logo
Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

2 Pages12>
NPG Forum Newletter
Val
#1 Posted : Tuesday, July 3, 2012 6:41:27 AM(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered, Approved
Joined: 8/18/2011(UTC)
Posts: 136
Location: NW Kansas

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
COMMENTARY by NPG President Donald Mann

The whirlwind of activity on the national stage surrounding illegal immigration these past two weeks has put NPG in the news.
As one of America’s top organizations fighting the push from the open-border lobby to destroy our nation’s immigration system, we are always eager to publicly comment on headline stories such as President Obama’s directive related to the DREAM Act and the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision on Arizona’s SB 1070.
Below, we have reproduced the press releases we issued on each of these important events. I urge you to take a moment to read them.
My primary objective in speaking out on these important issues is to give voice to the thousands of NPG supporters and millions of Americans who understand that our dysfunctional immigration system must get back on track now if we are going to rescue our country from a devastating population crisis.
Our national leaders and the American people must wake up to the fact that the central issue, with regard to both legal and illegal immigration, is it’s impact on the growth of our already overpopulated nation.
If we follow the lead of the Obama White House and continue to dilute any effort to deport those who broke our laws to enter our country, we are only exacerbating a crisis that is already out of control. And if we continually have federal and state courts issuing confusing and oftentimes contradictory rulings on how existing immigration laws are enforced, we seriously impede our chances to make progress toward sensible solutions.
The more our nation gets caught up in arguments about “children’s rights” and what law enforcement can and can’t do in a given situation, we are losing sight of our ultimate goal – a sane and sensible national immigration and population policy that will serve the best interests of our nation, rather than add to its divisiveness.
It is important to understand that the longer our nation’s immigration policy remains muddled and our laws unenforced, the more attractive it becomes for illegals to sneak into our country by whatever means possible. As the economy starts to improve, we are sure to see an ever-increasing flow of illegals streaming across our borders.
Please know that NPG is constantly at work making sure that more of our fellow citizens understand that they can no longer remain silent on the critical issues of immigration and population growth. We must find a solution to this crisis – and soon!



NEGATIVE POPULATION GROWTH CONDEMNS
OBAMA IMMIGRATION ORDER

ASSERTS THAT RIGOROUS DEPORTATION PROGRAM IS ESSENTIAL ELEMENT IN AN EFFECTIVE IMMIGRATION POLICY

Alexandria, VA (June 19, 2012) – Negative Population Growth (NPG) President Donald Mann forcefully denounced the Obama Administration’s new policy that will immediately stop deportations and start granting work permits for hundreds of thousands of young illegal immigrants now in the U.S.
Mann criticized President Obama’s actions as a major setback toward responsible immigration reform by stating: “Rather than taking the long overdue steps to make clear to one and all that there is a real consequence – namely deportation – to violating our nation’s immigration laws, the White House is enacting a far-reaching policy that is vague on details and will only create even more havoc and overload in our present dysfunctional immigration system.”
NPG joined with other organizations and elected leaders who stressed that in effecting this radical policy change to present immigration laws, President Obama is doing an end run around Congress; going against the wishes of hard-pressed American taxpayers who are demanding stronger – rather than weaker – immigration laws; and giving the green light to illegals who will now be able to compete with citizens and legal residents for very scarce jobs."
Dingo
#2 Posted : Tuesday, July 3, 2012 11:02:53 AM(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered, Approved
Joined: 6/10/2012(UTC)
Posts: 101
Location: California

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
Frankly Val I think Mann is being a bit disingenuous by not also looking at the hiring side of the equation. The game is quite clear, you put up a lot of border guards but if the illegals get through and get a job that mostly Americans won't take at a price that makes them worth hiring then you pretty much leave them alone. It's the way our economy works. We could stop illegal immigration if we wanted to. But we would rather have their labor.

