How many remember....

[Father Heathen]

Haha, so you think I'm a "damned carmmie pinko". I've been a conservative voter for much of my adult life, actually.

But not a "real" conservative by U.S. standards.

 

[exchemist]

But not a "real" conservative by U.S. standards.

No, I have neither a pair of jackboots nor a sidecar.

 

[icehorse]

Saw this elsewhere. I remember some of it. How about you?

-in the 60's, oil will be gone in 10 years
-in the 70's, another ice age in 10 years
-in the 80's, acid rain will destroy all crops in 10 years
-in the 90's, the ozone layer will be gone in 10 years
-in 2000, ice caps will be gone in 10 years

None of that happened but the results were fear and taxes.

There is a bit of ambiguity in this OP, so forgive me if I'm misunderstanding you. It would appear that you think sounding the alarm about the things you listed above was a bad idea? That these were all false alarms?

If so, yours is an incredibly dangerous mindset. A potentially humanity-ending mindset. Prediction is an extremely complex undertaking. The fact that the timelines were wrong is a minor detail, and I have to think you're being intellectually dishonest to ignore that.

Greenland's glaciers ARE melting. Faster than predicted. The math needed to calculate the rise in sea levels based only on Greenland's melting fresh water is easy to do.

Desalinating the oceans WILL have enormously dire impact on sea life. Again, this is easy to prove.

Our fresh water aquifers ARE being drained orders of magnitude faster than they replenish themselves.

Our fragile topsoil is being blown away at unsustainable rates.

And on and on.

And you're criticizing minor inaccuracies in predictive timelines? This sort of head-in-the-sand thinking is to be reviled.

 

[Father Heathen]

No, I have neither a pair of jackboots nor a sidecar.

Do you drive something like this?

 

[Soandso]

Here's what chatgpt has to say about it:

"The statements you provided are commonly cited as predictions made in the past regarding various environmental issues. However, it's important to note that these statements do not accurately represent the scientific consensus or mainstream predictions made during those time periods. Let's examine each statement:

1. "In the 60's, oil will be gone in 10 years": There were concerns about oil scarcity during the 1960s, but it was not a widely accepted prediction that oil would completely run out within 10 years. Since then, significant oil reserves have been discovered, and advancements in extraction techniques have expanded the available oil supply.

2. "In the 70's, another ice age in 10 years": While there were discussions about a potential cooling trend in the 1970s, it was not a consensus prediction that another ice age would occur within a decade. Climate scientists have long recognized the complexity of climate systems, and subsequent research has provided a more nuanced understanding of global climate patterns.

3. "In the 80's, acid rain will destroy all crops in 10 years": Acid rain was indeed a recognized environmental issue in the 1980s, primarily caused by emissions of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides. While it did cause damage to ecosystems and certain structures, the prediction that it would "destroy all crops in 10 years" is an overstatement. Acid rain remains a concern, but various emission control measures have significantly reduced its impact.

4. "In the 90's, the ozone layer will be gone in 10 years": The depletion of the ozone layer was a real concern in the 1980s and 1990s due to the release of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and other ozone-depleting substances. However, the prediction that the ozone layer would be completely gone within a decade was not widely made. The Montreal Protocol, an international environmental agreement, was established in 1987 to phase out the production of ozone-depleting substances, resulting in the recovery of the ozone layer.

5. "In 2000, ice caps will be gone in 10 years": There were concerns about the melting of ice caps and glaciers in the early 2000s, particularly due to rising global temperatures. However, the prediction that the ice caps would completely disappear within a decade was not a mainstream scientific consensus. While Arctic sea ice has experienced significant decline, it has not completely disappeared, and ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica are still present."

In summary, the statements you provided are exaggerated or misrepresentations of the concerns and predictions made during those time periods. It is essential to rely on accurate scientific information and the consensus of experts when evaluating environmental issues."

Seems AI will be handy for filtering out BS that should've been left on Facebook where it was copied and pasted from.

This ^^^

 

[exchemist]

Do you drive something like this?

Oh yes, these obese trerks, that are so fat that they have buttocks.

Nah, when I was in Houston I drove a Mazda sports car. Red actually - proves I was a carmmie.

 

[We Never Know]

If you were quoting someone else, and did not mean to associate yourself with the statements, you should have put it in quotation marks and made that clear.

Yeah saying "Saw this elsewhere" is pretty confusing

 

[We Never Know]

Here's what chatgpt has to say about it:

"The statements you provided are commonly cited as predictions made in the past regarding various environmental issues. However, it's important to note that these statements do not accurately represent the scientific consensus or mainstream predictions made during those time periods. Let's examine each statement:

1. "In the 60's, oil will be gone in 10 years": There were concerns about oil scarcity during the 1960s, but it was not a widely accepted prediction that oil would completely run out within 10 years. Since then, significant oil reserves have been discovered, and advancements in extraction techniques have expanded the available oil supply.

2. "In the 70's, another ice age in 10 years": While there were discussions about a potential cooling trend in the 1970s, it was not a consensus prediction that another ice age would occur within a decade. Climate scientists have long recognized the complexity of climate systems, and subsequent research has provided a more nuanced understanding of global climate patterns.

3. "In the 80's, acid rain will destroy all crops in 10 years": Acid rain was indeed a recognized environmental issue in the 1980s, primarily caused by emissions of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides. While it did cause damage to ecosystems and certain structures, the prediction that it would "destroy all crops in 10 years" is an overstatement. Acid rain remains a concern, but various emission control measures have significantly reduced its impact.

