Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 6/25/2002 1:09:44 PM EDT
[url]http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/science/06/25/environment.biosphere.reut/index.html[/url]
Link Posted: 6/25/2002 1:28:48 PM EDT
The end of the article expresses the point that there is some disagreement as technologies can improve efficiencies. The reports are based on assumptions which ends up just being more of the same environmental priesthood propaganda. It's interesting to note that advanced economies have lower birth rates than their third world counterparts. This alone to me indicates we are capable of acting in our own enlightened self-interest as long as the tax producers are not destroyed by the tax consumers.
Link Posted: 6/25/2002 2:05:49 PM EDT
In order to develop a formula that measured humanity's consumption with the Earth's regenerative capacity, the researchers were forced to reach several assumptions and omit the use of some resources because of insufficient data. The results, for example, [b]excluded the impact of local freshwater use[/b] and the release of solid, liquid or gaseous pollutants other than CO2 into the environment.
View Quote
When fresh water supply is the biggest single issue facing the third world, I'd say that's a pretty darn big thing to leave out of the model.
Link Posted: 6/25/2002 3:12:53 PM EDT
Read "The Ultimate Resource" by Julian Simon. You'll never fall for resource depletion and overpopulation theories again.
Link Posted: 6/25/2002 3:32:41 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Francisco_dAnconia: Read "The Ultimate Resource" by Julian Simon. You'll never fall for resource depletion and overpopulation theories again.
View Quote
WRONG The world is overpopulated- but its all in third world countries. The third world is responsible for far and away more enviromental damage than the industrialized countries are.
Link Posted: 6/25/2002 3:56:39 PM EDT
The third world is underdeveloped not overpopulated.
Top Top