The real question is how do we build a society-economy that doesn't require outsiders to maintain it. I'd like to see NPR get on that issue along with breaking the back of the endless economic growth obsession.
Val
#3 Posted : Wednesday, July 4, 2012 8:44:56 AM(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered, Approved
Joined: 8/18/2011(UTC)
Posts: 136
Location: NW Kansas

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
I signed up quite a while ago at http://www.growthbusters.org and bought the DVD. Here is the latest email link;
it is funny, yet poignant.
http://worldpopulationday.org/
JohnTaves
#4 Posted : Wednesday, July 4, 2012 11:01:34 AM(UTC)
Rank: Administration

Groups: Administrators, Approved
Joined: 7/14/2011(UTC)
Posts: 75

Val;160 wrote:
I signed up quite a while ago at http://www.growthbusters.org and bought the DVD.

I found that DVD useless. The author does not comprehend that individuals, corporations, and governments all acting to improve their economic pie has almost no effect on the number of children we average. The whole concept of attempting to get people to stop improving their economic pie is totally pointless.
Val
#5 Posted : Wednesday, July 4, 2012 12:51:59 PM(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered, Approved
Joined: 8/18/2011(UTC)
Posts: 136
Location: NW Kansas

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
The whole thing with growth busters was a humorous, fact filled approach to showing the negative effects of economic, population, urban, and over consumption growths. To us, it was preaching to the choir. I think of NPG, and the US population has gone up more than 50% since they started, so education and ads have had very little effect. Immigration has been the cause of 90% of it, and the other 10% the lowbrows who can't understand overpopulation and ecology either. The immigrants are escaping their own overpopulation ruin to spread it to host countries.
It has progressed to the point that a near generation long moratorium on having any kids is the only thing that could mitigate both AGW and the population crash circa 2030 to 2050 for peak population before rapid die-off. Back in the 1970s to mid 1980s, stopping at two would have worked. It is doubtful people will stop burning fossil fuels and slash and burn agriculture and deforestation. People will never go to a moratorium on pregnancies.
That means the population crash will happen probably just before mid century from depletion of key resources, and pollution effects, and its effect on food and good water supplies. People will keep burning fossil fuels to a point soon when several tipping points of positive feedback occur that are in progress now. The peak from these will be over a thousand years in the future, with a small human population eking it out in ever worsening conditions.
I guess we make efforts that are really pointless because we are among the few that care and have the morality to try to educate others and speak out in every way we can, if only to know we are doing what is the right thing, the good. We walk the talk, or at least many of us do, living low eco-footprint lifestyles, one or no kids(remember the multiplier for 2 kids is 40 times the carbon legacy), solar power, hybrids or better vehicles, growing our own food as much as we can, and voting for who ever may lower population as a start, even if it is just kicking out 30 million illegals and fining their million or more felonious encouragers.
Dingo
#6 Posted : Thursday, July 5, 2012 10:52:48 PM(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered, Approved
Joined: 6/10/2012(UTC)
Posts: 101
Location: California

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
Growth Busters is a good source for links. Among others they have Annie Leonards 'Story of Stuff', about as good a use of cartooning with presentation as I've seen to make an important statement.
Val
#7 Posted : Friday, December 19, 2014 8:27:44 AM(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered, Approved
Joined: 8/18/2011(UTC)
Posts: 136
Location: NW Kansas

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)



The NPG Journal

Volume 8, Number 2


WHAT DOES GLOBAL POPULATION GROWTH REALLY MEAN?


"A recent paper published by Science Magazine titled "World population stabilization unlikely this century" has put a new spotlight on global population growth. The paper's panel of expert authors concluded: "There is an 80% probability that world population, now 7.2 billion people, will increase to between 9.6 billion and 12.3 billion in 2100."



In the deluge of media coverage, an interesting article by Kevin Smead was published by Energy Digital on December 4. The article includes an informative graphic further explaining the population crisis, as well as the areas of everyday life that it affects. Some notable highlights from the article include:



It took until about the year 1804 for the Earth to hit 1 billion people. Just two centuries later, the world's population has exploded exponentially by more than another 6 billion people.

