CO2 levels in 2100 will hit levels last seen when the Earth was 29°F h

[Shady]

Yes don't actually argue against his points just throw out the alarmist label some more, I'm sure it will stick eventually.

His points are non-existent. Unless you think saying "from what I've seen" is somehow a reasonable argument.

[Guest TrueMetis]

His points are non-existent. Unless you think saying "from what I've seen" is somehow a reasonable argument.

So the obvious points like educated people use many times the resources of third world people are non-existent? Typical shady and his quote mining.

[WIP]

That's because you're an alarmist. And unless you're advocating mass murder. There's nothing you can do about it.

The only humane way to deal with these problems is start dealing now with the combined problems of overuse of natural resources and increasing greenhouse gas levels, is to get past the fossil fuel age, and to bring back the U.N.-sponsored birth control information programs that the religious reactionaries have put a halt to in many places.

It doesn't take a deliberate policy of mass murder to reduce the world's population, since ignorance and neglect will do that job in the coming decades. And, after reading Gwynn Dyer's book about the CIA and other agencies' contingency plans for dealing with the political, economic and security implications of climate change; it gives the appearance that the people who control the levers of power are not climate skeptics, nor overpopulation skeptics, but instead have made a cold-blooded calculus that there will be a massive die-off of the world' population in the coming decades; and their only concern is how to protect their own interests under this nightmare scenario.

[WIP]

That's a better source then my own, thank you.

ETA according to it we will reach 7 billion on November 29, 2012 at 8:26:56

There are no exact numbers dealing with these population projections. There are too many variables to guess whether will reach 7 billion next year, or this year as according to Population Reference Bureau.

[WIP]

His points are non-existent. Unless you think saying "from what I've seen" is somehow a reasonable argument.

Well, from what I've seen, the people who are the most sure of themselves, and certain about their information, are the ones who are least informed and have the worst suggestions.

[Shady]

So the obvious points like educated people use many times the resources of third world people are non-existent?

I didn't say that. But what does that have to do with over-population? Nothing. It has to do with third world countries that usually lack the political stability that fosters industrialization, high education, free markets and good economies. Those third world countires you speak of all have the capacity to produce their own power plants, generate their own electricity, grow their own food, etc, etc, etc.

[Guest TrueMetis]

I didn't say that. But what does that have to do with over-population? Nothing. It has to do with third world countries that usually lack the political stability that fosters industrialization, high education, free markets and good economies. Those third world countires you speak of all have the capacity to produce their own power plants, generate their own electricity, grow their own food, etc, etc, etc.

And they often do, like India which has been a net exporter of wheat which is why it's on the extreme end of the amount of crops it can produce. Problem is there isn't enough water to support that kind of sustained agriculture.

There are no exact numbers dealing with these population projections. There are too many variables to guess whether will reach 7 billion next year, or this year as according to Population Reference Bureau.

I know I just thought it was cool, I am now taking bets on how close it will be if you are interested.

[Shady]

And they often do, like India which has been a net exporter of wheat which is why it's on the extreme end of the amount of crops it can produce. Problem is there isn't enough water to support that kind of sustained agriculture.

That where irrigation comes in.

INDIA: Wonder Irrigation Pump Goes A Long Way

It’s all thanks to a simple and cheap micro-irrigation tool. Indeed, since 1994, the treadle pump has been changing the lives of millions of farmers in this country, where some 60 percent of the population are estimated to be directly involved in farming.

Link

[Guest TrueMetis]

That where irrigation comes in.

And what happens when the aquifer runs out? Like it's doing pretty much everywhere there is intensive farming. Aquifer's and desalination plants only go so far.

See here I thought you were advocating for new sustainable techniques not techniques we realized would fail 20 years ago.

[Shady]

And what happens when the aquifer runs out? Like it's doing pretty much everywhere there is intensive farming. Aquifer's and desalination plants only go so far.

I dunno, what happens when the sun burns out?

See here I thought you were advocating for new sustainable techniques not techniques we realized would fail 20 years ago.

That was just one example. An example to debunk your nonsense about India already producing as much food as is possible. Which again, was a complete lie. There's always new and better food technology constantly being created and perfected.

[Guest TrueMetis]

I dunno, what happens when the sun burns out?

Because these two issues are remotely the same. My link

Today, half the world's people live in countries where water tables are falling as overpumping depletes aquifers. Once an aquifer is depleted, pumping is necessarily reduced to the rate of recharge unless it is a fossil (nonreplenishable) aquifer, in which case pumping ends altogether.

Just where the hell have you been? People have been worried about aquifer depletion for decades.

