Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

15,000 scientists issue 'warning to humanity'


UM-Bot

Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, paperdyer said:

Seriously, why we need consumerism?  People need to work so they can eat and take care of their families.  No one NEEDS a new iPhone or Galaxy S every 6 months.  All these help to do is dumb down society. "Look a new amimoji!"  Give me a break!  Until John Lennon's dream of "Imagine" is realized, we are headed for destruction as a race.  Which sort of brings us back around to the first post "Greed"

It isn't "greed" to have belongings as long as they don't cause suffering and damage in their production. And some of us like going out to work, being paid and buying things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Scarlatti said:

And will these same scientists promote the only solution: curbing the breeding rates in the third world and muslim countries. No, because apparently being PC is still more important than saving the planet.

If a family of 5 in a first world country would stop using as much of the Earth's resources as a village of 100 in a third world country, you might have a point.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Emma_Acid said:

It isn't "greed" to have belongings as long as they don't cause suffering and damage in their production. And some of us like going out to work, being paid and buying things.

Not greed on your part.  Having to have the newest and greatest of everything then trashing the old is bad for the environment. My whole point was if "Imagine" came to be, the "need" would be gone.  Will this ever happen, no.  We wouldn't be humans if it did.  That nmeed is what made the human race what it is, for good or bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎14‎/‎11‎/‎2017 at 4:01 PM, Michelle said:

After Walter Conkite announced to the world my city was the dirtiest in the US in 1969 the local government was so insulted they stepped up. Now we have an exceptional air quality track record. No feds needed.

Maybe we should insult China and they will stop hurling millions of tons of pollution into the sky.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

could all this be leading to mass migrations and refugee camps in the next seven years? That's the estimate until the great stink isn't it seven years?

 

Edited by trevor borocz johnson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, seanjo said:

All the REAL problems are caused by the exponential growth of the Human population, every person on this planet has an ecological footprint, land that must be cultivated to feed them, or put aside for feeding stock, that's land cleared of trees, the lungs of this planet, until we grasp the nettle and have a program of World population reduction (through contraception and birth limits) anything we do to reduce Mans effect is a waste of time, because the population will keep on growing and more resources will have to be used.

I'll concede that population growth is AN issue, but until anyone offers up a solution that will be amenable to all the differing cultural, religious, political aspects.. do you not think it might be a more sensible move to attack the problem from the other direction, which is what science is trying to do.  Namely identify the worst and most pressing of the environmental problems and then unleash the debate on how those problems can be addressed.  The greenhouse / global warming issue can be addressed pretty substantially without trying to kill off people... (reducing the birthrate takes too long....)

And I'm only being slightly tongue in cheek..

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15,000 Scientists huh ? Weeeell... I wonder what their area of expertise is ? 

The co-author of the report is a PhD is Social Science,

Ihttp://liberalarts.vt.edu/faculty-directory/sts-faculty/eileen-crist.html

Social Science degrees do not make you a "scientist". And being a professor in a Liberal Arts faculty doesn't make you competent to pontificate on ANY "real" science. So I wonder what the other 14,999 "scientists" specialise in  ? Transgender Dance Studies ? Palestinian Flute Music ? 

This particular endeavour appears to be an agenda group based in Oregon. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RoofGardener said:

15,000 Scientists huh ? Weeeell... I wonder what their area of expertise is ? 

Weeell, maybe you should check...

Quote

The co-author of the report is a PhD is Social Science,

Ihttp://liberalarts.vt.edu/faculty-directory/sts-faculty/eileen-crist.html

Social Science degrees do not make you a "scientist".

Actually, that is pretty dam insulting - yes it does - it makes you a scientist in *that field*.  You see, RG, as you would know if you had any exposure to science, being a co-author to a report that simply summarizes the findings of many other scientists, means that you should be attacking the scientists and what they say about their fields, rather than taking a cheap shot at someone who may simply be an organiser/collator.  And if you are going to have a go at someone as inexperienced, you should really tell the full story - you left some stuff out, in particular that she is now an Assoc. Professor.  Her BA was in sociology and she gained her PhD (doctorate) specialising in life sciences and society.  She has since studied environmental evolution and has done post-doctoral fellowships at the University of California, San Diego and Cornell, and now is Assoc Prof at Virginia Tech in the Department of Science and Technology in Society.

I've got to ask.. did you read the article?

Let's quote from it:

Quote

The campaign was started by William Ripple of Oregon State University's College of Forestry who, along with graduate student Christopher Wolf, conducted a revised analysis of each of the concerns that had been raised a quarter of a century ago.  With the exception of a rapid decline in the rate of ozone depletion, the findings were grim.  In addition to climate change, Ripple highlighted multiple environmental concerns including ocean dead zones, dwindling biodiversity, forest losses and unsustainable marine fisheries.

So, RG, why not find out who the scientists were on those specific areas, and tell us how they are not qualified or what they stated that was incorrect.  Also tell us how that you know better, and that biodiversity is just fine, there aren't forest losses, there aren't unsustainable marine fisheries (- hey I should check that one, as I used to manage a marine research lab... indeed I will - there are a LOT of unsustainable marine fisheries in bothe developed and undeveloped regions, and with ocean temperatures increasing (and they ARE) and pollution from farm chemical run-off, etc that can only get worse - just up the road from me is the Great Barrier Reef, and frankly, it's in significant trouble already.)

Quote

And being a professor in a Liberal Arts faculty doesn't make you competent to pontificate on ANY "real" science. So I wonder what the other 14,999 "scientists" specialise in  ? Transgender Dance Studies ? Palestinian Flute Music ? 

Oh, how amusing..  Yes, I'm sure that applies to these scientists..:rolleyes:.. but maybe I'll wait until you point out some examples that are anything like that.

