Safety glasses on.

[Twilight Hue]

We can measure what is man-made CO2 versus natural. Fossil fuels have a different ratio of C12/C13 than fossil fuels do. As a result we can see that the increase in CO2 is due to human and not natural events. We are the cause of the rise in CO2, there is no doubt of that. We are the cause of AGW. Do you need any links on how and why the different ratios exist? If not I can explain it to you. Plants and other life take in C12 slightly better than C13. Both are non-radioactive in case you were wondering. As a result fossil fuels are C12 rich. And as we burn more and more fossil fuels the percentage of C12 has been rising:

The Smoking Gun of Global Warming - Planet Experts

That's exactly the kind of information I like to see. Not just predictive modeling and theoretical assumptions of what the future might look like. Something concrete like that would go much further than what we see at present in the arguments made thus far.

While I'm not completely 'converted' to the ringing alarm end of the spectrum, it certainly has prompted me to go softer on the issue in light of actual evidences that point in a particular direction.

 

[Revoltingest]

You will have to explain what you mean here. If I am familiar with the subject, I am failing to make a connection.

The age of technological mankind occupying every habitable
place on the planet is the anthropocene. It also correlates
with one of the most rapid mass extinctions in history.
I don't like that. It makes the planet less interesting.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I really like Bill Nye even though he a proponent of ecological 'Nazism'.

I just wish he would use more down-to-earth examples to back up his addressing issues as to opposed to hyperbole and alarmist style pronouncements.

Something which environmentalists rarely address but interesting all the same as it applies to climate changes.......

Namely from Washington University here who are addressing things that climate change proponents omits from their predictive modeling. ...

High CO2 levels cause plants to thicken their leaves, which could worsen climate change effects, researchers say


You have to have all the pieces before you put the jigsaw puzzle together to get the whole picture.

No please excuse me, I'm going to go out in my backyard and measure the thickness of the leaves to see for myself.

What is ecological Naziism? Is there a right wing political ecological movement that involves putting people in concentration camps?

 

[Subduction Zone]

The data says otherwise.

U.S. Births Fell To A 32-Year Low In 2018; CDC Says Birthrate Is In Record Slump

Without more people to replace the current ones there will be no one to solve the pollution problems. Economies will crash, civil unrest, and possibly war(s).

How Low Population Growth Is Posing Challenges to Advanced Countries

Do not conflate a drop in birth rates with a drop in population. Right now our economic policies are based upon a growing population and that cannot go on forever. If the population ever begins to decline then maybe you can begin to be worried.

 

[Enoch07]

He discusses the mater both seriously and dramatically. In the show he was used as a bit of spice. You can't go by just this excerpt. He does not just preach doom and gloom, he does point out that there are solutions.

I watched his "new" show on Netflix a year or so ago? It was nothing but Identitarian hyperbole, conjecture, and pseudoscience. I was extremely let down, disappointed, and heartbroken tbh. I haven't been able to take a single thing he has said seriously since.

 

[Subduction Zone]

What is ecological Naziism? Is there a right wing political ecological movement that involves putting people in concentration camps?

Ecological Nazism is making people pay to clean up their own mess

 

[Subduction Zone]

I watched his "new" show on Netflix a year or so ago? It was nothing but Identitarian hyperbole, conjecture, and pseudoscience. I was extremely let down, disappointed, and heartbroken tbh. I haven't been able to take a single thing he has said seriously since.

I did not see that myself so I cannot judge based upon that.

 

[Enoch07]

If the population ever begins to decline then maybe you can begin to be worried.

It's in the process of decline now.

Just so its known. I don't have a dog in this fight. I will be dead long before the climate or low birth rates bring us down.

But yes in 100 years if birth rates don't increase it could be trouble. Birth rates raise and fall naturally as well, so it might sort itself out. But, like with climate change, it would be foolish to flat out ignore it, just because the danger is not immediate.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

The age of technological mankind occupying every habitable
place on the planet is the anthropocene. It also correlates
with one of the most rapid mass extinctions in history.
I don't like that. It makes the planet less interesting.

OK. I do know about that. It does make things less interesting and could make them much worse. There are quite likely, species that have already gone without our ever knowing they were there. Of course, there is no way to test that, but the potential possibility exists.

What I wonder is if we can do something about it.

In the 1950's and 1960's several scientists predicted, based on our current levels of productivity, we would run out of food. We did not. Not because they were wrong. We succeeded, because some very intelligent scientists took what they said as possibility and did something about it. People like Norman Borlaug found technical means around the problem. Maybe we can do it again.

Now I am going to plug one of my brushes with greatness that really does not say anything about me or impart any special ability on me, but it happened and I still think it is cool. I met Norman Borlaug. What an interesting guy. Really sharp, even at the age he was when we met.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It's in the process of decline now.

Just so its known. I don't have a dog in this fight. I will be dead long before the climate or low birth rates bring us down.

But yes in 100 years if birth rates don't increase it could be trouble. Birth rates raise and fall naturally as well, so it might sort itself out. But, like with climate change, it would be foolish to flat out ignore it, just because the danger is not immediate.

For quite some time, even if population declines, we should be more worried about overpopulation than a decline. Granted an unending decline would be a disaster, but I do not see that happening unless our own actions cause it.