And because all it takes to find out about these problems is to type the words aquifer depletion into Google here's some more reading for you.

Serious though emerging water shortages are in China, they are even more serious in India simply because the margin between actual food consumption and survival is so precarious. In a survey of India’s water situation, Fred Pearce reported in the New Scientist that the 21 million wells drilled in this global epicenter of well-drilling are lowering water tables in most of the country. In North Gujarat, the water table is falling by 6 meters (20 feet) per year.

In Tamil Nadu, a state with more than 62 million people in southern India, wells are going dry almost everywhere. According to Kuppannan Palanisami of Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, falling water tables have dried up 95 percent of the wells owned by small farmers, reducing the irrigated area in the state by half over the last decade.

As water tables fall, well drillers are using modified oil-drilling technology to reach water, going as deep as 1,000 meters in some locations. In communities where underground water sources have dried up entirely, all agriculture is rain-fed and drinking water is trucked in. Tushaar Shah, who heads the International Water Management Institute’s groundwater station in Gujarat, says of India’s water situation: “When the balloon bursts, untold anarchy will be the lot of rural India.”

At this point, the harvests of wheat and rice, India’s principal food grains, are still increasing. But within the next few years, the loss of irrigation water could override technological progress and start shrinking the harvest in some areas, as it is already doing in China.

My link

So tell me how is technology going to overcome communities having no water at all? Some aquifer's are depleted now and more will be within the coming decades.

That was just one example. An example to debunk your nonsense about India already producing as much food as is possible. Which again, was a complete lie. There's always new and better food technology constantly being created and perfected.

You debunked nothing. New food technology takes decades to develop so that by the time it is ready to be used the circumstances have changed so much most of it is useless. Shitty little hand pumps that don't help the big picture notwithstanding.

Edited January 17, 2011 by TrueMetis

[Shady]

See, this is what happens when one enters into a discussion with alarmists. It's like a shell game. When they're cornered on a particular topic, it suddenly changes into something else, and then something else, and then something else.

The facts are this:

The earth isn't over populated. It's entire population could fit in the state of Texas.

Third world countries don't use much resources because they don't have the means to, not because they don't have any, or there's not enough.

And India is NOT reached it's food producing limit. Despite what some posters will assert with no evidence, or what alarmists will say might happen several years from now. Kind of like the topic of this thread. If nothing changes, and society and technology stays stagnant, then 100 years from now, it might be a lot warmer.

When you boil it all down (pun intended), it all comes down to one constant theme. FEAR, FEAR, FEAR!!!

[Guest TrueMetis]

Once again instead of countering points you just decide to stick me with the alarmist level. For doing no more than realizing what pretty much everyone else on the planet realizes. Shady just because you are a deluded fool doesn't mean the rest of the world is. Facing harsh reality isn't alarmist it's well reality.

[Shady]

Once again instead of countering points

Yes, a countering point to your assertion that India has reached its peak food producing capacity. Which is patently false. Or a countering point to WIP's observation that from "what he's seen lately." Yeah, I'll get right on that.

[Guest TrueMetis]

Yes, a countering point to your assertion that India has reached its peak food producing capacity. Which is patently false. Or a countering point to WIP's observation that from "what he's seen lately." Yeah, I'll get right on that.

If it's patently false you should have no problem finding a source to counter it. According to my link aquifer's in India are already beginning to run out, hard to farm with no water.

[Shady]

If it's patently false you should have no problem finding a source to counter it.

But you didn't provide any source to support it.

According to my link aquifer's in India are already beginning to run out, hard to farm with no water.

Not really. India's a large country. There are several ways to make water available to areas with little or no access. Take a look at what Israel's done to an area that was formally complete desert.

[Guest TrueMetis]

But you didn't provide any source to support it.

I posted a link showing that it was depleting it aquifer's you want to explain how exactly India is to keep growing crops once it runs out of water?

Not really. India's a large country. There are several ways to make water available to areas with little or no access. Take a look at what Israel's done to an area that was formally complete desert.

Great an example of a country that had to ban irrigating its wheat crop.

Israel, even though a pioneer in raising irrigation water productivity, is depleting both of its principal aquifers—-the coastal aquifer and the mountain aquifer that it shares with Palestinians. Israel’s population, whose growth is fueled by both natural increase and immigration, is outgrowing its water supply. Conflicts between Israelis and Palestinians over the allocation of water in the latter area are ongoing. Because of severe water shortages, Israel has banned the irrigation of wheat.

My link

[dre]

I posted a link showing that it was depleting it aquifer's you want to explain how exactly India is to keep growing crops once it runs out of water?

