|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
endofthewor1d
Joined: 01 Apr 2003
Location: the end of the wor1d.
|
 Posted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:41 am Post subject: |
 |
|
big bird. that came out wrong. at the expense of keeping my family awake, i'll apologize. there is a reason i respect you. it's because, although we have opposing viewpoints, i can have a rational conversation with you.
i think there is a grey area with us that does not exist in conversations with bobster vs. bramble/pet lover/red dog. or even conversations with me vs. bramble/pet lover/red dog.
that, and you've told me how adorable my daughter is.
okay. that's it. last post until i wake up sober. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 5:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| What I really mean by 'planet' is the planet's overall ecosystem/s, not the water and mineral ore on which they are situated, which is not 'alive' in the sense we know it. The planet will go on, but our 'meddling' has enormous repucussions for us and our fellow passengers. |
I have enough faith in human intelligence and creativity that we'll solve and adapt. Not to say we should turn a blind eye, we have to face up to the strong possibility humans are causing global warming, for example. But from my tarry, life is getting better. Consider for the first time in history there are more overweight people than underweight. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Julius
Joined: 27 Jul 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| endofthewor1d wrote: |
| if we ever do create the scary doomsday scenerio and nuke ourselves into oblivion, the planet (and life with it) will keep on going long after we're gone. |
What about a runaway global warming scenario? A domino feedback loop effect that makes life intolerable for everything.
Even if that doesn't happen and human settlement increases, it will vanquish most other lifeforms off the planet through degradation of ecosystems. By "life continuing" do you mean a lot of ants, cockroaches and rodents? Thats nothing worth preserving after we've cleared out the whales, tigers, bears, and probably about 60% each of all phyla. To you this is no tragedy?
| Quote: |
| i don't even think that's going to be an issue. |
I think you have no comprehension or appreciation of the natural world, you're just writing this from your mundane urban existence. Have you ever: a) swum with dolphins or whales? b) taken a safari? c) seen any wild animal apart from a house mouse?
| Quote: |
| earth's time is limited to when our sun burns out. |
In several million/ billion years from now? Surely you want to make life on earth sustainable and rich with variety until then?
| Quote: |
| i'm confident that by that time we'll have colonized other planets by then |
Well that is more head in the sand dreamy thinking. Even if other planets are capable of sustaining life, what makes you think we still have the time to invent the technology to colonise them before we have trashed our own planet? Looking at the trends now, we don't have much time left to either correct the damage we're doing here or make our escape to planet X.
| Quote: |
| on a side note, has a study ever been done as to how many new species have been created as a result of our 'meddling' against those that have been destroyed by it? |
Your question is unclear/ badly phrased. if you mean, how many new species have evolved as a result of man's recent spread over the globe and associated activities? The answer is none. Some may have developed resistance to certain conditions or whatever.. or a select few have thrived in the new environment we've created (eg Brown rats and cockroaches). But overwhelmingly the vast majority have been incredibly damaged, reduced in number, brought to the brink of extinction, or made extinct by our harmful and exploitative trashing of the earths ecosystems.
| Quote: |
| don't flatter yourself. we're all just a tiny part of the same big picture |
 I don't think so.. No species before has ever performed the global surgical operation of mass ruination that we have, let alone adversely affected the worlds climate. Do you see antelopes or honey bees poisoning the air, oceans, and transforming every habitat into a sterile wasteland fit only for human industry?
Your "who cares anyway" attitude is the reason we're in this mess. Because One species is largely ignorant to the other millions of species it shares the planet with.
Anyhow, no hard feelings- I just want you to appreciate the natural world around you a bit more. I want to see humanity have some reverence for life on earth. Only last week I shouted at some idiot who threw a bottle at a Panda in the zoo enclosure because he wanted to get its attention. I hope you're not someone like that.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
endofthewor1d
Joined: 01 Apr 2003
Location: the end of the wor1d.
