What is causing all these natural problems?

lasttombstone

Kinder, Gentler LTS
NOTE: If mods feel this needs to be moved to Muzzleblast, feel free.
I guess this will generate a vast number of different responses but just wanted to see if there was a consensus of similar thoughts.

For some time, I have been of the opinion that the increase in population world wide is the major contributor to the majority of the problems. Now, I"m not a knowledgeable know-it-all when it comes to climate change, global warming and the such. I tend to be one that looks at history and tries to compare it to the present in many situations when trying to answer "why". With that being said, I just can't accept that there were this many tornadoes, hurricanes, tidal waves, droughts and resulting forest fires, torrential rains and resulting floods/mudslides/landslides and the such even in the 1800s, when I guess there is more statistical data somewhere.
I can't see any way that the increase in industry, vehicles, logging, burning, etc., has not affected the atmosphere to the point that weather patterns have changed resulting in the devastation that we see today. Anyone that knows me, knows I'm no treehugger, protester, troublemaker and I don't mean to sound like one.

I'm sure some will say that we now have more access to what is going on other than our local community and this is what has always been happening but I ain't buying it. Never saw this quantity of problems 50 years ago. And it seems to continue to grow in frequency.

I'm saying that there are too many people. Earth has surpassed it's carrying capacity and our overpopulation and the requirements to keep it going has caught up with us. I know people much smarter than I am are working and have been working to create ways to continue "business as usual" without the negative side effects. Good for them, but is it too little too late? Is the damage irreparable?

Do I have a solution..... Nope. I do know that I am on the downside and don't mind. I've reached my 3 score and 10 and if I get 10 more, then good graces on me. But I see no need for me to be here at 100 nor do I particularly want to be. But we have become a world bent on saving everyone from any dire disease and pushing longevity as far as it will go. Sooner or later, we will completely overgraze our habitat and we all know where that leads. As much as some people want to think, you can't beat nature.

And if your ideas are as lengthy, I promise I'll read them all. I always do.
 

wcjones

Twelve Pointer
Contributor
I am sure we have had a negative effect on our environment...no doubt about it. I am not sure how much we have contributed to it.

Of course the flooding/landslides can be attributed to paving/no permeable lands and of course deforestation.

Droughts seem more dire because of the increased need of water and row crops show the effects of droughts before say a forest or grassland would.


Of course the advance reporting has something to do with it as well as the fact that the newS media always needs a story so things you wouldn't have heard about 20 years ago are reported on daily

We need to figure out this whole population issue. The biggest problem is going to be fresh water.
 

lasttombstone

Kinder, Gentler LTS
Good points WC. Not gouging here but didn't we have plenty of fresh water once upon a time? I think there are too many deer crapping in the creek and drinking the water table down. I say, only one bath a week. But then, there are still folks in Africa/Asia who have hardly any at all.
 

wcjones

Twelve Pointer
Contributor
Good points WC. Not gouging here but didn't we have plenty of fresh water once upon a time? I think there are too many deer crapping in the creek and drinking the water table down. I say, only one bath a week. But then, there are still folks in Africa/Asia who have hardly any at all.

Don't forget irrigation of crops....baths aren't the real issue.

They estimate that 2.1 trillion gallons are lost to leaky pipes in the US alone
 

DRS

Old Mossy Horns
I think our contribution to climate change is negligible. I think there have been times weather on this earth have been way more volatile. People want to want to see the world as stable while it is really not. There have been great changes in the environment in world temperatures, sea levels and landscapes that our ancestors survived. I liked how one scientist put global warming, he stated global warming is real and made a good point. He stated, "The world had been warming since the last ice age".
 

curdog

Ten Pointer
Contributor
We're having a lot less fires now than we did 100-150 years ago. All the other human impacts have increased but the number of fires and amount of acreage burned is tremendously lower. In the 1920s most of the counties were showing thousands of acres burned annually,and a 50,000 acre fire in eastern nc would hardly make a newspaper.
 

crittergitter

Ten Pointer
The earth itself produces more "greenhouse" gasses in one day then mankind does in one year. As to the amount of water, we have the same amount today as 1000 years ago it's just moved around due to the natural cycle of the way water moves through the environment. The water shortages can be to cyclical drought. Part of the water issues in the West are too much population for the amount of water.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

FishHunt

Old Mossy Horns
2016 was the hottest year in modern times. Scientist say it was as hot as the earth was 125,000 years ago. There were no people creating greenhouse gasses at that time. Minus the "little ice age" the earth has been on a warming trend coming out of a real ice age for the last 10,000+/- years. I doubt anyone has a definitive answer to your question(s).