Great an example of a country that had to ban irrigating its wheat crop.

My link

Just a quick side note... people wont starve to death because of water scarcity, theyll kill each other.

The UNEP predicts that by 2050 3 billion people will face "extreme" water shortages. The shortage is likely to cause regional conflicts like it has with Israel and its neighbors, in areas that depend on river basins for water (the danube for example). There will be a series of wars over water in the next few decades.

Desalination can help but the problem of course is that its very energy intensive, and our failure to take energy development seriously over the last few decades is going result in the energy supply being even more volatile than it is now.

Back to the farming problem..

Theres a picture here that shows what a farm might look like in the future.

http://sidewalksprouts.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/chris_jacobs_light.jpg

Theoretically we could farm with an "almost" closed water cycle, besides the water that would escape the cycle inside fresh fruit and vegatables. If we did this we could drastically reduce hydraulic depletion from agriculture, and reduce soil errosion which is just as big a problem as water. I dont claim this technology at present is a solution to the problem youre talking about, but its interesting. Its extremely energy intensive though so it couldnt be a widespread solution until the next energy age.

Heres a good article that talks about both soil and water.

http://www.seafriends.org.nz/enviro/soil/sustain.htm

As far as your central point, there could be some argument over your timeframes, and also over the degree of potential we have to mitigate the problem with technology, but you are essentially correct. What we are doing now is completely and totally UNSUSTAINABLE even for the population we currently have.

[Guest TrueMetis]

Just a quick side note... people wont starve to death because of water scarcity, theyll kill each other.

I did say a war over water was likely.

As for solutions there is a reason farmers love GM foods, but with climate change it will be very difficult to make ones that work as it takes so long not only to make an new GM strain but the testing takes a while to prove it is safe. We are getting to the point where many once thought to be separate issues are converging, and it's not looking good.

[Pliny]

Yes, lemmings never seem to be able to see when they are approaching the edge of a cliff either.

Trying to turn people into lemmings now? After all, it's you following the "consensus".

The opening post sounds really alarming. Maybe it is just alarmism?

[WIP]

Trying to turn people into lemmings now? After all, it's you following the "consensus".

The opening post sounds really alarming. Maybe it is just alarmism?

This is a issue that has real cause to be alarmist. That's why we have smoke detectors in our homes; to warn us of REAL danger, and I mean REAL...not the fake, phony outrage that your rightwing sources keep ginning up to scapegoat: liberals, environmentalists, secular humanists, gays, all racial minorities with darker than white skin, Muslims....and likely more that I can't think of right now. A scapegoat is targeted by neofascists like Glenn Beck to strike fear into his feeble-minded authoritarian audience, and they soak it up....some even going so far as to be in a hurry to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights!

Besides all that we have covered about rising carbon levels, global warming, topsoil erosion, declining freshwater sources, overpopulation etc., the right still chooses to close their eyes and plug their ears as disaster approaches. I should say a disaster we are already in the middle of, whether we know it or not, since biologists and zoologists consider the rate of species extinction today to be equivalent to the five major mass extinctions in Earth's past:

The sixth extinction

Somewhere on Earth, every 20 minutes, one animal species dies out. At this rate, we will lose 50% of all species by the end of the century. http://articles.latimes.com/2009/nov/30/opinion/la-oe-corwin30-2009nov30

Now, in this case the threat is real, and can be seen by everyone who doesn't have their eyes closed....such as all of the rightwingers who fear that real action to reduce carbon footprints and bring fossil fuel-usage to an end, will require binding international agreements, and threaten the present economic system of gangster capitalism....so be it

[WIP]

See, this is what happens when one enters into a discussion with alarmists. It's like a shell game. When they're cornered on a particular topic, it suddenly changes into something else, and then something else, and then something else.

The facts are this:

The earth isn't over populated. It's entire population could fit in the state of Texas.

Do they at least get to lie down, or do they have to remain at attention? Seriously, it's not a matter of how many people you can fit into a given space; it's a question of how many people can live without depleting all of the resources....and needless to say, 7 billion people would not survive for very long in Texas, if they had no access to outside resources.

Third world countries don't use much resources because they don't have the means to, not because they don't have any, or there's not enough.

At some point, if the human race is going to last more than 50 or a hundred years, this mentality that nature is here for our exploitation will have to end! The cold hard facts that the planet's ecosystems are giving us a rude awakening to right now, is that every animal, including the human race, lives within nature, not outside of it and consuming it! This should be a simple fact, but it is lost on the masses who live in cities, or even on farms where they think they are in control of nature. Some anthropologists argue that we've been heading down this dangerous road of feeling separate from, and superior to nature ever since the agricultural revolution got started. One thing I do know is that the few hunter/gatherer tribes that may or may not still exist today have no misconceptions about how much they are in control of their environment.