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 3:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Julius wrote: |
| endofthewor1d wrote: |
| if we ever do create the scary doomsday scenerio and nuke ourselves into oblivion, the planet (and life with it) will keep on going long after we're gone. |
What about a runaway global warming scenario? A domino feedback loop effect that makes life intolerable for everything. |
i don't know what a domino feedback loop effect is, and i don't have the time to look it up right now.
| Julius wrote: |
Even if that doesn't happen and human settlement increases, it will vanquish most other lifeforms off the planet through degradation of ecosystems. |
most other large mammals maybe. most other life forms? i don't think so.
| Julius wrote: |
By "life continuing" do you mean a lot of ants, *beep* and rodents? Thats nothing worth preserving after we've cleared out the whales, tigers, bears, and probably about 60% each of all phyla. To you this is no tragedy? |
what have you got against ants, cockroaches, and rodents? actually, i'm with you on the cockroaches. (i'm assuming that the *beep* was cockroaches) but at least they serve a purpose.
whales, tigers, and bears are pretty to look at. but the earth can make it without them. the dinosaurs are gone. nobody's shedding any tears for them. personally, i think they rock way harder than whales. i have to say, i would miss tigers if they were gone. but i'd still struggle on.
so yeah, it would be personally saddening to me if these animals were no more, particularly if humans went out with them. but life will go on. even if it's in the form of ants, cockroaches, and rodents. those will evolve once again into amazing things that might not have had a shot if we didn't *beep* everything up while we were here.
i'm not arguing that it i don't personally think it would suck if we wiped out a bunch of animals that i personally think are cool. that's my point of view. i was arguing from what i expect the earth's point of view is. and i imagine that as long as life keeps on going in some manifestation, earth isn't too bothered. she's seen it happen before (whatever wiped out the dinosaurs... a far greater disaster than anything we've managed to come up with), and she's likely to see it happen again. i imagine she's thinking something along the lines of...
'the reptiles have had their go. they mammals have had theirs, and they made a pretty impressive run of it, particularly that endofthewor1d guy. i don't know who will be next, but i've got my fingers crossed for giant intelligent insects.'
| Julius wrote: |
| Quote: |
| i don't even think that's going to be an issue. |
I think you have no comprehension or appreciation of the natural world, you're just writing this from your mundane urban existence. Have you ever: a) swum with dolphins or whales? |
no.
| Julius wrote: |
b) taken a safari?
|
no.
| Julius wrote: |
c) seen any wild animal apart from a house mouse?
|
yes.
| Julius wrote: |
| Quote: |
| earth's time is limited to when our sun burns out. |
In several million/ billion years from now? Surely you want to make life on earth sustainable and rich with variety until then?
|
again. i'd like to see all of the creatures in the world singing songs together and frolicking in the sun. i'm just not convince that the earth is as bothered about it as you guys seem to think.
| Julius wrote: |
| Quote: |
| i'm confident that by that time we'll have colonized other planets by then |
Well that is more head in the sand dreamy thinking. Even if other planets are capable of sustaining life, what makes you think we still have the time to invent the technology to colonise them before we have trashed our own planet? Looking at the trends now, we don't have much time left to either correct the damage we're doing here or make our escape to planet X. |
i disagree. i think we've got quite a while yet. whales and tigers might not have too much time. but i think we'll be around a bit longer. and how much more advanced does this technology have to be?
honestly. you really think we won't have the time to colonise another planet before we've made this one absolutely uninhabitable? i'm really curious about that.
(a) how much time do you think humans have before we've erradicated our own existence?
(b) how much time do you think it will take us to develop the technology to find and colonise another planet? (especially if things start really going downhill and we put a little pressure on those technology developers to speed things up a bit)
ballpark figures are fine.
| Julius wrote: |
| Quote: |
| on a side note, has a study ever been done as to how many new species have been created as a result of our 'meddling' against those that have been destroyed by it? |
Your question is unclear/ badly phrased. if you mean, how many new species have evolved as a result of man's recent spread over the globe and associated activities? The answer is none.
|
can you absolutely back that up? i'd like to see a link on that one. maybe it's true. i was posing a sincere question that i don't know the answer to. but you seem to be very sure of yourself.
| Julius wrote: |
Some may have developed resistance to certain conditions or whatever.. or a select few have thrived in the new environment we've created (eg Brown rats and *beep*). But overwhelmingly the vast majority have been incredibly damaged, reduced in number, brought to the brink of extinction, or made extinct by our harmful and exploitative trashing of the earths ecosystems.
|
| Quote: |
| don't flatter yourself. we're all just a tiny part of the same big picture |
| Julius wrote: |
I don't think so.. No species before has ever performed the global surgical operation of mass ruination that we have, let alone adversely affected the worlds climate. Do you see antelopes or honey bees poisoning the air, oceans, and transforming every habitat into a sterile wasteland fit only for human industry?
|
something took out the dinosaurs. and i think that whatever it was, it caused a lot more ruination and adverse effect to the world's climate than we've ever come close to.
| Julius wrote: |
Your "who cares anyway" attitude is the reason we're in this mess. Because One species is largely ignorant to the other millions of species it shares the planet with.