I believe H.L. Mencken had it about right when he said; “We are here and it is now. Further than that, all human knowledge is moonshine.”

<>< Fish
 

Tipmoose

Administrator
Staff member
Contributor
My answer won't sit well with some....its happening because God wants it to happen or because he doesn't care that its happening.
 

41magfan

Twelve Pointer
Contributor
My answer won't sit well with some....its happening because God wants it to happen or because he doesn't care that its happening.

The first part of your commentary was somewhat correct. God makes certain things happen and He allows things to happen, but in either case it's part of His will.
 

2boyz

Twelve Pointer
Contributor
Well-worded, OP. Consensus on climate change is nonexistent with one exception: All parties agree that atmospheric carbon levels have increased over the past decades. IF this carbon is a contributing factor to 'climate change', there are two schools of thought to addressing the issue:

1. Various scribes and lib parrots in Congress have basically called for burying our heads in the sand and drastically altering our growth as a country and the associated lifestyles in order to address our perceived impact on the climate. Obama actually proposed drastically limiting our country's growth.

2. Alternative approach. World food needs will double by 2050. American agriculture is preparing to address and PROFIT from this market which is driven by income growth in developing countries creating an increased demand for meat protein. Simply put, profitable growth coupled with on-going technological development has the potential feed the world while using and actually profiting from the techniques and technology to reduce the carbon emissions being implicated in 'climate change'.

PROFIT is the KEY to addressing carbon emissions. Clean technology. The tools of the trade are rapidly developing and they ain't cheap.

Example: http://www.theverge.com/2016/12/7/13874576/john-deere-sesam-electric-tractor-150kw-battery

The point is simple. Profitable worldwide growth and productivity is critical to human survival. Profits will allow every industry to (potentially) fund the technology to not only reduce carbon emissions but also to sequester a % of the atmospheric carbon. Example:

http://modernfarmer.com/2016/04/carbon-sequestration/

Obama's approach was to stymie growth in the US. HRC was on-board with this approach.

Pending Secretary of State Tillerson simplified the issue for Congress: paraphrased "If global warming is real, the primary cause is technology. Technology will also be the solution".
 

Soilman

Old Mossy Horns
Contributor
The earth and it's environment has ALWAYS been cyclical in it's change, and it is constantly changing. It may slow down and appear fairly constant for periods, but change it does. The "unstable" pattern you are now seeing has happened before...just not in your lifetime. Many think this "unstableness" is a "bad" thing. However, quite the contrary, if it were NOT happening THAT would be the bad thing. You see, as long as the earth is changing, it means it is still alive. If it ever stops changing, is when we are in BIG trouble.

Yes climate change is real, and is happening...but it is SUPPOSED to happen, and fighting against it is futile and idiotic. Man can't stop it, and neither did he cause it.
 
Last edited:

lasttombstone

Kinder, Gentler LTS
Good reading. Thank you all. I knew there was a lot more knowledge here than I had. I guess I'm still wondering when we will run out of space, or is that really where we are headed?
 

Mack in N.C.

Old Mossy Horns
I think like everything earth related that there are cycles of bad weather but the main difference now is if a tornado hits somewhere it is more likely to kill someone or destroy a home just because there are so many people now. Once upon a time when a tornado hit you never knew one had even been there until you see the trees down after the fact, every weather guru reports about it.
 
Last edited:

ABolt

Twelve Pointer
Contributor
I guess I'm still wondering when we will run out of space, or is that really where we are headed?

We are certainly not going to run out of space. Speaking just in terms of land mass:

If every single human being in the entire world was herded onto 1/4 acre single-house lots with 4 people per house, the entire world's population could fit into an area the size of only our two largest states: Texas and Alaska. Think about that...

