A solution worse than the symptom?

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Snestorm

Global Warming has to stand in line behind the more pressing issues like Food, Clean Water, Clean Air, Energy Resourses.

All the latter are influenced by the first, or better by a intermittent variable: global warming changes the envrionemnt, and by that influences food, clean water, clean air, and probably also some energy source (fire wood for example). Though I do not say that global wamring is the only variable effecting thise things. As always, I say that the key issues are 1. overpopulation, and 2. too excessive living standards of people in the West. This is what stood at the beginning of the man-made share of global warming.

Originally Posted by Skybird

1. overpopulation,

This on is the key. When this problem is solved, voluntarily or involuntarily, everything else will begin the long and slow process of self-repair.

The earth was here long before man, man's technology and science, and it will be here long after man's extinction.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Snestorm

This on is the key. When this problem is solved, voluntarily or involuntarily, everything else will begin the long and slow process of self-repair.

The earth was here long before man, man's technology and science, and it will be here long after man's extinction.

The second point - too excessive consummation of ressources, too excessive living standards in the West - also is key. Even if you delete all mankind outside Europe and North America, we still would be in a mess, in the long-term. We consume too much, and by that effect the environment more seriously than it could compensate for within timeframes that are of interest for human fate. The Western imgination of "living style" is totally unsuited to serve as a global model.

Originally Posted by Skybird

The second point - too excessive consummation of ressources, too excessive living standards in the West - also is key. Even if you delete all mankind outside Europe and North America, we still would be in a mess, in the long-term. We consume too much, and by that effect the environment more seriously than it could compensate for within timeframes that are of interest for human fate. The Western imgination of "living style" is totally unsuited to serve as a global model.

A glance at the amount of trash generated by one household can easily be used to illustrate your point.

It costs a-lot of money to make a-lot of trash. I've often found myself pondering the question: "How can anybody possibly afford to make so much trash?". For me it can be a truely mind boggling question.

[August]

Originally Posted by Skybird

We consume too much, and by that effect the environment more seriously than it could compensate for within timeframes that are of interest for human fate. The Western imgination of "living style" is totally unsuited to serve as a global model.

Says the guy with the extensive ignore list who wastes vital world resources on computer gaming and forums...

[Torvald Von Mansee]

Originally Posted by August

Says the guy with the extensive ignore list who wastes vital world resources on computer gaming and forums...

...

Compared to what? The resources from computer gaming/forums/etc. are nothing compared to some SUV guy driving around a state w/a robust infrastructure. If you in a city in a warm climate, do you NEED a Hummer?

[August]

Originally Posted by Torvald Von Mansee

...

Compared to what? The resources from computer gaming/forums/etc. are nothing compared to some SUV guy driving around a state w/a robust infrastructure. If you in a city in a warm climate, do you NEED a Hummer?

So you're trying to tell me that something is not a waste if there is something worse to compare it to? That's an interesting theory you got there.

The point is that when you argue that we consume too much or that our living standards are too high you had better be prepared to have to live with someone elses definition of what is "enough".

Now maybe I'm wrong but computer gaming has to be pretty high on the list of unnecessary things. At least your Hummer is useful as a means of transportation.

[CaptainHaplo]

Not the first time I have heard that theory espoused. Is it a bad idea? Today, yes - because its a distinct over-reaction to an unproven "problem" that has yet to be truly proven. Even were I to accept GW as real man made issue, the idea should not be used until other, more controllable and reversible means of solving the problem are attempted. Ultimately, as a near the end and we have little other choice, then ok we start looking at the more extreme things.

One thing I have as yet to see proposed, would be a reintroduction of the previous water canopy that once encased the earth. If we can do this idea with sulfer, we could do it with water vapor..... And water vapor would be helpful, not harmful. Plus it could easily be reveresed if needed - and we could use the water that gets added to the oceans when all the ice caps melt - preventing all that nasty flooding.

Oh wait - this idea makes too much sense and would ruin the livelihood of too many GW "scientists"...

Oh well....