4. "In the 90's, the ozone layer will be gone in 10 years": The depletion of the ozone layer was a real concern in the 1980s and 1990s due to the release of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and other ozone-depleting substances. However, the prediction that the ozone layer would be completely gone within a decade was not widely made. The Montreal Protocol, an international environmental agreement, was established in 1987 to phase out the production of ozone-depleting substances, resulting in the recovery of the ozone layer.

5. "In 2000, ice caps will be gone in 10 years": There were concerns about the melting of ice caps and glaciers in the early 2000s, particularly due to rising global temperatures. However, the prediction that the ice caps would completely disappear within a decade was not a mainstream scientific consensus. While Arctic sea ice has experienced significant decline, it has not completely disappeared, and ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica are still present."

In summary, the statements you provided are exaggerated or misrepresentations of the concerns and predictions made during those time periods. It is essential to rely on accurate scientific information and the consensus of experts when evaluating environmental issues."

Seems AI will be handy for filtering out BS that should've been left on Facebook where it was copied and pasted from.

I don't do Meta. It was Twitter.

 

[metis]

Saw this elsewhere. I remember some of it. How about you?

-in the 60's, oil will be gone in 10 years
-in the 70's, another ice age in 10 years
-in the 80's, acid rain will destroy all crops in 10 years
-in the 90's, the ozone layer will be gone in 10 years
-in 2000, ice caps will be gone in 10 years

None of that happened but the results were fear and taxes.

I follow science a lot since that's my field, and frankly I heard none of that as you posted. Maybe use some links with this next time.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Are they the ones who've overturned roe vs. Wade? Are they the ones banning books and art performances? Are they the ones engaging in a witchhunt against the LGBT community? Are they the ones who disregard the establishment clause of the first amendment?

Are they the ones attacking free speech?

Are they the ones attacking the 2nd amendment?

Are they the ones forcing people into state sanctioned evs, to only have state sanctioned electric stoves , to have state sanctioned healthcare with state sanctioned insurance and to live only state sanctioned lives?

Are they the ones promoting and allowing socialism, Marxism, communism into their ranks and enjoy spitting on the constitution as a becon of a free country?

Are they the ones who want undocumented illegals to cross/ invade the border unchecked and to have more rights than natural and naturalized born citizens who live here?

 

[ChristineM]

Are they the ones attacking free speech?

Chuckle. Not sure you know what you have said there.

Free speech means everyone has the right of free speech, not just the people you agree with. Yes, even communist have the right to free speech in America.

 

[Tinker Grey]

Oh yes, these obese trerks, that are so fat that they have buttocks.

Nah, when I was in Houston I drove a Mazda sports car. Red actually - proves I was a carmmie.

I drive:

Dallas area.

 

[Revoltingest]

I remember people saying all sorts of things over
the last 60 some years. Memory is a selective
thing, so one's recollection can paint a biased
picture. I recall claims much like those in the OP.
And also claims the opposite of those.
If one is fortunate, one learns to keep in mind
that reality can be a difficult thing to discern,
& one shouldn't go overboard embracing every
"fact" proffered by the many talking heads.

 

[We Never Know]

I remember people saying all sorts of things over
the last 60 some years. Memory is a selective
thing, so one's recollection can paint a biased
picture. I recall claims much like those in the OP.
And also claims the opposite of those.
If one is fortunate, one learns to keep in mind
that reality can be a difficult thing to discern,
& one shouldn't go overboard embracing every
"fact" proffered by the many talking heads.

Yep all kinds of things have been claimed/said by either/or politicians, media and some scientists.
Denying they were said isnt disproving they were said.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Chuckle. Not sure you know what you have said there.

Free speech means everyone has the right of free speech, not just the people you agree with. Yes, even communist have the right to free speech in America.

Yes they certainly do, which is why I frequent their website to gauge the Democrats by. Now that a Democrat is now a major controlling member of the CPUSA, free speech is certainly an asset for as long as it's there before it's restricted even more then it alteady is.

 

[ChristineM]

Yes they certainly do, which is why I frequent their website to gauge the Democrats by. Now that a Democrat is now a major controlling member of the CPUSA, free speech is certainly an asset for as long as it's there before it's restricted even more then it alteady is.

Monitoring is a first step


Yup pubs are constantly trying to erode free speech if its not speech they agree with

 

[Revoltingest]

Yep all kinds of things have been claimed/said by either/or politicians, media and some scientists.
Denying they were said isnt disproving they were said.

But is there a theme to what's culled & offered?

 

[Soandso]

Monitoring is a first step


Yup pubs are constantly trying to erode free speech if its not speech they agree with

Don't say gay

 

[We Never Know]

But is there a theme to what's culled & offered?

IMO... Fear

 

[Father Heathen]

Are they the ones attacking free speech?

Yes, of course they are: the bans on books and art performances.

Are they the ones attacking the 2nd amendment?

The "well regulated milita"?

Are they the ones forcing people into state sanctioned evs, to only have state sanctioned electric stoves , to have state sanctioned healthcare with state sanctioned insurance and to live only state sanctioned lives?

What a wacky straw man.

Are they the ones promoting and allowing socialism, Marxism, communism into their ranks and enjoy spitting on the constitution as a becon of a free country?

Nope. That just dated moral panic and fear mongering.

Are they the ones who want undocumented illegals to cross/ invade the border unchecked and to have more rights than natural and naturalized born citizens who live here?

Another wacky straw man.