Anyhow, no hard feelings- I just want you to appreciate the natural world around you a bit more. I want to see humanity have some reverence for life on earth. Only last week I shouted at some idiot who threw a bottle at a Panda in the zoo enclosure because he wanted to get its attention. I hope you're not someone like that. |
[/quote]
you've got me wrong. i don't hate nature. i don't throw bottles at pandas or kick bald eagles in the nuts or anything. i dispose of my garbage in the designated receptacles. i drive a cheap, fuel efficient car, and have no desire to drive a big SUV or anything. while most of that is due to me not wanting to pay that much for gas, it also has a little to do with me making a small effort to be a little nurturing to my environment.
all i'm saying is that i don't think we're 20 minutes away from armageddon. and even if we as a species are, the larger world of life on earth isn't. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Julius
Joined: 27 Jul 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 5:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| endofthewor1d wrote: |
| i don't know what a domino feedback loop effect is, and i don't have the time to look it up right now. |
you're basically talking a runaway greenhouse effect, the type of which turned venus into a ball of fire.
What is a "Feedback Loop"?
Scientists: 'Feedback Loops' Are the Single-Biggest Threat to Civilization From Global Warming
In a feedback loop, the rising temperature on the Earth changes the environment in ways that then create even more heat. Scientists consider feedback loops the single-biggest threat to civilization from global warming.
Past a certain point -- the tipping point, they say -- there may be no stopping the changes.
Scientists working in the Arctic report that feedback loops are already under way. As the frozen sea surface of the Arctic Ocean melts back, there's less white to reflect the sun's heat back into space -- and more dark, open water to absorb that heat, which then melts the floating sea ice even faster. More than a third of summer sea ice disappeared in the past 30 years.
In the ground next to the ocean, scientists say, warming has also awakened another enormous danger -- billions of tons of carbon locked up for eons by what was once frozen ground.
"I feel very uncomfortable about it," says Walter Oechel, a scientist studying the problem. "I mean, it's not the way the Arctic should be."
Oechel discovered that as global warming thaws and dries out the vast tundra, old decayed vegetation releases carbon dioxide. That's the same greenhouse gas that comes from car and plane exhausts, and power-plant chimneys -- and the tundra releasing carbon dioxide warms the atmosphere even more.
Scientist: Reduce Fossil Fuels
It's a slow-motion time bomb that's speeding up and could become self-generating, Oechel says.
"Humans are putting about 6 billion or 7 billion metric tons of carbon in the atmosphere a year," he adds. "And we are standing on 200 billion tons here. If any significant portion came out, that dwarfs the current human injection into the atmosphere. And once that runaway release occurred, there'd be no way to stop it."
http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/Science/story?id=1607112&page=1
| Quote: |
| honestly. you really think we won't have the time to colonise another planet before we've made this one absolutely uninhabitable? i'm really curious about that. |
Even if human life continues much longer, I suspect it will be as a new type of unsophisticated stone age. Take into account whole regions aridifying and mass movements of human immigration: increasing conflicts over dwindling resources- fresh water etc. Nuclear conflagration. A poisoned environment. the death of a large % of humanity. the survivors reduced to a lawless band of isolated small populations incapable of finding healthy food let alone making rockets to mars.
| Quote: |
| how much time do you think humans have before we've erradicated our own existence? |
Clearly we can't really continue as is. Something has to give. And its the natural environment and its mechanisms of climate, water and air cycles, ecosystems of fish and agriculture etc that are exhausted and changing out of our control. How much time? Scientists always give conservative pronouncements but the speed of global warming now is accelerating faster than they predicted. A domino effect. As I say..climate change will likely cause massive scale warfare and the end of civilised life as we know it within this century at the very least.
| Quote: |
| how much time do you think it will take us to develop the technology to find and colonise another planet? |
you might want to ask Mithridates. At the moment the concept of sustainable human colonies on other planets is little more than popular science fiction. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dutchy pink
Joined: 06 Feb 2007
Location: Incheon
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 5:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Julius wrote...