TX = 172,044,800 acres, which equals 688,179,200 1/4 acre lots
AK = 420,000,000 acres which equals 1,050,000,000 1/4 acre lots
Total = 1,738,179,200

Current world's population is approximately 7 billion, which divided by 4 = 1,750,000,000 households

Now, I know that nobody wants to live packed in like sardines, but we're only talking 2 states here - the entire rest of the world is available. Just think how big Africa, Australia, and Asia are, and then we haven't touched South America, Europe or the rest of North America.

Bottom Line: There's plenty of space for us all...
 

Greg

Old Mossy Horns
What Soilman said. These cycles have likely been going on for a few billion years.
 

shadycove

Twelve Pointer
The earth and it's environment has ALWAYS been cyclical in it's change, and it is constantly changing. It may slow down and appear fairly constant for periods, but change it does. The "unstable" pattern you are now seeing has happened before...just not in your lifetime. Many think this "unstableness" is a "bad" thing. However, quite the contrary, if it were NOT happening THAT would be the bad thing. You see, as long as the earth is changing, it means it is still alive. If it ever stops changing, is when we are in BIG trouble.

Yes climate change is real, and is happening...but it is SUPPOSED to happen, and fighting against it is futile and idiotic. Man can't stop it, and neither did he cause it.

Spot on IMO.
We as the human race are having little or nothing to do with "global warming" but we are definitely having an effect on our aquifers in most developed countries on Earth.
We are drawing more water from the earth than we can put back since most that we use ends up being channeled straight into the ocean.
It needs to be put back into the ground near where it was removed so that it can return to it's natural cycle.
The loss of groundwater has reached the point where it may be affecting local weather [droughts].
 

Lonehunter

Six Pointer
In my opinion, the climate has always changed and always will be changing! Yes I think the amount of people in the world contributes to global warming! Is it the only reason? I don't think so! Can we change it! Maybe! If we exterminate 90% of the people, less pollution, less hot bodies! Maybe the temps will drop a degree! Is that a option?

It is funny how we have had multiple ice ages and bouts of global warming before there was enough humans to have caused it. But it still happened! What caused it? Maybe it was because our sun goes threw cycles where it puts out more heat than other times. Maybe a asteroid hit the earth and put so much dust in the atmosphere that it blocked the sun and the dinosaurs all died!

There are places in the world where you can find fossils of sea shells and other sea creatures on top of mountains! So obviously there have been some really major earth quakes in the past! Far worse than we experience now. Or those fossils are from the great flood the bible tells us about! I imagine forest fires in the past did destroy and thus regenerate millions of acres at a time! They only burned out from lack of fuel or enough rain to put them out!

Should we try to cut down on pollution! Absolutely! Will it help? Absolutely! Will it stop all global cooling or warming? I think earths past gives us the answer to that !
 
Last edited:

Markfromflorida

Eight Pointer
No doubt humans are contributing to "climate change". How much, impossible to quantify. Visit Mexico City or other large cities and try to breathe the air....
The world has tested ~2000 nuclear bombs in the past 50 years...
Plastic in the oceans (or streams) will kill the planet before rising temps tho. Look up ocean acidification if you wanna learn more. (Plankton-animals which is the bottom of the food chain for all marine life is effected by this)

I believe God told us to watch over the earth and animals... We're doing a poor job of it IMHO.
 

Zach's Grandpa

Old Mossy Horns
The earth and it's environment has ALWAYS been cyclical in it's change, and it is constantly changing. It may slow down and appear fairly constant for periods, but change it does. The "unstable" pattern you are now seeing has happened before...just not in your lifetime. Many think this "unstableness" is a "bad" thing. However, quite the contrary, if it were NOT happening THAT would be the bad thing. You see, as long as the earth is changing, it means it is still alive. If it ever stops changing, is when we are in BIG trouble.

Yes climate change is real, and is happening...but it is SUPPOSED to happen, and fighting against it is futile and idiotic. Man can't stop it, and neither did he cause it.

