The Enviornment

[Fect]

Here's to all those who say "Yes/No we are (not) ruining the enviornment."

Begin the debate.

[ssjharsh]

depends... environment has been changed

If you mean have we changed it like "its the end of the world!" then no, life and the world will continue to exist

If you mean we have taken away much of what we need to live, then yes, we have ruined it.

[Fect]

I'm talking about the debate over the enviornment:

1)Is it being ruined or not? Why?

2)What does this effect?

3)How can we solve this?

Let's start with those questions.

[Kyouka Suigetsu]

I do believe as a species we are having a very negative effect on the planet. Are we going to destroy life as we know it? Probably not. There is no debate though that we are causing irreparable damage to bio-diversity. Almost all biologists agree on this fact. The extinction process has accelerated radically. New studies suggest it has increased a thousand fold. This is something to worry about.

The cause of this is habitat destruction. Any textbook on biology will tell you that this is number one reason for most species decline and eventual extinction. Many organisms only have a single environment they can live and thrive in. The latter which relates to "fitness" is very important. Species have a set quota of offspring they need to met in order to balce with the factors against survival.

It really isn't clear on how we can solve this problem. Our growth as a race and lifestyles greatly contribute to the destruction of many habitats. There are things we can do to slow the progress, but nothing to truly stop it. Radical innovations in agriculture, transportation, recycling, and living areas would all help a great deal though. In any case, it's going to take a lot of time and money to make any discernable difference.

[Neve]

Yes, it is. Two reasons. Firstly, the fact that the atmosphere is rapidly changing due to our persistant burning of fossil fuels and the release of greenhouse gasses, which thicken the atmosphere, trapping more of the sun's heat. This is causing the earth to heat up, and therefore creating erratic weather patterns(2001: Athens had had no snow for over 100 years, 2002: Athens had snow which blew into drifts of up to 6 feet high). Eventually we will have nuclear winters, where weather will be completely unpredictable, and will theefore make it very difficult to grow food (a chance of frost, snow and hail every day), and for many life forms to survive. There is also the problem that the polar ice caps are melting and will flood many places and there is the chance of another ice age.

The second reason is that many species are becoming extinct. In fact, it is on average 5 species per day which are being extinct. Now, there are an estimated 7,000,000 species on this earth (1,000,000 known, an estimated 6,000,000 unknown), which seems like a lot, but when you consider 5 a day are becoming extinct, that's over 1,500 per year, so in the next millenium, about 1/4 of the species on this earth will become extinct. This is quite obviously not natural.

How can we solve this problem? Well, in order to solve it, all of our energy needs to be completely natural, and we need to stop abusing any life forms, or at least make everything sustainable. This is obviously not going to happen overnight - people have become too attached to their convenient methods of transport, to their heating, to their electric appliances. What we need to focus on, is to first devlop a car that uses a sustainable energy source, and then try to take all the energy we need from sustainable sources such as wind and wave power.

There have been several pacts to try to reduce fossil fuel burning, which is what is emitting the largest number of greenhouse gasses, between leading powers such as Europe and Japan, but the USA (and I will try very hard not to insult anyone here, I mean nobody any offense, I just have an intense dislike of the President, as I do of my own country's prime minister), has refused to agree to any of these under the pretence that there is 'no scientific proof' that global warming is being caused by emmisions of greenhouse gasses, even though they are the largest emmitter of these gasses, and so could easily cut down on them

[koreasamurai]

its being killed but we really cant do anything beause our lives will go in mass chaos if we stop using the environments so we need 2 extremely find a solution soon or the world will likely b in mass chaos soon

[yumisan]

yes yes i agree that the enviroment is getting very very worst.people should stop cutting down trees that much because we can't really stop cutting down it totally but by just reducing it,it sure helps alot to mother nature and stop the extinction of the animals and plants species.futhermore i can't stand seeing a red land(red sands) without trees it really soar my eyes up><.
water too just the same thing.humans should stop dumping unwanted toxic waste straight into the water and waste the water.it kills the water creatures and especially fishes!(Lol,cause my friends call me fish so of course i will protect my own species)
pity the water now this days it is so dirty.factories should filter their toxic wastes before letting it out to the sea.sob..sob...pity the fishes...
gorvenments around the world should start promoting the use of bio-diversity.it surely helps the enviroment alot. i can see not many countries around the world are really into it.it sure helps to dispose of unwanted substances easily and getting the benefits out if it without wasting much land to dispose it.