And India is NOT reached it's food producing limit. Despite what some posters will assert with no evidence, or what alarmists will say might happen several years from now. Kind of like the topic of this thread. If nothing changes, and society and technology stays stagnant, then 100 years from now, it might be a lot warmer.

Do we really need to go through this again? There has been enough information posted here over the last couple of pages to show that India's Green Revolution is going to hit the wall soon, because of topsoil erosion from over-farming, and declining groundwater levels. The scientists who created the Green Revolution hybrids back in the 60's, recognized that India was already overpopulated at that time. They considered providing a boost to farm yields as a means to allow India to gradually get their population under control -- not to be a method for ballooning the population to over a billion.

When you boil it all down (pun intended), it all comes down to one constant theme. FEAR, FEAR, FEAR!!!

As mentioned elsewhere, fear would be a good motivator if there is a real cause for fear, instead of the constant barrage of phony outrage that your rightwing heroes keep subjecting their audiences to.

[GostHacked]

and food shortages could be coming our way as well, from an article in yesterdays G&M...it's estimated that 90+% of the native bumble bee population is gone, possibly destroyed by a combination of mites, virus, global warming and loss of habitat...cold weather that normally keeps mites in check from spreading a virus...a lot of our food requires bees for pollination...

No it's 90% of 4 species of bees in North America. Which is still alarming on it's own. I'll try to find a source, but I think I saw that on CNN.com.

[bloodyminded]

Do they at least get to lie down, or do they have to remain at attention? Seriously, it's not a matter of how many people you can fit into a given space; it's a question of how many people can live without depleting all of the resources....and needless to say, 7 billion people would not survive for very long in Texas, if they had no access to outside resources.

It's absurd that you have to spell this out, or answer the remark at all. Not your fault, however.

As mentioned elsewhere, fear would be a good motivator if there is a real cause for fear, instead of the constant barrage of phony outrage that your rightwing heroes keep subjecting their audiences to.

So now we've got right-wingers lecturing us about the political misuse of fear?

Not that I don't consider Muslim community centres, gentle old lefty professors, single mothers, and gays getting married to be terrible threats, mind you! Of course I do!

[WIP]

Just a quick side note... people wont starve to death because of water scarcity, theyll kill each other.

The UNEP predicts that by 2050 3 billion people will face "extreme" water shortages. The shortage is likely to cause regional conflicts like it has with Israel and its neighbors, in areas that depend on river basins for water (the danube for example). There will be a series of wars over water in the next few decades.

Desalination can help but the problem of course is that its very energy intensive, and our failure to take energy development seriously over the last few decades is going result in the energy supply being even more volatile than it is now.

Reminds me of back in the 70's, before a good understanding was available of the environment -- one of the U.S. gov. depts. was actually funding a pilot project to test the feasibility of breaking up pack ice in the Antarctic, and towing them to the Persian Gulf to sell to all of the nouveau riche emirates; I can imagine what a mess we would have if they actually followed through with it.

Back to the farming problem..

Theres a picture here that shows what a farm might look like in the future.

http://sidewalksprouts.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/chris_jacobs_light.jpg

Theoretically we could farm with an "almost" closed water cycle, besides the water that would escape the cycle inside fresh fruit and vegatables. If we did this we could drastically reduce hydraulic depletion from agriculture, and reduce soil errosion which is just as big a problem as water. I dont claim this technology at present is a solution to the problem youre talking about, but its interesting. Its extremely energy intensive though so it couldnt be a widespread solution until the next energy age.

Heres a good article that talks about both soil and water.

http://www.seafriends.org.nz/enviro/soil/sustain.htm

They don't mention anything about costs! This highrise, high tech farm looks like it would be expensive to build and to operate. I'm a little dubious about an "almost" closed system, after reading about the failures of the Biosphere 2 experiments back in the 80's. Back then, even the scientists didn't realize how complex ecological systems were; the books I had back in the 70's about long distance space ships and space colonies, had closed farming systems that were supposed to provide the necessities -- Biosphere 2 threw a big monkeywrench into these plans, because so many problems with rising carbon dioxide levels, mold, and dry rot, could not be solved.

But, if an almost closed agricultural system is possible, and is able to comfortably meet the needs of 7 billion people, then what? Will it prevent our looming disaster, or just provide a stopgap solution like the Green Revolution, and leave us with an even larger population problem to deal with?