^^^^^^^this. And I'll add this......man cannot destroy what God created until God is ready to destroy it. He could use the hands of man to do it if He chooses. "No one knows that day and hour other than the Father"
 

Eric Revo

Old Mossy Horns
Contributor
The earth and it's environment has ALWAYS been cyclical in it's change, and it is constantly changing. It may slow down and appear fairly constant for periods, but change it does. The "unstable" pattern you are now seeing has happened before...just not in your lifetime. Many think this "unstableness" is a "bad" thing. However, quite the contrary, if it were NOT happening THAT would be the bad thing. You see, as long as the earth is changing, it means it is still alive. If it ever stops changing, is when we are in BIG trouble.

Yes climate change is real, and is happening...but it is SUPPOSED to happen, and fighting against it is futile and idiotic. Man can't stop it, and neither did he cause it.
Well said....if you believe the Bible it clearly states that man isn't even able to control himself, much less the fate of the Earth.
Man has impact, certainly there's no doubt about that, but that impact is far less damaging to Earth than it simply damages man.
There's no denying the past cyclical patterns of this rock we live on, regardless of man's minimal influence. Just sit back and enjoy the ride while it lasts, and try to make the world around you a better place than it was when you got here.
 

Rockhound

Eight Pointer
Guys this may be a lengthy response. Apologies, I really love this topic. I'm a geologist by training and profession. It's a beautiful world we live in and I love studying it. My specialty is hydrogeology (how water moves through the subsurface) and geophysics (using tools from above ground to image things below ground). I'll admit climate science is not my specialty, but historical geology was always of great interest. In that passion alone, I bet I disagree with a lot of folks here, especially if there are any young earthers in the house. I don't mean to poke at religion at all here, so please don't read it that way.

This post will be focused on climate, and there are a few points specifically on water I'll hit on in my next post.

^^^^^^^this. And I'll add this......man cannot destroy what God created until God is ready to destroy it. He could use the hands of man to do it if He chooses. "No one knows that day and hour other than the Father"

This is the first point I wanted to address. People often think that climate change is "destroying the earth". It's not. Frankly, the earth is a system that doesn't "care" about you or me. Caring about climate change is a selfish agenda. Why is it selfish? Because we want to ensure that our kids and our kids kids can survive and thrive without things like water or food shortages. Life will go on, there is no doubt. Takeway: We don't care if the climate changes, we only care if it can still sustain humans


The earth and it's environment has ALWAYS been cyclical in it's change, and it is constantly changing. It may slow down and appear fairly constant for periods, but change it does. The "unstable" pattern you are now seeing has happened before...just not in your lifetime. Many think this "unstableness" is a "bad" thing. However, quite the contrary, if it were NOT happening THAT would be the bad thing. You see, as long as the earth is changing, it means it is still alive. If it ever stops changing, is when we are in BIG trouble.

Yes climate change is real, and is happening...but it is SUPPOSED to happen, and fighting against it is futile and idiotic. Man can't stop it, and neither did he cause it.

This is another widespread misconception. Let me unpack it a little. Yes, the earth and it's climate has always been changing. Any argument to the contrary would only elucidate one's ignorance of earth systems. Always happened, always will. If you ever get a chance, look up Milankovitch cycles, the approx 100 thousand year cycles between glacial and interglacial periods. Our last glacial maximum was approx 26,000 years ago. By the Milankovitch logic, yes, the Earth should absolutely be warming to an "interglacial" maximum, and then start cooling down in preparation for the next glacial period. Very cyclic, and if you look at the historical data, it's pretty mind boggling how close this falls to a 100k year cycle. Most data from ice cores.

Ok now that is out of the way. So what I am trying to point out is again a misunderstanding of the conclusions from the scientific community. The argument is not whether the earth is warming. It is instead, questions related to the rate of change (increasing) and therefore the cause for the increased rate of change. This is where humans are invoked. Our contribution primarily of greenhouse gases, see below....

The earth itself produces more "greenhouse" gasses in one day then mankind does in one year. As to the amount of water, we have the same amount today as 1000 years ago it's just moved around due to the natural cycle of the way water moves through the environment. The water shortages can be to cyclical drought. Part of the water issues in the West are too much population for the amount of water.

