More Doom and Gloom...From the Left

[boxcar]

Scientists Report Earth Reaching ‘Tipping Point’ With ‘Severe Impacts’ on Quality of Life

Make sure you read this all the way through. Just by a cursory reading, I picked up on two things immediately. The number one reason given twice for why Doom's Day is around the corner is due to overpopulation. Then later on, these scientists tell us that they're certain about their predictions because nearly 12,000 years ago during an ice age, it already occurred, citing animal extinctions. But did man cause the Ice Age? Do these scientists know what the population of the earth was at that time? Anyone?

So, it appears everyone on the planet, whether we like it or not, is caught in between two kinds of hardliner Gloomists. One prophesied Gloom will be due to Christ's return when he judges the world for man's sins, and the other predicted Gloom will be due to Man's sins against Mother Earth. So either God will judge us or our Mother will. Talk about being caught between a rock and hard place. :lol: :lol:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/scientists-report-earth-reaching-tipping-point-with-severe-impacts-on-quality-of-life/

Boxcar

[Tom]

A lib will believe anything negative - that is what defines a lib - stupid to the core.

[HUSKER55]

HEY TOM, maybe they are afraid it is god coming back and they are the target of his wrath. :D

brings tears to my eyes!;)

[fast4522]

The real problem is they will tell you anything but the truth. Besides the national defense of our country, the environment in which we live is pretty high on any President's list. It is a fact that man has used everything under the sun to live easier by the labor of his fellow man. The environment is no exception, the personal gain of the few using the gloom and doom of polar caps melting as reasoning to sway the many. What they do not tell you is the amount of carbons put up into the ionosphere by commercial jets actually is countering all of their data, and the impact is actually global cooling of the planet. They measure carbon emissions by each country in an elaborate Ponzi scheme to funnel moneys to redistribute wealth how the Bilderburg Group wants without having any effect on the environmental issues whatsoever. The amount of commercial jetliners in the sky's will only increase during our lifetime and nothing we do on the ground will effect anything at all except taxes and the people trying to impose new ones. Filthy humans, measured not by carbon emissions but by taxes collected.

[Marshall Bennett]

I believe we'll be long gone before overpopulation becomes a factor. Too many other problems or disasters would be more likely in our demise. I won't go into all of them because the list is long. One only has to barely use their imagination to realize them.

[BlueShoe]

Hey, none of this really matters, it all ends on December 21, 2012. The Mayans said so, and those guys were supposed to be expert astronomers. Get those bets down fellas, we just have a little over six months to make that big score before the lights are turned off forever at every track on the planet. :(

[fast4522]

Ray Kurzweil does not predict that outcome, look the guy up on the web.

[badcompany]

Leftist Pinkos are always worried about overpopulation because their economic system, Socialism, always ends in mass starvation.

Capitalism, with its price and profit system, is always finding more efficient ways to produce and can therefore handle population increases. In addition, when countries get wealthier, parents tend to have few children. Of course, Socialist countries never get wealthier unless they adopt Capitalism, as was the case with China.

[Tom]

What percent of newborns in this country do you suppose are nothing more than
a way to get more welfare money?

[fast4522]

Tom, your last post alone has more ankle's in the air.

[Actor]

Do these scientists know what the population of the earth was at that time? Anyone?
Mitochondrial DNA evidence suggests that the human population of the earth 60,000 years ago was 1,000 people.

The population was about 100 million at the time of Christ, approximately 2000 years ago.

Assuming exponential population growth gives us an equation for human population vs time:

P = 100,000,000 x exp(0.000192 x t)

where P is the population at time t, and t is the time in years with the birth of Christ being zero and times before that being negative. 12,000 years ago t = -10,000.

I get roughly 15 million as the answer.

This answer is suspect since it assumes growth at a constant (exponential) rate, 0.000192/yr. In truth the growth rate is not constant but increases with time (in quantum leaps). The population has grown much faster from 2000 years ago to the present than it did from 60,000 years ago to the time of Christ. Add to that the fact that the growth rate probably increased dramatically with the discovery of agriculture (12,000 years ago?) and 15 million is probably high. I would hazard a guess of 1 to 2 million as the actual figure.

Whether humans caused the extinctions 12,000 years ago is controversial even among scientists.

[boxcar]

Whether humans caused the extinctions 12,000 years ago is controversial even among scientists.

In other words, the Ice Age thingy is a non sequitur in this article? :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[hcap]

In other words, the Ice Age thingy is a non sequitur in this article? :rolleyes:

According to you the Ice Age thingy is a non sequitur 12,000 YEARS AGO TOO.

Impossible to have a 12,000 year old ice age on a 6,000 year old earth.

PS: it's me hcap

hcap

[mostpost]

According to you the Ice Age thingy is a non sequitur 12,000 YEARS AGO TOO.

Impossible to have a 12,000 year old ice age on a 6,000 year old earth.

PS: it's me hcap

hcap
You're not making fun of Boxcar for signing all his posts, are you?
Shouldn't the PS: come after your signature?

[hcap]

You're not making fun of Boxcar for signing all his posts, are you?
Shouldn't the PS: come after your signature?Probably, but I would not be making fun if I did it exactly.