Anyway, here's the bit where that co-author comments:

Quote

Co-author Professor Eileen Crist also echoed the concerns highlighted in the report.

"We are in the throes of a mass extinction event that is anthropogenic," she said. "If we lose 50 to 75 per cent of the species on the planet in this century - which is what scientists are telling us what will occur if we continue to operate as business-as-usual. If this happens, this can not be fixed."

So, RG, what is it that is wrong in what she says?  Do you not think it is allowable for an Assoc Professor in Sociology to express concerns about the future of society..?  Or that she has exceeded her expertise or is working to an agenda?  If so, cite why you think that.

Quote

This particular endeavour appears to be an agenda group based in Oregon. 

OK, please explain exactly how that 'appears' to be the case.  It's not good science to handwave, as you would know, right?

 

 

Edited by ChrLzs
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, seanjo said:

Anyone can get an 'ology' Ph.D.

Yeah. Anyone who does the work and learns the subject. So?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, ChrLzs said:

Weeell, maybe you should check...

Actually, that is pretty dam insulting - yes it does - it makes you a scientist in *that field*.

Which - presumably - is why her bachelors degree in sociology is a BA (Bachelor of ARTS) rather than a BSc (Bachelor of SCIENCE).

I'm aware of the logical fallacy of ad-hominem. However, this sort of "science" stunt really annoys me. Getting 15,000 "scientists" around the world to sign up to a statement makes for a very effective media stunt. But REAL science isn't a democracy.

I tried to find the list of the 15,000 scientists; although the linked document REFERS to this list, it doesn't appear to have actually published it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got a BA. In geophysics. I now research paleomagic. So it all fits.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Socks Junior said:

I got a BA. In geophysics. I now research paleomagic. So it all fits.

Umm... what is paleomagic ?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Umm... what is paleomagic ?

Old magic.

 

Kidding. It's a nickname for paleomagnetism.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

I tried to find the list of the 15,000 scientists; although the linked document REFERS to this list, it doesn't appear to have actually published it.

The actual article you are criticising World Scientists’ Warning to Humanity: A Second Notice published by BioScience on 13th November, clearly contains a link at the end (in the "Epilogue") to a pdf (supplemental file S2) that you can download, containing the full list.   I haven't have as yet gone through all 595 pages to check the signatories credentials ;) 


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, seanjo said:

The point is, unless the population growth issue is addressed, then any other solution is a quick temporary fix, a sticking plaster.

 

Now, I know this is never going to happen, for the cultural etc. reasons you listed, which means at some point in the future population reduction will be forced on us with famine, war and the inevitable diseases that go with that...I doubt we will be alive then, but maybe our kids or grandkids will be.

Indeed Seanjo !

Soylent Green anyone ? :D  

Edited by RoofGardener
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Imagine if the population of the earth today if the two "great wars" did not occur. We might be dealing with severe starvation and other overpopulation issues. Nature,  as well as humans will always find a way to thin the herd. If not, we are headed for trouble. Hawking feels that we have already passed the tipping point. He's a pretty smart guy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And just like before...no one's gonna give a ****.

Someone needs to tell scientists that facts don't matter anymore. 

They keep banging their heads against brick walls for no reason. 

Edited by ChaosRose
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 16/11/2017 at 5:20 PM, seanjo said:

So real science's like Engineering or Physics are not open to all, they need intelligence and a talent.

So they are open to all then - but like anything in life you are only going to get on with something if you're good at it (or just very lucky).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Haroldbattschits said:

Imagine if the population of the earth today if the two "great wars" did not occur. We might be dealing with severe starvation and other overpopulation issues. Nature,  as well as humans will always find a way to thin the herd. If not, we are headed for trouble. Hawking feels that we have already passed the tipping point. He's a pretty smart guy

Actually, the world wars didn't kill all that many people.   Many more people died if Spanish 'flu than in WWI, for example

Meanwhile, the key to curbing population growth is increased prosperity (one reason why most "western" nations now have negative growth, excluding immigration).   But the problem is that those in prosperous "western" nations, earning far more money than they ever really need, also want cheap food and throw-away gadgets from "3rd world" countries ......

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15,000 quoting from the same information is the same as one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:lol:

Wow ... that's some mind bending logic right there ...

~

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, TripGun said:

15,000 quoting from the same information is the same as one.

That's a perfect response from someone who:

- didn't read any of the thread

- didn't read the article

- didn't read the study

I don't think anyone else needs this clarification, so just for you, Trip..

The study covers a wide range of different disciplines, and the scientists are specialists in those different disciplines.

So your use of the term "same information" (and your conclusion) is ....   well, what's the term for 'beyond daft'..?

Edited by ChrLzs
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
On 11/20/2017 at 4:40 PM, ChrLzs said:

That's a perfect response from someone who:

- didn't read any of the thread

- didn't read the article

- didn't read the study

I don't think anyone else needs this clarification, so just for you, Trip..

The study covers a wide range of different disciplines, and the scientists are specialists in those different disciplines.

So your use of the term "same information" (and your conclusion) is ....   well, what's the term for 'beyond daft'..?

Well, ok then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/13/2017 at 0:56 PM, Kismit said:

Seriously, a few years ago I started asking what would happen to the environment if we all stopped trying to tame our yards and let earth get on with her own natural process of evolution. 

I tried that.  Lots of complaints from my neighbor about the dandelions.  I offered to let him dig them up.  Needless to say, they're still there.

I did mow it, about three times a year.  And I try to rake up the leaves about once a year, but with trees all over the neighborhood, that's a hopeless task.

At least, my dogs and kids don't get cancer from playing in the yard.

Doug

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Earth will be fine. It will be around for another 4.5 billion years or so.

Edited by Black Monk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.