By 2025, 1.8 billion people will be living in countries or regions with absolute water scarcity.

The United States uses 1 million gallons of oil every 2 minutes.

While population has exploded exponentially, unfortunately the resources on our planet are finite. The ecological term for this is "carrying capacity," which is the maximum population that our environment and resources can sustain indefinitely.

While technology has saved the human race time after time, we have not yet found ways to address many of the problems tied to overpopulation, consumption, changes to climate, inequality, and scarcity of resources.



Perhaps most notable is the graphic's simple statement: "And this is just the beginning." These alarming realities hold true for U.S. population growth as well as the world. NPG encourages all concerned Americans to stand together - we must advocate for national policies which work to slow, halt, and eventually reverse U.S. population growth. For more information on NPG's proposed population policies, see our 10 Principles for a Responsible U.S. Population Policy.



THE PLIGHT OF THE CHESAPEAKE BAY CONTINUES

In a recent article in MarylandReporter.com, Chesapeake Bay expert (and NPG Forum author) Tom Horton revisits the plight of the Bay. During a panel discussion, Horton was challenged with the all-too-common question: "Chesapeake Bay is a national treasure. Who are you to say how many people should live here and enjoy it?" In this thoughtful article, Horton carefully highlights the flaws in this argument - and why population growth is so damaging to the Bay.



He explains: "For the record, the population in the watershed has more than doubled from the 8 million people here when the Bay was healthier in the 1950s. It is expected to triple in the next several decades... The 17-plus million already living in the watershed already need to reduce their environmental impacts by a large and expansive measure to avoid ruining this national treasure, the Chesapeake. And it's not clear, after decades of trying, that we can do this. So is it responsible to keep adding more pressure?"



Horton's discussion of the negative consequences of population growth on the Chesapeake Bay serves as a window to the rest of the United States. Using simple examples of the costs of growth on the environment, economy, and infrastructure, Horton notes: "And to what ends do we pursue all that growth? What do the millions already here get from it? Do they get better, or just bigger? We ask questions like those about as much as we question gravity." He rightly concludes: "Growth needs a better look."


For more information, see Tom Horton's NPG Forum paper Revisiting the Chesapeake Bay: The Effect of Population Growth on America's Largest Estuary. To get involved in protecting the Chesapeake Bay - and to help NPG educate more Americans about the effects of population growth - we encourage you to contact NPG and request a copy of our Chesapeake Bay poster. This full-color and fact-filled poster focuses on the irrefutable correlation between population growth and overdevelopment in the Bay's extensive watershed and the detrimental health of its ecosystem. Call NPG at 703-370-9510 and request your free poster today - it will serve as a strong educational gift to your local school or library!

BRITAIN'S RECENT POPULATION GROWTH: 'ALMOST ENTIRELY' DUE TO IMMIGRATION


A recent article in Breitbart News reports that: "A new study has cast doubt on the government's official immigration figures, claiming that a higher than previously thought 84% of [Britain's] population growth this century so far has been caused by migration, and that figure could rise to 100% in 25 years." Sound familiar?



The new figures are the work of the think-tank MigrationWatch UK, whose report explains: "While official figures place population growth due to migration at an already high 57%, this 'underestimates the demographic power of migration,' and that many of the children being born to this country are to immigrant parents. Once this is factored in, the figure rises to 84% - meaning only a small fraction of population growth in the UK is down to long settled families."



The report continues: "Indeed, the findings explain the unprecedented population explosion this century which has come despite a plummeting fertility rate for British families, as women put off having children for professional reasons." Sir Andrew Green, who heads MigrationWatch UK, noted: "This [population growth due to immigration] would place enormous stress on our already creaking infrastructure and on our environment. And it would also change the nature of British society forever."