[quote] I don't think so.. No species before has ever performed the global surgical operation of mass ruination that we have, let alone adversely affected the worlds climate. Do you see antelopes or honey bees poisoning the air, oceans, and transforming every habitat into a sterile wasteland fit only for human industry?
| Quote: |
This is completely untrue. In the early Earth, there was no free oxygen in the environment, well very minimal, less than 1%. Some organisms used hydrogen to fuel their life processes. As hydrogen became less available in some locales, these organisms started splitting water molecules, using the hydrogen and releasing oxygen into the atmosphere. Oxygen was a toxic substance to the near majority of organisms, and most died off.
Oxygen was the biggest, most devestating pollutant the world has ever seen. Some organisms adapted and started using the oxygen to fuel their life processes, ultimately leading to the multitude of species you see today. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dutchy pink
Joined: 06 Feb 2007
Location: Incheon
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 5:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| oops, apologies for the poor quoting. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Julius
Joined: 27 Jul 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 5:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| dutchy pink wrote: |
This is completely untrue. In the early Earth, there was no free oxygen in the environment, well very minimal, less than 1%. Some organisms used hydrogen to fuel their life processes. As hydrogen became less available in some locales, these organisms started splitting water molecules, using the hydrogen and releasing oxygen into the atmosphere. Oxygen was a toxic substance to the near majority of organisms, and most died off.
Oxygen was the biggest, most devestating pollutant the world has ever seen. Some organisms adapted and started using the oxygen to fuel their life processes, ultimately leading to the multitude of species you see today. |
Thats just a speculative theory... Nobody really knows.
Either way, it hardly justifies humans jumping off the cliff of extinction and taking 99% of everything else down with us, when we were actually able to avoid such a fate. I say "were", because i think the aforementioned "tipping point" see article link above (with video)- has probably already occurred. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dutchy pink
Joined: 06 Feb 2007
Location: Incheon
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 5:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Thats just a speculative theory... Nobody really knows. |
It is much more than just a speculative theory. But, to a certain extend you are right, but this is a flimsy argument. Nobody can prove the global warming feedback loops will happen, either.
But I agree, what happened 4 billion years ago doesn't justify the present situation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
endofthewor1d
Joined: 01 Apr 2003
Location: the end of the wor1d.
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 6:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Julius wrote: |
| dutchy pink wrote: |
This is completely untrue. In the early Earth, there was no free oxygen in the environment, well very minimal, less than 1%. Some organisms used hydrogen to fuel their life processes. As hydrogen became less available in some locales, these organisms started splitting water molecules, using the hydrogen and releasing oxygen into the atmosphere. Oxygen was a toxic substance to the near majority of organisms, and most died off.
Oxygen was the biggest, most devestating pollutant the world has ever seen. Some organisms adapted and started using the oxygen to fuel their life processes, ultimately leading to the multitude of species you see today. |
Thats just a speculative theory... Nobody really knows.
Either way, it hardly justifies humans jumping off the cliff of extinction and taking 99% of everything else down with us, when we were actually able to avoid such a fate. I say "were", because i think the aforementioned "tipping point" see article link above (with video)- has probably already occurred. |
well if that's true, at least it takes some of the pressure off. smoke 'em if you got 'em.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Julius
Joined: 27 Jul 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 6:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
Actually I was chatting to a Morrocan the other day. he says global warming is big over there. Apparently there are far fewer days of rain than even 20 years ago and people are struggling like never before. What you won't see in the media is that boatloads of them drown, get pulled from the water or are arrested every day trying to get to Spain and Europe to make a living. North Africa is increasingly arid and infertile. Partly overgrazing etc, partly climate change/ GW.
Expect the number of N.Africans risking their lives to get into Europe, to become an outright deluge in years to come. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 8:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| endofthewor1d wrote: |
big bird. that came out wrong. at the expense of keeping my family awake, i'll apologize. there is a reason i respect you. it's because, although we have opposing viewpoints, i can have a rational conversation with you.
i think there is a grey area with us that does not exist in conversations with bobster vs. bramble/pet lover/red dog. or even conversations with me vs. bramble/pet lover/red dog.
that, and you've told me how adorable my daughter is.
okay. that's it. last post until i wake up sober. |
Cheers EotW. I hadn't taken offence and understood quite well how you intended it. But thanks for the compliments all the same.
I've found your posts very humourous and entertaining, and have been enjoying the exchange between you and Julius.