[ssjharsh]

I don't think that there is any "solving" environmental problems. All we can really do is slow them down. As long as humanity requires the Earth's resources to live, we will continue to harm the planet. There are just too many of us, so our impact on the planet is so great and rapid, we do not allow for nature's self-healing processes to repair our damage. However, if we were to bring under control our usage paper products, natural gas, coal, water, and other resources, we could allow them to last longer. Also, we cannot continue to consume land as we do now. This includes changing geographies, by building dams, changing river flow patterns, deforestation, monoagriculture (which is when just 1 cash crop is grown, causing severe depletion of certain minerals in the earth, while too much of other minerals), and also fertilizer use (which is entering river runoff, causing depletion of oxygen from water, killing sea life).

The best bet for us, at this point, is called Sustainable development, in which we basically are trying to spread our energy requirements over several different sources. Also, this plan tries to encourage people to use less of the rapidly decreasing resources. Alot of this is covered in the UN Agenda 21. However, I don't think at the rate we are moving now it will do much good.

[Kyouka Suigetsu]

A great deal of the emissions being released into our atmosphere could be stopped by switching to hydrogen as our main source of fuel for transportation. It produces nothing but water vapor which coalesces into clouds. Of course, the process of introducing it and integrating it into society will take a couple decades. The problem is that the American government, who is the heaviest polluter, isn't doing all they can to advance this movement.

[HallowDude]

human hands are made for destruction
easier way to put this...
-humans are a virus,they feed off of the planet and once there is no more they move on
-we cannot fix the eviroment becuase we keep taking from it and most of the population dont really care
-our solution "judgement day" hosta la vista baby :toocool:

[Fect]

It really isn't clear on how we can solve this problem. Our growth as a race and lifestyles greatly contribute to the destruction of many habitats. There are things we can do to slow the progress, but nothing to truly stop it. Radical innovations in agriculture, transportation, recycling, and living areas would all help a great deal though. In any case, it's going to take a lot of time and money to make any discernable difference.


Just to add to this:

20 family members in Nepal contribute less waste (plastic, human, etc.) than a family of 4 in the US or any country that is "developed."

[Kyouka Suigetsu]

Here's another interesting fact. America makes up about 3% of the population of humans on earth. The average indivudual has an ecological footprint of about 1 acre. A e.p. is the amount of resources a person consumes in a year measured in acres. The average American consumes about 25 acres of resources in one year. Amazing, huh?

[yumisan]

ya like that kind of day will come..hope will come soon.many goverments around the world are discussing about the enviroment issue but i don't see much actions are taken to solve it:
1st reason:goverments are not interested in it actually just to praticipate inside to show the interest.they think other goverments will solve the problems and the same thought happens to the other goverments and nothing actually happens.

2nd reason:getting the citizens to help out are not enough.citizens are not aware of it and continue to spoil the enviroment.

3rd reason: citizens are just to arrogant about it and it ends up falling on to deaf ears.they do not want to help out to save the eviroment and putting all the hopes to the goverment to solve it.in that way eviroment won't be save it the people won't help out.

and of course..humans..they are just like this and for the fourth reason..words speaks louder than actions.we can see that all over the place not into just this issue but in others to.

[SLVR]

It obvious it getting worde becasue the holes in the ozone are getting bigger. Fact

[Fect]

Personally, I think that the current change in climate has been encouraged by humanity's waste, but more or less, we are experiencing the "warm" period just before an ice age. These have occured two other times in human history (5 millenia ago till now) the last one beginning in 1350 and ending in 1850. For almost 400 years before 1350, the temperature was about 4* C WARMER than average!

[Chord]

So? It's an ice age, Fect. They happen. I'm pretty sure there natural. Something to do with Earth resetting herself (yes, I believe the planet has a soul, spirit, life force, whatever, as a collective of the life upon it), like sleep.

In reply to an earlier post, those 20 people in Nepal probably don't have running water, electricity and heating, I'd wager. I'm not defending consumer lifestyle, I hate it, but I live in it, and I've never known otherwise.