This eye-opening article could easily be altered for the current situation in the United States. According to Breitbart, Britain's net migration is thought to be running at close to quarter of a million admissions a year. The U.S. accepts over 4 times as many legal immigrants annually - and nearly twice as many are thought to enter our nation illegally each year.



NPG advocates the position of James Brokenshire, Britain's immigration and security minister, who noted: "Uncontrolled, mass immigration... makes it difficult to maintain social cohesion, puts pressure on public services and forces down wages. That's why our focus remains on controlling migration at sustainable levels."



"The major problems in the world are the result in the difference between how nature works and the way people think."

- Gregory Bateson





"If you really think the environment is less important than the economy, try holding your breath while you count your money."

- Guy McPherson





"It's ironic: We have all of these environmental agencies, from the federal Environmental Protection Agency on down, to restrict pollution - while the growth that drives it is actively sought by every level of government."

- Tom Horton
http://www.npg.org
Dingo
#8 Posted : Monday, December 22, 2014 4:59:05 AM(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered, Approved
Joined: 6/10/2012(UTC)
Posts: 101
Location: California

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
Val;10997 wrote:






"The major problems in the world are the result in the difference between how nature works and the way people think."

- Gregory Bateson





"If you really think the environment is less important than the economy, try holding your breath while you count your money."

- Guy McPherson

Those are definitely keepers.




Quote:

"It's ironic: We have all of these environmental agencies, from the federal Environmental Protection Agency on down, to restrict pollution - while the growth that drives it is actively sought by every level of government."

- Tom Horton
http://www.npg.org

The problem is the public. They promote the problem (Think forced birth fascists) and then want the consequences managed by their government.
Val
#9 Posted : Monday, December 22, 2014 9:18:57 AM(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered, Approved
Joined: 8/18/2011(UTC)
Posts: 136
Location: NW Kansas

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
Yes, a public that, worldwide, has a 30+% accidental birth rate, in addition to not caring, or genetic greed, or plain stupid.
18 trillion debt, and much comes from the population growth of the needy, imported and at home.
What will come first? Overpopulation caused economic failure, a large natural disaster, or several, that 'break the bank'?
A group of diseases that we can no longer afford to fight? More war? Ecological collapse in various areas? Extreme cancer rates? Or just plain running short on everything needed to live. All of these?
I like your "forced birth fascists". The Catholic Church, the Mormon 'Church', the kill cult moslems, Evangelical Christians along with more sects like the shakers and snake handlers. Then you have others who get advantage with more kids, generational welfare, and certain groups single motherhood rates.
It is really sickening to see, really for all my life, the growth of growth for growth's sake, without environmental regard at all, or insufficiently. Greed for more, more and more! Taking more and putting in more pollution, until biosphere failure.
To me, humans ARE NOT an intelligent species, for the most part. Too bad for us.
Dingo
#10 Posted : Saturday, December 27, 2014 1:24:53 AM(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered, Approved
Joined: 6/10/2012(UTC)
Posts: 101
Location: California

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
Val;10999 wrote:

To me, humans ARE NOT an intelligent species, for the most part. Too bad for us.

As the anthropologist Kroeber put it according to the Native Americans Ishi's thinking the European invaders were "smart but not wise."
Val
#11 Posted : Saturday, December 27, 2014 8:59:51 AM(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered, Approved
Joined: 8/18/2011(UTC)
Posts: 136
Location: NW Kansas

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
Like I've said before. There were NO "native" Americans, north OR south, and there also were no
"native" Australians. However, the Aborigines did get across the SE Asian land and short sea route
to Australia 50K+ years ago, and in N. America probably 25K years ago, with S. America a thousand years later.
Humans came out of Africa 80K years ago, and really, anyplace else was not native to them.
If humans were a really intelligent species, the environmental wisdom learned in those 80K years
should have been to all instead of the diminishing percentage of "wise" or "medicine" men (and women).
Dingo
#12 Posted : Saturday, December 27, 2014 11:58:53 AM(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered, Approved
Joined: 6/10/2012(UTC)
Posts: 101
Location: California

