the deep ocean. When the chemocline flips the entire ocean becomes hospitable to them. They then commence to belch out planetary scale masses of H2SO4 suffocating the entire planet. This is not science fiction. This theory resolved an unexplained inconsistency in the asteroid theory.

You can no more prove that everything will be fine than I can prove it won’t. However, with our record to date: . Chemical pollution, biological pollution, alien species invasion, climate change, habitat destruction, water resource destruction and not to mention direct human harvesting of species, which is using an estimated 40% of incident solar energy and 40% of land surface. I’m betting that a magic solution won’t be found in time. How many concurrent global assaults can the ecosystem bear?

Wishful thinking is the hallmark of immaturity.

I fix my own car and lots of other things.

I never claimed we should go backwards. That is your projection of your own fears. I'm suggesting we find another way through rather than over the cliff. I choose not to be a lemming.

oops, that should be H2S for hydrogen sulfide, not sulfuric acid.

Answer 1

I'll refute the challenge statement.

The environmentalist side does not define progression as a regression to a pre-Industrial Revolution state.

Increasing energy efficiency is progress, not regress. Inventing new green technologies is progress. Increasing our use of renewable energy is progress. We didn't have any of these things prior to the Industrial Revolution. This is far more progress than remaining stagnant burning fossil fuels with the same old outdated technology.

Answer 2

Ah.. you fall into the trap of large numbers. You think the population of man is very great, to the breaking point, but it is not. The entire population of the world can fit on a 1/4 acre lot, in a home shared by just 4 people and take up only seven western US states. That would leave the rest of the world for farming are other natural resource conservation.

The world is not finite. With each new technological breakthrough we open the doors for even new technology. We are feeding more people with less land and less water. We warm more homes with less energy, and we provide better drinking to more homes than ever before. And this technology will only get better over the years.

Just think back a hundred years and say that we aren't better off now.

Regretfully people will always be afraid of the future. Life always appears better for them during their childhood. Just don't drag me down with you. This is the age of man's achievements and I want to be a part of this age.

Added: Yes, people will always be scared of today's world, scared of future technology. Some will always be scared of very large numbers, and others will never be able to visualize the future. Some are always pessimist and others will always be optimist. Some will always believe it's better for man to turn back time and live in caves, others will always find solutions for mans progression.

It's clear which side you choose.

Answer 3

Have you not noticed all the sky is falling egg heads that say eggs are very bad for you and then raise a scare and everyone freaks out? Oh what about El ninjo for the weather problems and then its global warming! Did you know that everything causes cancer? They have to do that so they won't lose their grants and federal funding to study why the pug worm is loosing its sexual desire in the south pole! Yes I agree that we should be finding better ways to heat our homes and get from point to point also to feed the planet, but lets not be taken by "could be's" or "maybes"! Think damn it! Oh and by the way the pug worm was made up, but it got you thinking didn't it? Way too many drugs in the 60s and 70s and lies were swallowed and smoked. How about a line of sh*t to go along with that? Look at me look at me! See how smart I am! Yea right! Most of these people can't even figure out what is wrong with their car's when they break down and they want me to believe them when they bark? Forget it! Let's put it this way, not all is wrong and not all is bad, but beware of the lime lighter's who want glory and fame at the price of whats right and true! During the black plague, they believed that bad smells were the cause of the problem and thus comes the rime "a pocket full of posies we all fall down"!

Answer 4

Anti atheism is doing lots injury to Christianity that that's in certainty anti Christianity – David Manley It takes in certainty in simple terms one to make a quarrel. that's ineffective for the sheep to bypass resolutions in favour of vegetarianism, at the same time as the wolf keeps to be of a diverse opinion. - William Ralph Inge. Why so unaware of what reasons the backlash against christianity? all the different religions and atheists stay in peace and are in simple terms attacked via undesirable christians which reasons all solid christians to melancholy on the wear they do! Up till approximately forty years lower back Christianity replaced into thriving and there replaced into no conflict with others yet in in simple terms those few short years the fashionable christians have become illiberal, hate crammed, bigoted and persecuting ensuing in a becoming backlash against christianity and inflicting christianity to unfastened over ten p.c. in under a decade with the loss accelerating! The self destruction of Christianity is underway and the only factor that could end that's to desert the destructive human emotions, seek for to rediscover the belief of a loving god and act like it! Posts like yours thatcontinual human beings further faraway from God are driving you in the direction of hell. So who're you working for the devil or the antichrist because of the fact it particular ain't the loving god!

Answer 5

Easily.

Environmentalists advocate advanced technology--fuel efficient cars, the use of advanced conservation technologies--everything from compact flourescent bulbs to homes with good insulation and insulating windows. We advocate modern systems for producing and using energy--electric ccars, solar and wind energy, etc.

The anti-environmentalsists keep telling us that we have to continue to depend on outdated and obsolete methods--oil, coal, and natural gas--all of wich were developed clear back in the 1800s and should have been replaced with MODERN technology decades ago.

So much for the BS about environmentalists being "regressive. You should try listening to what we actually say, instead of what drug addicts like Rush Limbaugh claim we say.

Answer 6

I plan to watch the special on TV tonight about global warming. John Stossel is going to do a special report on global warming where he will expose the real truth about it.

Answer 7

I think the Mad Max scenario would more appropriately serve Darwin's Theory