I have no idea where you got your numbers and I'm not here to dispute them because honestly I can't offer well founded facts, but what I do want to address is the presence of greenhouse gas feedback cycles that are well timed and well suited to keeping natural greenhouse gas emissions in check on earth or alternatively, systems that are not equipped to deal with changes beyond certain rates in the system. Simply put, a feedback is a system change as a result to changes in single variables in the system. I'll give an example of both, of which there are many more.

Negative Feedback System - A system that corrects itself once past a certain point
In climate science, the classic negative feedback loop described is warmer temperatures yield more evaporation from surface water, which yield more low lying clouds in the atmosphere, blocking sunlight, and therefore reducing surface temperatures and bringing the system back toward short term stability.

Here is another one too cool to pass up. Fantastic article that is relatively short explaining underwater volcanoes as a climate valve: https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2015/02/tolstoy_inpress_grl_2015.pdf

Positive Feedback System - A system that spirals out of control once past a certain point
Again, try to rid your mind of why climate change is happening. We've already determined it is happening. With that at the forefront of your mind, consider melting of sea ice. As it melts, it exposes dark seawater instead of white ice. Now when the sun shines, the water absorbs more of that heat, warming the water even more, and therefore melting more sea ice, which exposes yet more dark seawater and so on and so forth. Very difficult to stop once this starts. It's called the ice-albedo effect.


All I have now in climate. Man what cool stuff!




We are certainly not going to run out of space. Speaking just in terms of land mass:

If every single human being in the entire world was herded onto 1/4 acre single-house lots with 4 people per house, the entire world's population could fit into an area the size of only our two largest states: Texas and Alaska. Think about that...

TX = 172,044,800 acres, which equals 688,179,200 1/4 acre lots
AK = 420,000,000 acres which equals 1,050,000,000 1/4 acre lots
Total = 1,738,179,200

Current world's population is approximately 7 billion, which divided by 4 = 1,750,000,000 households

Now, I know that nobody wants to live packed in like sardines, but we're only talking 2 states here - the entire rest of the world is available. Just think how big Africa, Australia, and Asia are, and then we haven't touched South America, Europe or the rest of North America.

Bottom Line: There's plenty of space for us all...

@ABolt I just had to respond to this too. Incredibly short sighted approach. I encourage you to read more about carrying capacity in biological systems. If your sole argument is "we would fit" on earth, then sure. But to suggest space = ability to support life, that's 19th century thinking there. Arable land and water resources are just the two most basic systems that need to be considered. My personal opinion mirrors the OP, yes, we are overpopulated as a species. Because we are the smartest organisms to ever live, we are figuring out ways to artificially extend the carrying capacity of earth for humans. It's fantastic for us, but like everything in a finite system: there is a limit. With folks like Elon Musk and other great thinkers of our time, we are going to push the envelope pretty hard before we find it though.
 
Last edited:

Rockhound

Eight Pointer
Spot on IMO.
We as the human race are having little or nothing to do with "global warming" but we are definitely having an effect on our aquifers in most developed countries on Earth.
We are drawing more water from the earth than we can put back since most that we use ends up being channeled straight into the ocean.
It needs to be put back into the ground near where it was removed so that it can return to it's natural cycle.
The loss of groundwater has reached the point where it may be affecting local weather [droughts].

I disagree with you on our lack on contribution to global warming, however, completely agree on the water issue. I'd encourage you to look up the difference between confined and unconfined aquifers, as well as topics like "fossil water" and recharge rates. It takes water a long time to get deep into groundwater aquifers. Simply dumping water onto the ground near its extraction point will not accomplish your goal of recharging the aquifer in most cases. Wise water use and controlled extraction/pumping is the only way to fix this. The Ogallala aquifer in the western US for example, is getting withdrawn much much faster than natural recharge can ever accommodate. It's like pulling 10% out of your bank accounts each year and only contributing 2%...you will run out of money.

Groundwater is also typically the only drought buffer in low precipitation times. Groundwater is much more stable than surface water resources. Very typically in droughts in the eastern US, you don't have wells going dry during droughts.