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
If you have been hanging around an area for thousands of years I would call you "Native". However if you want to get technical no species is native to anywhere.
Val
#13 Posted : Sunday, December 28, 2014 10:19:02 AM(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered, Approved
Joined: 8/18/2011(UTC)
Posts: 136
Location: NW Kansas

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
Species are native to the continent or continents where they evolved. Humans evolved mostly in Africa.
How many years to claim being native? A thousand? The Vikings made a settlement in Nova Scotia 999 to 1002 when they then interbred and were absorbed by the Ojibwa. So Vikings could be said to be native?
How about some tribes that came over 9K years ago, only to be wiped out because they were white. In Washington State, the horrible tale was found.
There is the possibility that humans got to S Am prior to the Solutrian proto-"Indians". These were relatives of the SE Asia aborigines, close to 48K years ago. They were wiped out by the newer immigrants from Spain and France--the Solutrians.
Chinese explorers were there in the 400s. Later Europeans regularly hit the E N Am shores, the Basques and probably an Irish priest. Then came the days of world exploration by the Spanish, French, Danes, English, Portuguese, and Italians, and the Spanish brutal conquest of Mexico, Central America and S Am.
Prior to the occupation of NW Europe, the Solutrians wiped out the Neanderthals. As the first migrations from African went east to India then eventually Australia, remaining Homo Erectus were killed, and one miniature version lasted for a long time on a single Indonesian Island.
The main thing is that humans became their own predators when the mega fauna and large carnivores were brought to extinction with the Folsom Point. Then came 'Christian' compassion and tolerance, which lowered the self-predation to insufficient.
The situation was ripe for a stimulated geometric population rise when more food became available with fossil fuel use.
Of course, there were medical tech and cultural inability to change to a lower TFR.
How can this "Juggernaut" of destruction be stopped? Not with even one child families anymore. It is too late to stop the crash, and if it happens earlier, the biosphere could be saved.
No one wishes for apocalypse, but that is what is needed before 2030 to stop fatal pollution from HGHGs.
Will it be Cascadia? La Palma's tsunami producing huge landslide? Katla making a world volcanic winter? Or Yellowstone making a ten year volcanic winter? Wars, diseases, malnutrition, starvation, death from thirst, economic hardships brought on by overpopulation, these are all part of it.
What if not enough reduction is done in time? Then humanity and most life will go extinct on Earth, with perhaps a 50 million year recovery period. Runaway methane and CO2 self releases, along with acid oceans, could eventually even kill the thermal vent extremophobes when the oceans boil away to a permanent cloud cover until Nova.
We will probably not know before extinction in the early 2100s.
Val
#14 Posted : Thursday, January 1, 2015 12:43:03 PM(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered, Approved
Joined: 8/18/2011(UTC)
Posts: 136
Location: NW Kansas

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)







NPG’s 10 Principles for a Responsible U.S. Population Policy

by NPG
on August 20, 2014
in NPG Comments
2 Comments

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditlinkedinmail
10 Principles for a Responsible U.S. Population Policy



1. Unrestricted Access to Family Planning Resources

All U.S. residents – regardless of income, citizenship status, or gender – must have reliable, affordable, and unrestricted access to family planning and educational materials, contraception, and reproductive health assistance. Priority funding must be allocated to research safe, effective, and inexpensive contraceptive methods – with greater emphasis on developing options for males. Free ual education must be expanded through public schools, as well as private family planning and community organizations.



2. Promotion and Encouragement of Smaller Family SizeID-100172987

As part of a broad public discussion, the United States must endorse smaller families as beneficial to our nation’s future. Free from any coercive measures, we must promote the benefits of having two or fewer children through high-level political endorsement, community and public school education, and tax incentives. Existing subsidies for parenthood must be redesigned to provide generous support for the first child, limited support for the second, and none for subsequent births. Special tax incentives may also be designed for families or individuals who remain childless.



ID-100126384

3. Increased Opportunities for Women

U.S. society – and government at all levels – must maximize educational and career opportunities for women. Such advancement has been proven to significantly lower fertility rates. Employment laws, college admissions requirements, and organizational oversight procedures must be adjusted to ensure equal opportunities for the acceptance and advancement of women, as well as equal wages for women in all professional categories.





4. Significantly Reduce Annual Legal Immigration LevelsID-10096062

Annual admissions of legal immigrants, as well as long-term “temporary” migrants, currently average 1.3 million a year. We must phase-out extensive family reunification and “chain migration” policies, gradually reducing total admissions to no more than 200,000 per year. This roughly balances immigration intake with out-migration, and could be adjusted to reflect any changes in future demographic trends. The lowered admissions can then be appropriately apportioned among humanitarian, business, and necessary specialty categories.




ID-1002433675. Strict Enforcement of Existing Laws Against Illegal Entry
In both Congress and the White House, there must be a strong and consistent commitment to upholding our nation’s laws – regardless of political differences. Existing laws barring illegal entry through our border or ports of entry must be strictly enforced. Border Patrol, U.S. Customs, and U.S. Attorneys must be provided with the necessary personnel, resources, and access to high-risk areas to secure our border and ports of entry, as well as prosecute all immigration offenses.





6. Immediate Internal Enforcement within the U.S.ID-100108199

With an estimated 12 million illegal aliens already present, there is strong incentive for millions more to enter our nation. Laws against illegal presence, alien smuggling, and document fraud must be rigorously enforced. Deportation and “expedited removal” procedures should be frequent and speedy. We must mandate America’s 7 million employers to comply with the E-Verify system, denying illegal aliens access to jobs. We must immediately strengthen consular screening and adopt a mandatory check-in/check-out system for temporary visas.



birth17. Clarification of Birthright Citizenship

Under present interpretation of the 14th Amendment, all children born on U.S. soil – regardless of the residency status of either parent – are granted automatic citizenship. This perpetuates illegal immigration and the growing “birth tourism” industry, along with the forgery of vital documents. Such application of birthright citizenship is granted to more than 400,000 newborns annually – all of whom are later eligible to sponsor the visas of multiple extended relatives through current chain migration policies. The application of the 14th Amendment must be clarified to confer citizenship only when at least one parent is a citizen or legal resident alien.



8. Mandate the Cooperation of State and Local Governments

The federal government presently discourages – or bars outright – many state and local immigration enforcement initiatives under the “federal supremacy” doctrine. Yet Washington often ignores violation of its supremacy as applied to state or local “sanctuary” jurisdictions – which have no legal basis. We must demand cooperation on all levels. Non-compliant governments should be denied federal grants, such as those for law enforcement and community development. State governments should also be encouraged to examine: a) their family planning programs as a long-term population factor, and b) their population policies which subsidize rapid growth or encourage illegal alien settlement.



class-raising-hands-1024x6829. Enlist America’s Young People in the Fight for Their Future

Our nation’s next generation of leaders must play a vital role in planning our future population policies for the future. The federal government must do more to educate today’s students regarding the dangers of overpopulation for our environment, natural resources, and quality of life. We must adopt public education curricula which encourage a sense of personal responsibility for future generations, as well as advocate responsible family planning decisions.



10. Create a National Population Commission

Without delay, our elected leaders must create a permanent National Population Commission – complete with government, private, and academic representatives – to study current and future population growth, its composition and distribution, and its social, economic, and environmental consequences. This Commission can then make recommendations on immigration and other population multipliers to the President, Congress, and state and local governments. The Commission’s goal will be to establish and maintain a national population in balance with our resources and within sustainable limits. Congress should also create a counterpart commission within its committee structure.
Dingo
#15 Posted : Saturday, January 3, 2015 1:11:57 PM(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered, Approved
Joined: 6/10/2012(UTC)
Posts: 101
Location: California

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
It seems weird to advocate for a massive wipe out since that will take care of itself. Whether with billions of people or starting over at the Adam and Eve level, exponential growth would rapidly close the gap, the challenge remains the same - find a more or less steady state population level that is sustainable and get there and then stay within those boundaries. Conscious child bearing that considers the fate of others is critical to achieving that desirable condition. Developing an expertise with experts on the matter of population ecology that most of us can respect and the others will have to respect is also critical.

