Comments on: U.S. Government: Global Warming Is Real, Serious

By: Reopening the Northeast Passage, Thanks to Global Warming (Time.com) | Photography, Science and Technology News - Computers, Internet, Invention and Innovation Tech from

Sat, 19 Sep 2009 05:11:47 +0000

[...] U.S. Government: Global Warming Is Real, Serious [...]

By: neorationalizationalisticism

neorationalizationalisticism — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 03:12:06 +0000

Thanks for the response. I understand where you're coming from, pragmatism and all. But, hell, sometimes passion trumps practicality, no? But I'll keep in mind your advice as I near my own personal crossroad in life...
Cheerio...

By: Joe Bftsplk

Joe Bftsplk — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 03:06:16 +0000

Wow -- still at it late on Day 2! Too bad it's an MS thread. But thanks for playing -- I'm still finding this fascinating.
So whaddaya think of economic incentives? In fact I see overpopulation as parallel to global warming (which is why I brought it up). If we don't somehow act to limit population growth, the planet will fall to ruins before the economic incentives naturally appear. (You can see that as an engineer, I'm not a big fan of unregulated systems.)
Also, education correlates to lower birth rates -- how about that as a humane solution?
But if you can promise people all the sex they want, as long as they'll use birth control, then you've got a winner!

By: incandenzah

incandenzah — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 02:34:41 +0000

ew... that would be "you're gone."

By: incandenzah

incandenzah — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 02:32:41 +0000

Neo -- Create a family-only compound and lock the world out. I hear you. We were talking about long-term ecological and human survival consequences of that choice, though. No? Even in the U.S., families like yours are, even now, becoming increasingly less common. And, eventually, they'll disappear entirely (stats bear me out*), or homo-sapiens simply won't survive. It's a simple as that. Be happy you're living in the time that you do. Enjoy your family as it exists now. Revel in it & never take it for granted.
.
But I hope you do think about what you'll be leaving behind for the world to deal with, after your gone, when (flying-spaghetti-monster willing) you eventually decide how many young neos and neas (and theirs and so on) you might want to bestow upon rapidly over-extended planet. Adoption and fostering is a wonderful option, too. My brother is adopted, in fact.
.
http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/SAFFFacts?_event=&geo_id=01000US&_geoContext=01000US&_street=&_county=&_cityTown=&_state=&_zip=&_lang=en&_sse=on&ActiveGeoDiv=&_useEV=&pctxt=fph&pgsl=010&_submenuId=factsheet_1&ds_name=ACS_2007_3YR_SAFF&_ci_nbr=null&qr_name=null®=null%3Anull&_keyword=&_industry=

By: neorationalizationalisticism

neorationalizationalisticism — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 00:54:19 +0000

Incandenzah- I hear you, I do. I understand why for some, having a large family might seem 'taxing.' I see how in the in the purely practical sense you may want to avoid having children. But to others, it is simply their calling. Its more emotion than practicality. I'm utterly biased on this issue as I have a huge family. And to be honest, I can't picture life without it. Family is the most important thing in life, if you have it. Growing up with just me? I can't fathom it. Massive family reunions where 200 hundred people show up, all family, all know one another. You can't beat that. The human elements of family are unbreakable. Friends are lost. Co-workers come and go. But family is a solid rock, for most people. Its the one thing you can depend on in life. The one thing you can always turn to. My family is my niche in this impersonal, bizarre world we live in. . I hope you see how powerful a large family can be to some. To others, its not even a thought. Its all how you perceive the world I suppose.

By: sacredh

sacredh — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 00:32:00 +0000

incandenzah: That's Nice. Very nice. But I doubt the sanity of anyone who agrees too much with me. (semi-snark) It's not just kids and grandkids, it's great great great great great grandkids and those that come after. I was fortunate to grow up during a period where well paying jobs were plentiful, men walked on the moon and the limits for the future looked boundless. The future looks anything but boundless now.
.
Rachel Carson's Silent Spring seemed more like a what-if horror story than anything else back then. Global warming and melting ice caps were the stuff of sci-fi. The steel industry, auto industry and heavy manufacturing were part and parcel of our manufacturing base. They've just about gone now. New, green industries may fill part of the void, but things are not as bright for the middle class now or in the future.
.
Just a few years ago I taught a class for newly hired employees and when it came to filling in their educational level, I had people with Masters starting out painting, greasing and cutting grass. They were happy to get the jobs too. It's hard for me to imagine things getting significantly better in our lifetimes. Better for a few maybe, not better for most.

By: incandenzah

incandenzah — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 23:28:07 +0000

sorry, neo, meant to respond to you, too. I understand all that about molding young minds (kinda narcissistic if they have to posses *your* genes, but I get it), but what I don't get is this: Why more than one or two? Sure, mold a mind, if that's your bag... but 3 of them? If it's an addiction, shouldn't these poor fecund souls seek help to get that baby-monkey off their backs? Or maybe they can teach Sunday school, or volunteer as a foster parent, or adopt an unwanted baby, or something less taxing on future of "our children and grandchildren"?

By: incandenzah

incandenzah — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 23:20:55 +0000

sacredh: Agreed on all points (ain't that nice?)
.
You wrote, "I would think that people would be willing and eager to forestall that as long as possible."
.
Yeah. Me, too. But don't you also think it would be especially important to those who are having kids to make sure the world is around to provide them the resources to also give them the opportunity for a nice life? I mean, we hear all this hand-wringing over "the grandchildren" from granstanding GOPers intent on scaring folks about deficit spending (needed to forestall another depression, I quickly add parenthetically)... but by deed and action, it seems they're really just empty words for them.
.
And if, as it seems, they really aren't thinking about futures for their precious "kids and grandkids," why did they even have them to begin with?

By: sacredh

sacredh — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 22:39:37 +0000

incandenzah: It's a mystery to me too. I'm a genetic dead end myself. I never wanted a child, but then I married a woman who already had one. It's been an interesting experience. I came into the fatherhood scenario a little late in life. To me, one or two is enough. I can't understand why anyone would think that the earth can sustain an unlimited number of people. At some point draconian measures are going to have to be instituted.
.
I'm at a loss to understand why anyone would want to be put into that situation. Such a time is coming. Much more of my life is behind me rather than ahead of me. I think I'll be gone before the truly bad times hit. You combine climate change with an expoding popultion and it spells disaster. I would think that people would be willing and eager to forestall that as long as possible.
.
The competition for food and resources isn't going to be pretty. We supply a significant amount of food to other nations now. If our farmland dries up, are we going to go hungry to feed other nations? The answer is no. Are other nations going to forego their share of raw materials so that we can maintain our lifestyle? The answer again is no. We can either face reality or face disaster.