Oh and someone said something about trees, a lot of those trees are sliced for paper. If we made paper from hemp, a natural substance related to cannabis |(but completely devoid of THC), which can be done, and well for that matter, we'd save an awful lot of trees, mainly because it could reduce the need for other crops, as in double blow.

[MazdaRxEight]

To have a little visual aid, here is a trailer of a movie on global warming

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TUiP6dqPynE

[M-50]

I'm talking about the debate over the enviornment:
1)Is it being ruined or not? Why?
2)What does this effect?
3)How can we solve this?
Let's start with those questions.
The environment is being ruined. While we have been evolving, many other species are being driven extinct by our need for space and land. It not only affects certain species but the earth itself, as we are directly/indirectly (depending on how you see it) causing it to warm up. We can solve this b;y using more environmentally friendly sources of energy and by not wasting as much energy as we are doing now. :headbang:

[Schoulayer]

Humanity is comparable to a virus on this planet. Too many people simply don't care about the enviroment, as long as they can live their personal lives without any problems. I hate the whole 'its not an immediate threat, so its our childrens childrens childrens problem...' mentality. Its sad but true, most people in America disgust me, our culture has degraded to the point where we have no morals and everyones materialistic.

[VampyreLord]

Humanity is comparable to a virus on this planet. Too many people simply don't care about the enviroment, as long as they can live their personal lives without any problems. I hate the whole 'its not an immediate threat, so its our childrens childrens childrens problem...' mentality. Its sad but true, most people in America disgust me, our culture has degraded to the point where we have no morals and everyones materialistic.

Schoulayer you are 100% correct here, I am glad we are able to agree. My parents believe so strongly about this that we do not own a car and we cycle or walk everywhere, or maybe take the bus.

The way to protect the environment is to encourage people to walk or use public transport (50 people on one bus is much less polluting than 50 people in 30 cars), to clamp down on cheap flights (the totalitarianism is breaking through again, but to be fair, aircraft are the biggest polluters by far) ban leaded petrol and replace fossil fuel power stations with renewable ones.

This is all much more easily said than done, however.

[tankhunter253]

The environment is being ruined. While we have been evolving, many other species are being driven extinct by our need for space and land. It not only affects certain species but the earth itself, as we are directly/indirectly (depending on how you see it) causing it to warm up. We can solve this b;y using more environmentally friendly sources of energy and by not wasting as much energy as we are doing now. :headbang:

i agree with you, but there is one problem the usage of more environmentally friendly sources of energy is good, yes that's true, but the output is very very low and therefore less economical. i hope that agencys and governments do more R & D on these problems. Looking at other sources of energy i feel that nuclear energy is the way to go i mean we can extract so much energy from a nuclear powerplant, with the radioactive waste problem i know there is no way yet that we could remove this waste safely. i have heard of theorys on what could happen one of them is to send it into a gap in the crust where the container could withstand the heat and pressure till a point where the waste could be released. this would be safe because deep in the core radioactive reactions are happening all the time, that's how the earth stays warm on top of being heated by the sun (which by the way is one massive nuclear power plant).

[Insight]

asking whether or not humans are not just damaging but destroying the enviroment is like asking myself if the sky is blue or if i have feet, and let me tell you ladies and gentlemen yes i DO have feet.

i'm an enviromentalist i recylcle save electricity and water and my subject at university is enviromental science were i am learning about the earth and hope to be able to help protect and conserve it when i graduate-fingers crossed the earth is still around in 2yrs time.

unfortunately people will only do something if they have to and by then it will already be to late. so i would like to warn you all now to join me in building personal rockets to take us to all those other beautiful life-supporting planets that we know of. oh wait shit!

for those who want a funny video on the enviroment http://badjojo.com/daily/video.php?var=6.04.30/03.wmv
bewarned badjojo is at your own risk as there's loads of porn etc but thats why i like it.

[AltoK]

Well, OUR environment is getting ruined. The Earth won't explode. All species won't disappear. But a great number of them will ; and mankind could probably be one of the first to.

Then, just like 65 000 000 years ago, when dinosaurs disappeared, the Earth will get over it, and new forms of life will flourish all over the land.

