the future of environmentalism - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 04-23-2005, 06:18 AM   #16
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Jamila's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Texas
Posts: 5,454
Local Time: 11:19 PM
And please go to and sign their "UNDO IT!" petition to STOP GLOBAL WARMING and let our politicians know that YOU DO CAREabout the future of the world's environmental survival.

If we deplete the world of her natural resources and pollute her air and water, how do we think we can continue to live on earth?

Thanks very much for this thread....

Jamila is offline  
Old 04-23-2005, 08:42 AM   #17
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Posts: 1,415
Local Time: 05:19 AM
Is over-population ever discussed? It seems like it's almost verboten.

Golightly Grrl is offline  
Old 04-23-2005, 09:20 AM   #18
Rock n' Roll Doggie
angelordevil's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Inside a sound
Posts: 5,825
Local Time: 02:49 AM
That's great advice Jamila...I'll be passing that stuff along to everyone I know
angelordevil is offline  
Old 04-23-2005, 02:45 PM   #19
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,435
Local Time: 05:19 AM
You see, stuff like this is really pissing me off.

Sorry, I didnt know environmentalism was dead. But if everybody in the public media and many on the Intrrnet beat the drum saying it's dead, for 4 years nonstop, people will believe it is dead. Which is exactly what they want us to think.

Just like some 60-70% of all Americans think Saddam Hussein bombed the WTC, NOT al-Queda. When the meida reportsa it, and then reports that people are beleiving it, this cuases the groups targeted to behave as if the smears were true, and change thier behavior accordingly.

Someone mentioned the Ents. Well, I think of Sam's speech as the end of Two Towers "("the Shadow is only a small and passing thing...a new day will come, and when the sun shines, it will shine all the clearer." It depresses me even more.) What was interesting about the Ents was that they had no desire to get involved in the War of the Ring--until it directly affected them. Well, the naysayers will be the same.

Only under this Administration would anybody have the guts to even print something like this. The movement isn't dead; it;'s stalled. It isn't dead becuase people have lost touch with it, or it has lost touchl; it ransk low on priorities beucase people are concerned with other things. The basic opinion hasn't changed; (unlike they say), it's just that the public does not think about it.

Well, let this s$&%T happen. Beucase the nest time the floods come, and the droughts, and the wildfires, and the mudslides, and the heat waves that kill thousands of old people like in France 2 yrs ago, we will be forced to wake up. We ignore God;s creation at a price. And He has every right to indeed start to say "no more free will" after all.
Teta040 is offline  
Old 04-23-2005, 04:55 PM   #20
love, blood, life
A_Wanderer's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 03:19 PM
State of fear anyone
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 04-24-2005, 08:12 AM   #21
The Fly
Tinybubbles's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Maryland USA
Posts: 60
Local Time: 05:19 AM
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
The earth is a 4.5 billion year old ball of rock and metal that has survived innumerable collisions and upsets throughout it's history. I do not think that it is threatened by a few hundred years of insane apes running around on it's surface sticking CO2 back in the atmosphere.
Exactly- it (the earth) might not be threatened but our ability to live on it as healthy , happy humans definitly is in jeopardy. And that is what I was getting at with the Ent example. The Ents were not one to get involved in human conflict because they were old things, not human, and knew they would be around way after humans left. It is the lack of importance they placed on human doings that I find humbling to contemplate.
I believe we are part of a large web, a giant organism and to look at our situation on this planet as anything but holistic is dangerously short sighted. Does anyone really think we can keep consuming like we are forever, satisfying our every whim and modern comfort because we live outside of the web of nature? Does anyone think that you can just take care of your foot and the rest of the body will be just fine?
Tinybubbles is offline  
Old 04-24-2005, 08:29 AM   #22
love, blood, life
melon's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,763
Local Time: 01:19 AM
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
The earth is a 4.5 billion year old ball of rock and metal that has survived innumerable collisions and upsets throughout it's history. I do not think that it is threatened by a few hundred years of insane apes running around on it's surface sticking CO2 back in the atmosphere.
Sure, the Earth has survived 4.5 billion years of collisions, etc. It's life has not survived along with it, with mass extinctions? I think the newest "magnetar" theory for the first mass extinction is interesting; a dying star exploding massive gamma radiation thousands of light years away from us, but powerful enough to destroy our ozone layer for, theoretically, maybe five years. But five years without an ozone layer, apparently, would be enough to wipe out 80% of all life.

So, no, the Earth will survive another 3-4 billion years (when the Sun becomes a Red Giant and consumes the Earth) with some form of life surviving only another 1 billion (when the Sun gets too hot and starts boiling the Earth), but the question is...will there be another mass extinction before it? Perhaps that's why we're interested in preserving our environment. A few years without an ozone layer, due to our pollution, is enough to cause irreparable damage to existing life.

And China. We see it. We know what it wants to do, and the investors are responding accordingly. For China to achieve the same quality-of-life as the U.S., it will require the equivalent of 8 Earths or something like that. Why must we wait for the "gloom and doom" scenario before we start acting?

I know that supply-side economics is the eternal optimist, and assumes that the "market" will always compensate for any problems that may arise, but supply-side economics won't have the luxury of a quick fix with this scenario. Our zeal for "quarterly profits" over long-term R&D might be a problem.

Should be an interesting few decades. If the permafrost starts melting, it will release tons of trapped carbon dioxide and accelerate global warming.


melon is offline  

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:19 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright ©