The End Is Nigh, Again

Reason ^ | 6/26/02 | Ronald Bailey

[goodieD]

MathisWackernagel

this is just too easy.

[WindMinstrel]

lol, hadn't noticed that one -- good catch!

[Clara Lou]

Yeah, between global warming and someone's vision that the New Madrid fault is going to open up soon-- we are doomed, doomed, doomed.

[WindMinstrel]

Clara Lou, are you suggesting that the sky really *isn't* falling? My stars!

[Gumlegs]

They calculate that "humanity’s load corresponded to 70% of the biosphere’s capacity in 1961," and "this percentage grew to 120% in 1999." They explain that "20% overshoot means that it would require 1.2 earths, or one earth 1.2 years, to regenerate what humanity used in 1999."

Hmmm. That means that we were 20% in the hole in 1999 alone! Because things never get any better, that means we must also have been at least 20% in the hole in 2000, 2001 and 2002. So, by the end of this year, we'll be 80% in the hole! Shouldn't we have noticed by now that we're almost completely out of resources, we're down to our last 20% of all the oxygen available, and nothing is decomposing anymore because we now need 180% of the available enzymes to do the job?

[Prodigal Son]

Read a surprisingly rational post at Dem Underground concerning this article. One of their posters totally dismantles this argument about we're using up the Earth's capacity. Needless to say, not too many people over there had any real argument against facts.

It's worth a read to get some more ammo against the Greenies (it's not long). Human use exhausts Earth

[Clara Lou]

Wow! That was a nice post at DU-- Fred has way too many brains for that site. He made some excellent points-- to which a dodo bird or two responded.

[grundle]

The "Fred_Fenster" handle at DU was me.

I wrote a much longer set of replies to the same topic in this other DU thread:

http://www.democraticundergrou nd.com/duforum/DCForumID5/2433 3.html

They deleted my handle for my comments in that thread, even though I followed all of the rules in their guildlines.

I followed all of their rules, and I got deleted.

Why did I get deleted?

Because they are afraid of people hearing the truth.

If you dare to mention that the environmental doomsayers' predictions of the 1960s and 1970s were wrong, they will delete your handle. They do not want people to know the truth.

The people who run DU are not interested in a serous discussion of the enviornment. They do not want people to know the truth. That's why they deleted my handle.

I'm a libertarian. I thought I would be accepted at DU. I guess I was wrong.

Thanks for the compliments, Prodigal Son and WindMinstrel.

[EaglesUpForever]

I followed all of their rules, and I got deleted.

That is typical of DU, it is run by a bunch of adolescents. Really, I think it's best to simply ignore the site, not worth making an intelligent post which they'll invariably censor...

[Prodigal Son]

Thanks for the compliments, Prodigal Son and WindMinstrel.

Hey- no sweat. I knew that Fred couldn't have been a true lefty. But it was refreshing still to have read some sane comments over there. They used to have a fellow that went by the handle of Mike Galos that always posted in their Foreign Affairs/National Security (where they keep their Israel/Palestine debate hidden) who was really sane and just kept beating people down with facts (against the Palestinians) but I note he hasn't been around there in a long time and I figure he got banned.

When I first read your post over there, I thought you must have been using the Skeptical Environmentalist for a source of your info but then you used a different one and I thought that was very clever because citing Bjorn Lomborg would have gotten you busted right away. Was that intentional on your part? Your source (from that post), BTW, I believe Lomborg actually set out to prove that particular person wrong and actually realized the data bore out his claims- if I'm not mistaken- and that's why he wrote Skeptical Environmentalist.

[grundle]

I deliberately avoided mentioning Lomborg at first, but I did mention him later on. And yes, most of the people there hate him. But all they do is wage personal attacks on him, and post links to anti-lomborg websites, and copy things from those websites. No one there has ever actually criticized Lomborg in their own words, because they haven't actually read his book.

My link to The Economist with the statistics on increasing food produciton is actually from an article written by Lomborg.

Lomborg did indeed originally set out to prove that Julian Simon was wrong. But when Lomborg examined the facts, he realized that Simon was right. Julian Simon's most famous book is called "The Ultimate Resource 2." He also has a book called "It's Getting Better All The Time."

There are only two regular long term posters at DU who have actually read Lomborg's book, and both of them agree with Lomborg. But I won't mention their handles, because I don't want to put them at risk.

I'm just blown away that they would delete my handle for telling the truth. I was being polite and civil. I wasn't swearing. I followed all of their posting guidelines.

Julian Simon made two predictions for the 21st century before he died:

#1 Things would keep getting better.

#2 People would continue to complain that things were getting worse.

[Prodigal Son]

Julian Simon made two predictions for the 21st century before he died:
#1 Things would keep getting better.

#2 People would continue to complain that things were getting worse.

Sad but true. But only half sad. On the bright side, things will get better despite the complaining.

Thanks for the info on Simon. I bought the Skeptical Environmentalist and read it a little every night before going to bed. Oddly, it was sort of like browsing Free Republic without the ability to post- I kept wanting to, you know? I'd see a graphic or a stat that was really compelling and I'd want to post "let's see what the enviro nuts have to say about this"- LOL!. I must get copies of the two books you cited from Simon.

[grundle]

A couple other books on the same subject that you might enjoy:

"Earth Report 2000" by Ronald Bailey

"All The Trouble In The World" by P.J. O'Rourke

And if you have children, you might like "Facts Not Fear: How To Teach Your Children About The Environment." I haven't read this book, but a lot of homeschoolers use it.

[dixiechick2000]

Bump and ping!

[madfly]

bump and pinging back! Interesting insight into DU.

[Fish out of Water]

Thanks for the ping I like Reason magizine
*Index Bump

[blackie]

Stop the attacks by the wacko, extreme left-wing, enviro-nazis terrorist's on our Freedoms !!

Freedom Is Worth Fighting For !!

Molon Labe !!

[Grampa Dave]

If these enviral whackos believe this scenario, then they should have a massive group suicide like on the 4th of July.

If every enviral in the US and in the world commited suicide to save the planet from global warming, starvation, increased flatus in the ozone, global cooling and other horrors of overpopulation, that would be a great noble sacrifice on their part.

I would glady remember them for 1 second every 4th of July for making the US and the World a better place by offing themselves.

Mathis Wackernagel should set the example and be the first to off himself for the trees, the frogs, the suckerfish, the snail darter, the spotted owl, the Mexican Spotted Owl, the red legged frog, the Scuby Doo beatles that live in Scuby Doo Dung and the Lynx who aren't alive but leave hair in forests they don't live in.

Go ahead Mathis Wackernagel make this miserable world a better place. Quit wasting air!

[hattend]

bttt