Sadly, I think (from discussions with acquaintances with relevent degrees) that Julius is probably right. Although, I hope he isn't (I'd like him to be quite quite wrong). Especially about the part where we have already reached tipping point. Some scientists believe this. Other scientists believe we may have a bit more time before we reach tipping point (I've read 8 years). However, looking at the poor understanding of the general public, and the seeming lack of inclination to make the drastic personal sacrifices needed, 8 extra years probably won't make any difference.  I'd like to be very wrong about that, however. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
endofthewor1d
Joined: 01 Apr 2003
Location: the end of the wor1d.
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 9:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| endofthewor1d wrote: |
big bird. that came out wrong. at the expense of keeping my family awake, i'll apologize. there is a reason i respect you. it's because, although we have opposing viewpoints, i can have a rational conversation with you.
i think there is a grey area with us that does not exist in conversations with bobster vs. bramble/pet lover/red dog. or even conversations with me vs. bramble/pet lover/red dog.
that, and you've told me how adorable my daughter is.
okay. that's it. last post until i wake up sober. |
Cheers EotW. I hadn't taken offence and understood quite well how you intended it. But thanks for the compliments all the same.
I've found your posts very humourous and entertaining, and have been enjoying the exchange between you and Julius.
Sadly, I think (from discussions with acquaintances with relevent degrees) that Julius is probably right. Although, I hope he isn't (I'd like him to be quite quite wrong). Especially about the part where we have already reached tipping point. Some scientists believe this. Other scientists believe we may have a bit more time before we reach tipping point (I've read 8 years). However, looking at the poor understanding of the general public, and the seeming lack of inclination to make the drastic personal sacrifices needed, 8 extra years probably won't make any difference. I'd like to be very wrong about that, however. |
alright. if i were to accept that what you say is true. that still doesn't mean that we will cease to exist in 8 years. whenever the 'tipping point' occurs, we've still got quite a bit of time before we go the way of the dinosaurs.
julius never gave me a clear estimate as to what he thinks, so i'll ask you the same two questions.
1. how much time do you think we as a species have left on the planet?
2. how much time do you think it would take for us to develop the technology to find and colonize another planet?
i'm no scientist, but i think that 2 is much more likely to occur before 1. especially if we come to find that we really need to.
but really... i'm just saying that i think life is a lot tougher than you give it credit for. i remember once finding mushrooms sprouting in the carpet of the dining room in my parents' house. i would have thought that was pretty uninhabitable terrain. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dutchy pink
Joined: 06 Feb 2007
Location: Incheon
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 9:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ideas of 'tipping points" etc.... are human constructs. This is a human-centric worldview and I think it does more damage to the global warming debate than good.
It's only "tipping" out of our favor.
The Earth and Life ain't going nowhere.
IMO the global warming debate should be about the short term suffering that humans will experience due to desertification, flooding, etc...
This will garner far more sympathy from the middle-of-the-roaders than such things as habitat-loss for the rhesus monkey and artic caribou migrating patterns.
Most species that live/have ever lived, live on average of 5 million years.
We are approaching that quickly.
Are we different than the rest of life on this planet? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 9:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| endofthewor1d wrote: |
1. how much time do you think we as a species have left on the planet? |
I'm just a lay person, and anyone making an estimate would have to take so many variables into consideration. I agree with Julius that things could become so dire, that although we may continue as a species, our present civilisation would be in ruins and many of us will be sloughed from existence, with those of us left returning to a more primitive life-style. That's not an entirely unbelievable scenario, frankly. But it would take far too much typing on my part to explain why that is.
| Quote: |
| 2. how much time do you think it would take for us to develop the technology to find and colonize another planet? |
I'll treat this as a serious question. We would have to find a way of colonising planets that at present do not sustain life as we know it. That means creating artificial environments. That would take extraordinary resources and technological discovery. Suitable planets are impossibly far away. If we do colonise planets, there will not be enough transport to take billions with us. It would only be a tiny branch of the human race that benefitted. All this is still in the realms of science fiction. It would be far more feasible to adapt certain parts of this planet for habitation. However, again, this will probably mean only a minority benefit.
Your plan of action is a kin to a young guy saying well, I know that smoking could cause me cancer in the future, but I believe doctors will have found a cure for it by then. So I'll continue anyway. Surely they will have solved the problem before *I* die.
Last edited by Big_Bird on Sat Sep 22, 2007 9:30 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