[boxcar]

According to you the Ice Age thingy is a non sequitur 12,000 YEARS AGO TOO.

Impossible to have a 12,000 year old ice age on a 6,000 year old earth.

Tell that to the scientists who know all the answers. I didn't write the dumb article.

Boxcar

[boxcar]

You're not making fun of Boxcar for signing all his posts, are you?
Shouldn't the PS: come after your signature?

Don't confuse 'cap. Why would he want to start to get anything right, at this late stage in his life? That would be totally out of character for him.

Boxcar

[hcap]

Tell that to the scientists who know all the answers. I didn't write the dumb article.

ToxicarNo, but you did tell all of us that God made the earth only "appear old', but in fact it is a young earth with dinosaurs being eliminated by the Flood only thousands of years ago instead of millions. Apparently dinosaurs roamed the Garden of Eden. In other words another biblical version in addition to the hundreds published worldwide.

So let's see we have the

* New International Version
* New International Version (Anglicised)
* New International Reader's Version
* King James Version
* New American Standard Version ® (NASB)
* New Living Translation ® (NLT)

Now we can add the
*Hanna-Barbera/Fred Flinstone version(HBFF)

[boxcar]

No, but you did tell all of us that God made the earth only "appear old', but in fact it is a young earth with dinosaurs being eliminated by the Flood only thousands of years ago instead of millions.

What I might have said or didn't say in the past has nothing to do with stupid article at hand. Some scientists are as dumb as rocks, as evidenced by the Ice Age non sequitur.

Boxcar

[hcap]

What I might have said or didn't say in the past has nothing to do with stupid article at hand. Some scientists are as dumb as rocks, as evidenced by the Ice Age non sequitur.

ToxicarWhat you have said in the past disqualifies you totally from any scientific creditability or opinion.

[toetoe]

This is the "logic" that won a Nobel Prize for Paul Ehrlich. Not Julian Simon. No no no. Paul . Frickin. Ehrlich. :bang:

[Actor]

In other words, the Ice Age thingy is a non sequitur in this article? :rolleyes:

BoxcarNot exactly. Biology is not my field but as I understand it the theory is not that humans caused the ice age, but that human population exploded at the end of the ice age (a tipping point), causing increased human predation. The humans wiped out certain species that caused a "trickle down" effect that wiped out other species.

I don't embrace the theory but it has some merits. What the article seems to say is that it could happen again.

[fast4522]

All a bunch of crap intended to confuse the average Joe. Socialist agenda plain and simple, Agenda 21 in the hearts of every Marxist here.

[Robert Goren]

You can't argue with people who pick and choose what science they believe in! It is folly to even try. They believe what they believe and will ignore science when ever it conflicts with their beliefs.

[rastajenk]

You are talking about the AlGorians there, right, Goren?

[BlueShoe]

So let's see we have the

* New International Version
* New International Version (Anglicised)
* New International Reader's Version
* King James Version
* New American Standard Version ® (NASB)
* New Living Translation ® (NLT)
Being an old traditionalist, still prefer the King James Version, it is what I grew up with. Oh yes, Cappy, never during my lifetime have I ever met a single person that still seriously believes that our planet and all lifeforms are only 6000 years old, not one. You seem to use this 6k thing as one of your talking points, how did you manage to focus on that? 6000 years ago humans were just beginning to smelt metals, domesticate animals, live in groups, and form more structured societies. Everyone knows that, dont they?

[fast4522]

What these people count on is what we believe, the person who has a main core belief system is that he will need another beer is their best friend because he is perceived to be less intelligent than they are, but once the guy gets his next beer he too does not believe their bullshit.

[hcap]

Being an old traditionalist, still prefer the King James Version, it is what I grew up with. Oh yes, Cappy, never during my lifetime have I ever met a single person that still seriously believes that our planet and all lifeforms are only 6000 years old, not one. You seem to use this 6k thing as one of your talking points, how did you manage to focus on that? 6000 years ago humans were just beginning to smelt metals, domesticate animals, live in groups, and form more structured societies. Everyone knows that, dont they?Ask Toxicar if he believes radioactive carbon dating, the study of plate tectonics and other well established scientific dating techniques are valid. And if the speed of light can tell us quite directly how old the universe is. Ask him whether the speed of light and radioactive decay can determine simply if things are thousands of years old or billions. And him if the biblical Flood caused the extinction of Paleozoic species like the dinosaurs. a few thousand of years ago or died out millions of years ago.

BTW, the 6,000 figure can be traced to the Ussher chronology. A 17th-century chronology of the history of the world formulated from a literal reading of the Bible by James Ussher, the Archbishop of Armagh (Church of Ireland).

Ussher deduced that the first day of creation began at nightfall preceding Sunday, October 23, 4004 BC, in the proleptic Julian calendar, near the autumnal equinox.I have had this converstion with him before. What he will do since he can not refute the science is tell us that God created the Universe and the Earth thousands of times younger than the scientific evidence indicates, but "rigged" the observable data to fool humans as sort of a final exam in testing mien's souls or some such crap.

Ask him