The earth itself produces more "greenhouse" gasses in one day then mankind does in one year. As to the amount of water, we have the same amount today as 1000 years ago it's just moved around due to the natural cycle of the way water moves through the environment. The water shortages can be to cyclical drought. Part of the water issues in the West are too much population for the amount of water.

Your population comment...that may be the case in the far western US, e.g. California. But largely across the west and mid-west of the US, it's not too many people, it's too much irrigation. Water tables in the corn belt are dropping at alarming rates due to pumping for irrigation in areas with just a few people per square mile. All that food to feed the heavily populated areas along the coasts.

Thankfully in the East, we can rely heavily on surface water, and generally speaking, our aquifers are in a better state than the parched western US.
 

Rockhound

Eight Pointer
Rockhound, are you familiar with Hubbert's theory on "Peak Oil" and if so; myth or possibility????

Not an expert on it, but yes I am familiar. My 10,000 foot view is this....too many variables to simplify it that much. You've got politics, technology, economics, all influencing rates of production. Will the graph of oil production be a simple, uniform Gaussian curve? Probably not.
 

aya28ga

Old Mossy Horns
Contributor
I think Rockhound made a pretty good argument, and believing in science, its one I agree with.

All I can add is if you are any kind of observer of nature, you understand that species have cycles of peaks and declines, and there's no reason to think that Man as a species is any different. Like the line in the movie Jurassic Park,

"nature always finds a way."

The earth isn't in danger of being destroyed by man, but we sure need to be paying attention to what we're doing to our environment. If we don't, nature will "find a way," and make the correction for us......
 
Last edited:

2boyz

Twelve Pointer
Contributor
Enjoyed your comments, Rockhound. Good examples. Comments later.

The Ogaliala. Few people outside of the impacted area can fathom purchasing land in order to secure 'water rights' to support an on-going business.

Hopefully the Ogallaia is an extreme example; meaning it is possibly too late to maintain the current load and recharge. Ideally this is a wake-up call rather than the impending reality of life in the west.
 

ABolt

Twelve Pointer
Contributor
@ABolt I just had to respond to this too. Incredibly short sighted approach. I encourage you to read more about carrying capacity in biological systems. If your sole argument is "we would fit" on earth, then sure. But to suggest space = ability to support life, that's 19th century thinking there. Arable land and water resources are just the two most basic systems that need to be considered. My personal opinion mirrors the OP, yes, we are overpopulated as a species. Because we are the smartest organisms to ever live, we are figuring out ways to artificially extend the carrying capacity of earth for humans. It's fantastic for us, but like everything in a finite system: there is a limit. With folks like Elon Musk and other great thinkers of our time, we are going to push the envelope pretty hard before we find it though.

Exactly my point. Technology and innovation will pave the way for everyone to exist in the vast spaces we have on earth. Belief in impending resource scarcity, after 200 years of such false alarms, is the result of ignorance of history. For example, there are many reasons to shift away from fossil fuels, and we will when technology paves the way. We won't need legislation, financial incentives, carbon-offset programs, or constant fear-mongering to force us there. Nobody had to ban horse transportation in the early 1900s - the automobile was just a better way to get around, and we embraced it. We will do the same with the next best option when it's actually better than automobiles powered by the current internal combustion engine.

I suspect that in 2100 people will be richer, consume more energy of many forms, have a smaller global population, and enjoy more wilderness than we have today. I don't think we have to worry about them.

The current environmental movement is just a fear tactic to keep people in check now that there is no Cold War and thus no daily fear of mutually-assured destruction between super-powers. In the process it's a good way to enact treaties that intentionally chip away at the large economies of the world in an effort to decrease the world's temperature by 1/10th of a degree...
 
Last edited:

30/06

Twelve Pointer
IF global warming is real and not just a cycle the biggest contributor right now is livestock. Factory farming creates more greenhouse gasses than anything else. IF we are the cause of the current cycle we're in the problem is too many people and having to feed them.

I have no idea what the real deal is but I can agree we have been having some weird weather patterns lately.
 
Top