However, I do hope we won't disappear ; it would give me a taste of an unfinished piece of work, or stuff :D

[shadow_of_89]

The environment s on a verge of collapse.....u can't say otherwise.....We've created a human society with no sense of environment protection what so ever

[Dissidia]

It obvious it getting worde becasue the holes in the ozone are getting bigger. Fact

Whilst I do agree that plastics and other waste etc. are not being properly disposed of/used in recycling, I don't necessarily see shifting ozone layer sizes as being detriment to the well being of the world.

Rather than type out everything, this handy essay I found: http://www.stanford.edu/~moore/Boon_To_Man.html
pretty much explains the situation (evidence ahoy non believers, and a shiny penny to whoever reads the whole thing). :winking56

[tankhunter253]

thing is tho eventhough the evvironment is being destroyed the earth will still be around, maybe in the future when this get so drastic ther'll be a force that destroys everything so the earth may stat again maybe it is us that is this force, who knows. Rest assured the earth will still be around, think about it when the earth first started out it had a mainly carbon-dioxide atmosphere. then came plants and started producing a toxic gas (oxygen), slowly the oxygen levels increased and some animals evolved some didn't and became extinct and we come back to the argument that if a species doesn;t evolve it will surely become extinct. i aknowledge that the spices before do not have the destructive power to change the environment to their will.

[Draffut]

Sorry to beat a dead horse, but my boss just sent me this interesting link:

http://www.canada.com/components/print.aspx?id=3711460e-bd5a-475d-a6be-4db87559d605

Any opinions on it? VL?

I cant seam to locate our big global wamring debate we had.... so this will work.

[Jack Van Burace]

We (humans) ARE in fact the greatest environmental modifiers, but that doesn't mean we get to affect so much of the Earth's temperature and weather. Basically because there are astronomical factors we cannot interfere whith, and they still determine much of environmental changes. Personally, I would w8 for further studies b4 picking a cathegory, but u guys can pick a side and I won't really b bothered, cuz I really have no clue.

[~black butterfly~]

we are ruining the environment.... some are cutting down trees without replacing, some are polluting our waters, they are dumping toxic waste everywhere, trashes/garbages everywhere, and we are killing the animals...worse, we're also killing the endangered species....so yes, we are ruining the environment

[Delta]

I read this (http://www.livescience.com/environment/060713_global_warming.html) the other day and it just showed me how confused and misunderstood the topic really is. It seems to me the only thing we can agree on is the the world has gotten slightly warmer. Here's my opinion on it, we need to figure it out, and solve it, no matter what. This is the only planet we have, and if we find out that we may have to do things the will hurt us economicly in the short run, then we have to do that. If using new fuels will help, do that too. This thing is too big for people to just use as a political device or to further their own agendas.

[nikuwadoko]

nature has its limits. Humans keep multiplying. By number theory, the more the less.

[Daeruke]

i think that we are harming the planet. With the green house gases, and chopping of trees.There have been lots of natuaral disasters, and species going extinct. If you trace the casues, it all piles on humans. But theres are very few outcomes if we try to fix the way we live and save the planet. I won't say it since its too scary but know that a lot of sacrifice is required to save the planet and us.

[chiking1]

I think that we are ruinning the environment too... Because humans are consuming ALL the resources, and as said above by Daeruke, producing greenhouse gases, deforestation, etc. In the past, humans were like parasects (sp?) and moving onto another place to continue consuming the resources. However, we are better now, and actually TRY to help the environment by planting trees and other stuff.

[Nihsnek]

On the whole "Global Warming" theory, no. We have such a little effect it's almost unnoticable.

[Delta]

On the whole "Global Warming" theory, no. We have such a little effect it's almost unnoticable.

Are you saying we haven't noticed a gradual increase in temperature of the atmosphere and oceans over the past 100 years, or that we haven't observed increasing ammounts of CO2 in the atmosphere? Or are you disputing that these things were caused by humans? Or mby you dont believe that these things will cause significant changes in the climate? You cant just say "I dont believe in Global Warming", what dont you believe?

[Chrono Detector]

Sadly to say, the environment is being damaged everyday. Tree logging, heavy car usage which creates smoke, I don't have to go through every detail. And I heard in the next few years the earth is becoming warmer, global warming. In the next 100 years, the people are going to be screwed.