The NPG list addresses some of this and I think generally is a pretty good one. There is however the continuing question of emphasis which I'm inclined to fault them for. They keep putting the burden more on the illegal immigrants than the folks that hire them. It's action-attraction as far as I am concerned. We have illegals because on balance this country wants their labor. Until we get honest about that and make the correctives then the problem won't go away. And I haven't even gotten to the mess we have helped make of these immigrant countries that make them want to leave to their rich brother to the north; drug purchasing and support for bad governments just for starters.
Val
#16 Posted : Saturday, January 3, 2015 3:20:28 PM(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered, Approved
Joined: 8/18/2011(UTC)
Posts: 136
Location: NW Kansas

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
Here I thought your were Australian!
NPG calls for things that already happened years ago with two Presidential Commissions, one by Nixon, and one ignored by over-Baptist Carter.
They call for two child families when I wrote them three years ago that the TBR had to lower to 0 for nearly a generation to avoid the crash and people had to go green and establish a 10% of 1998 level of HGHG output before 2024 to effectively eventually halt AGW to before the tipping point of methane turnover.
So, I have not paid my dues. Trying to stop overpopulation, or get all people to go green, is an impossible task. We keep trying anyway.
In reality, it will take an Act of God like Cascadia, La Palma, or Katla within the time limit or Yellowstone after.
There is also the possibility of none of those happening before temperatures skyrocket up past +10*F. That could be as soon as 2040. The oceans are releasing methane much faster than originally thought they would. The tundra tipping point could even be AFTER the oceans begin explosive large releases. There is up to a thousand times more sequestered carbon than is in the atmosphere and ocean dissolution right now. Whether it takes 50 million years to regenerate itself totally or if the runaway takes away the biosphere until nova, is something we will not know, except maybe in Heaven.
Since we can not stop the human population crash, let us hope it happens sooner than 2024, and somehow, the biosphere eventually recovers with humans and most species still here. Once the turnover is a positive feedback loop, it is too late for a population crash to stop it going to GTE. Then Yellowstone is the only hope of survival before the +10*F hits. After, there is no hope at all, and humans will be gone forever from Earth, along with over 95% of species extant 9K BC. The "Sixth Great Extinction" with no witnesses left.
Dingo
#17 Posted : Sunday, January 4, 2015 2:03:24 AM(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered, Approved
Joined: 6/10/2012(UTC)
Posts: 101
Location: California

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
Val if you or anyone else wants to source a recent runaway scenario study stated by a climate scientist of any repute I would love to see it. I know in the past folks like Hansen speculated on the matter but from what I've read further studies have tended to poo poo the theory of a tipping point followed by a self-generating runaway ghg explosion. No question greater warmth generates methane and CO2 from the tundra and ocean. However my impression is the effect is pretty much linear. More AGW generates more ghg. Stop the AGW and the earth generating effect soon ceases.

This is not about my opinion versus your opinion. I want to see solid science shown by solid climate scientists based on recent studies.
Val
#18 Posted : Sunday, January 4, 2015 10:41:22 AM(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered, Approved
Joined: 8/18/2011(UTC)
Posts: 136
Location: NW Kansas

