Quote:
Originally Posted by MorTech
This is just plain laughable...There really is no helping you.
Just how long is the growing season in Colombia compared to Illinois?
You do know that fertilizer raises crop yields...Riiight?
How exactly does soil get "over used"? Soil is just soil.
Crop yields and productivity in the Mississippi river system are - By far - the highest in the world...Even with the short growing season.
It's a simple concept: Atmospheric H2O and CO2 rise as global temperatures rise...Permafrost thaws and deserts revert back into forests and steppes...Plant life flourishes and crop yields increase and growing seasons lengthen...More natural nitrogen fertilizer is
created from increased lightning energy. This is literally GRADE SCHOOL science.
Looking at it scientifically, the Earth is very near to being a cold and dead planet (most of the earth surface is permafrost and desert) with low temperatures and low atmospheric CO2 and low cloud cover/rain.
Anyway...Why bother.
|
All the hoopla aside, it is pretty much undeniable that the human race does better when things warm up, worse when it cools off.
But there is some scary stuff out there. Back in my younger days I was aware, through friends and some attendance on my part, of the "environmental" movement. A lot of the organizations that are now (unfortunately or not) part of our lives as Americans got their beginnings back then: the Environmental Justice Movement of the early 1980s, save the ozone, PETA, Denis Hayes and the Earth Day movement, etc. etc. Without going into details, there were a fair number of extremists flying under the radar; people who saw this stuff as gospel as well as others who may not so much have believed in the hype and hoopla quite as strongly as the True Believers but who were nevertheless adept at organizing, indoctrinating and demonstrating.
One of the topics that got a fair amount of play, at least among the folks I knew, was that North America, in an ideal situation where human activity was NOT harming the environment, could support at most eleven million hunter-gatherers. I'm not joking when I say that such a prospect was given serious thought by the more extreme folks. It was ludicrous then and even more so now, but one has to consider just what ARE the long-term goals of the more extreme environmentalists, especially considering the practice of no goal reached is ever enough: I seriously doubt that if an extreme environmental group saw all of their goals achieved one day, that they'd NOT have a list of even more extreme goals on the table the next.
What ARE the long-term goals of the more extreme environmentalists? We don't know, and I doubt we ever will.