[Draffut]

Are you saying we haven't noticed a gradual increase in temperature of the atmosphere and oceans over the past 100 years, or that we haven't observed increasing ammounts of CO2 in the atmosphere? Or are you disputing that these things were caused by humans? Or mby you dont believe that these things will cause significant changes in the climate? You cant just say "I dont believe in Global Warming", what dont you believe?

Please read the article i posted recently. It explains how we dont yet have conclusive evidence that we are what is causing the large increase in CO2 in the atmosphere. And that alot more, extensive, reaserch and funding needs to be put twords it to find out. As far as we know right now, this can be a natural cycle in the world's progression.

[VampyreLord]

On the whole "Global Warming" theory, no. We have such a little effect it's almost unnoticable.

There is enough scientific evidence to make global warming an important issue for any and every government to deal with. Several different competant and well funded studies have all concluded that the world is heating up, and almost all of them have agreed that carbon emissions are the cause. Republicans tend to just ignore or attempt to discredit such studies (they believe what they want to after all) but they cannot keep doing so forever.

Relatively speaking the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is small, but as for your comment "we have such a little effect" - this is simply not true. Readings have found that the amount of carbon dioxode in the atmosphere has increased by 33% in the last century, not to mention other gases such as methane and propane. That is an awful lot of carbon dioxide. Thirty three percent is certainly NOT unnoticable. It's a major issue, and we're all going to have to deal with it one day.

[Draffut]

There is enough scientific evidence to make global warming an important issue for any and every government to deal with. Several different competant and well funded studies have all concluded that the world is heating up, and almost all of them have agreed that carbon emissions are the cause. Republicans tend to just ignore or attempt to discredit such studies (they believe what they want to after all) but they cannot keep doing so forever.
Relatively speaking the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is small, but as for your comment "we have such a little effect" - this is simply not true. Readings have found that the amount of carbon dioxode in the atmosphere has increased by 33% in the last century, not to mention other gases such as methane and propane. That is an awful lot of carbon dioxide. Thirty three percent is certainly NOT unnoticable. It's a major issue, and we're all going to have to deal with it one day.

The article i posted was actually being proposed by Canadian politicains, and signed by 60 mostly well-known scientists from all over the globe. Also, a century ago we had no way of knowin what the CO2 level was in the atmosphere, so most of the 33% increase is just an assumption using recent information.

[Fect]

Draffut:

Sorry to say, but it is not an assumption~

"Ice Drilling" is a common practice that is used to measure levels of gas at any time in the last 1500 years. Just by measuring the gas bubbles trapped in each sector of the ice, it is very easy to tell the composition of the atmosphere at any time.

Also, I have to doubt the legitamacy of the letter. I see no real facts or even a logical warrant behind the following phrase:

Observational evidence does not support today's computer climate models, so there is little reason to trust model predictions of the future. Yet this is precisely what the United Nations did in creating and promoting Kyoto and still does in the alarmist forecasts on which Canada's climate policies are based. Even if the climate models were realistic, the environmental impact of Canada delaying implementation of Kyoto or other greenhouse-gas reduction schemes, pending completion of consultations, would be insignificant. Directing your government to convene balanced, open hearings as soon as possible would be a most prudent and responsible course of action.

What observational evidence is there and where does it exist so that I can find it and compare it against computer generated models?

I would like to see that same type of question asked throughout the entirety of the letter, otherwise I don't think you should include it in this debate.
-----------------------------------------------------------

I think that the environment is being rapidly changed. By Humankind's presence on Earth. Just look and see back in the 80s and into the early 90s when CFCs were destroying ozone and creating those large holes above the north and south poles. We stopped using them and since then, the earth has returned to normal.

I'm in favor of alternative fuel sources. Especially Hydrogen where the only byproduct is water vapor. Or the development of "cold fusion." As consumers of the world and the market, we have the ability to shape and create the desire for companies to seek different sources. Just see the E85 cars being produced now. They are a short-term solution, however. The easiest way to get "alternative fuels" is to do what all consumers do about products: complain.

Well, that's my activist side's two cents for tonight.

[airswifter]

It is even cheaper if the world can set-up a large solar panel that can supply the whole world with energy.