And thinking back about Bill Nye I do remember a kerfuffle when it appeared that he came out on the side of the LBG etc. community when he acknowledged the reality of transgenderism. Is that what changed your mind about him?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

It's in the process of decline now.

Just so its known. I don't have a dog in this fight. I will be dead long before the climate or low birth rates bring us down.

But yes in 100 years if birth rates don't increase it could be trouble. Birth rates raise and fall naturally as well, so it might sort itself out. But, like with climate change, it would be foolish to flat out ignore it, just because the danger is not immediate.

It would have to decline below a point where it could not recover. Considering the size of our population, that number is well below where we are. Of course, depleting resources will change where that threshold falls. Changes in the environment would do that too.

 

[Revoltingest]

OK. I do know about that. It does make things less interesting and could make them much worse. There are quite likely, species that have already gone without our ever knowing they were there. Of course, there is no way to test that, but the potential possibility exists.

What I wonder is if we can do something about it.

In the 1950's and 1960's several scientists predicted, based on our current levels of productivity, we would run out of food. We did not. Not because they were wrong. We succeeded, because some very intelligent scientists took what they said as possibility and did something about it. People like Norman Borlaug found technical means around the problem. Maybe we can do it again.

Now I am going to plug one of my brushes with greatness that really does not say anything about me or impart any special ability on me, but it happened and I still think it is cool. I met Norman Borlaug. What an interesting guy. Really sharp, even at the age he was when we met.

There is no solution....yet.
The problem must become much more compelling before people will
even see a problem, let alone do something about it. I still regularly
read that some countries need to grow their population more, even
in Ameristan. Ever heard a good argument that we cannot get by with
the population level we have?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

It's in the process of decline now.

Just so its known. I don't have a dog in this fight. I will be dead long before the climate or low birth rates bring us down.

But yes in 100 years if birth rates don't increase it could be trouble. Birth rates raise and fall naturally as well, so it might sort itself out. But, like with climate change, it would be foolish to flat out ignore it, just because the danger is not immediate.

In an aside, you are much more interesting when you are engaged in the discussion and not just mistreating other posters.

My respect for a person can change and it has moved up a few notches based on your last few posts.

 

[Revoltingest]

It's in the process of decline now.

Just so its known. I don't have a dog in this fight. I will be dead long before the climate or low birth rates bring us down.

But yes in 100 years if birth rates don't increase it could be trouble. Birth rates raise and fall naturally as well, so it might sort itself out. But, like with climate change, it would be foolish to flat out ignore it, just because the danger is not immediate.

Don't worry....immigration, both legal & illegal will still cause our population to balloon.
But suppose the world had half the people we do now....how would we be harmed?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

There is no solution....yet.
The problem must become much more compelling before people will
even see a problem, let alone do something about it. I still regularly
read that some countries need to grow their population more, even
in Ameristan. Ever heard a good argument that we cannot get by with
the population level we have?

I agree. One of the biggest hurdles is getting the idea across that there is a problem.

I have not heard a compelling argument that provides valid reason to increase the population. Considering what ecology tells us about the achievements of unimpeded reproduction, I cannot imagine one that makes much sense.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

The data says otherwise.

U.S. Births Fell To A 32-Year Low In 2018; CDC Says Birthrate Is In Record Slump

Without more people to replace the current ones there will be no one to solve the pollution problems. Economies will crash, civil unrest, and possibly war(s).

How Low Population Growth Is Posing Challenges to Advanced Countries

In the past there were less people and they solved problems. On what basis have you determined that the ability to solve future problems is density dependent?

I have not read your link. I will read it, but I am more interested in what you say about it. Our own thoughts and conclusions can be discussed and argued about. I cannot have a meaningful discussion with a link.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

The data says otherwise.

U.S. Births Fell To A 32-Year Low In 2018; CDC Says Birthrate Is In Record Slump

Without more people to replace the current ones there will be no one to solve the pollution problems. Economies will crash, civil unrest, and possibly war(s).

How Low Population Growth Is Posing Challenges to Advanced Countries

I am reading that article, but so far, I am seeing a combination of factors that are considered predictive of a problem and not just population growth. It must also be mentioned that population growth has problems that may exceed the benefit they provide to specific units of the whole population.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Don't worry....immigration, both legal & illegal will still cause our population to balloon.
But suppose the world had half the people we do now....how would we be harmed?

A lot of the technical expertise that was turned lose on solutions to end World War II came from people that were not originally part of our specific population. So there are ways around some of the issues that his link is raising.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Ecological Nazism is making people pay to clean up their own mess

That does not sound like anything the Nazis did. If that were all they did, they could have saved themselves a war.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

It's in the process of decline now.

Just so its known. I don't have a dog in this fight. I will be dead long before the climate or low birth rates bring us down.

But yes in 100 years if birth rates don't increase it could be trouble. Birth rates raise and fall naturally as well, so it might sort itself out. But, like with climate change, it would be foolish to flat out ignore it, just because the danger is not immediate.

I imagine that all of us will be dead before anything happens major happens about our population, whether dramatic reduction or increase. This appears to be true regarding climate change as well. That should not stop us from doing something though.

There is a new report out that US population growth was reduced by 2% last year and this reduction reflects a decrease in births from mothers 35 and younger. There was a substantial reduction in teen births of 7%. Remarkable considering all the fundamentalists that are claiming that the world is worse now then ever and the morals of youth have degraded to nothing.