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
Well, let me go through my bookmarks and find links for you;
No particular order;
http://www.skepticalscie...pping-Point-Coming.html
http://www.theguardian.c...rctic-methane-time-bomb
http://www.skepticalscie...ans-faster-warming.html
https://www.sciencenews....g-could-melt-permafrost
http://www.wunderground.com/climate/PETM.asp?MR=1
http://www.skepticalscie...e-Back-to-Haunt-us.html
http://www.wunderground....climate-change-20130927
http://americablog.com/2...ss-extinction-2100.html
http://www.skepticalscie...eat-widget-metrics.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6pFDu7lLV4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21D3ByfPTx8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HITbxpjDNgM
http://arstechnica.com/s...east-300-million-years/
http://www.natureworldne...rming.htm#disqus_thread
http://www.carbonbrief.o...d7-05ddda83a7-303429069
http://www.nbcnews.com/s...g-limit-experts-n257006
http://www.ameg.me/
http://grist.org/climate...mp;utm_campaign=climate
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kx1Jxk6kjbQ

You will have to peruse links within the articles, too. It means you have to do some math yourself. With the 2047 date, you must remember the momentum in the picture for finding a time when, including implementation time, when and how much people have to reduce emissions, and remember they all are not from fossil fuel burning, but ~30% from slash and burn farming.
In the links you will find the various studies done and scientists involved.
The AMEG site will probably be the best, besides SKS and Wunderground. You can do your own calculations, if able, and complete in multiple disciplines. Then if you are realistic with minimal conservatism, you will see what will probably happen in various scenarios, including runaway to 100% methane turnover. We are in a region never before experienced in Earth's geologic history, to this extent, by one species. Except for when cyanobacteria transformed the CO2 to O2 3.5 billion years ago. That was a positive for animal life to evolve. This is a negative to very long term biosphere destruction. Perhaps Hansen's Venus Effect.
Dingo
#19 Posted : Sunday, January 4, 2015 3:36:10 PM(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered, Approved
Joined: 6/10/2012(UTC)
Posts: 101
Location: California

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
Thanks for the links Val. I read through the first 5 and was only able to come up with one scientist that predicted a possible runaway effect where the temperature continues to climb over a long term on its own due to enhanced feedbacks. That scientist was of course James Hansen who I already mentioned. There is more of a debate about sudden methane release once certain thresholds are arrived at like ice melt unleashing formerly trapped gas from methane pockets. However the records of warmer periods don't reflect the kind of extended sudden jump up that one would expect from a runaway effect. Accelerated warming at certain times due to major ghg releases is different from some sort of runaway scenario.

Obviously I can't rule it out but for now I just don't see the evidence for a major runaway effect. Good articles full of dire warnings about the effects of global warming almost never bring up any runaway effect, although they do talk about being stuck with the higher temperature you got due to the persistence of CO2. Here is one article for instance.

http://thinkprogress.org...ate-change-yet-to-come/

Edit.
I have since read that a scientific group with the initials AMEG does suggest that an arctic driven runaway effect could be in the offing. Their views are not acknowledged by the IPCC or promoted by any other major scientific group that I could see. Their arguments appeared to me to be more informally discursive than systematically scientific, but who knows.

Just a side point; one inhibiting effect as the temperature moves higher is that heat loss to outer space goes up exponentially. That accounts for the higher and higher CO2 doubling requirement to achieve a roughly 3 deg. C rise. Having to go from 400 to 800 ppb of CO2 to bring about the 3 deg. temperature rise is a lot greater than going from 200 to 400.
Val
#20 Posted : Monday, January 5, 2015 12:10:12 PM(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered, Approved
Joined: 8/18/2011(UTC)
Posts: 136
Location: NW Kansas

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
The massive release of oceanic methane deposits and tundra deposits happened not only during PETM, but also the Permian Great Dying. There was only a partial turnover, mainly because there was a lot less carbon sequestered in all forms. Now there is many times more than necessary to go to runaway. However, even a greater than Permian, as indicated by studies, mainly because of ocean acidification not in those two episodes, is not something we would want to happen. The PETM had a 30 million year recovery, while Permian's was 50 million. I don't see this recovery happening this time, unfortunately. We won't know because we will be extinct, and it is doubtful that intelligent life will again be here in 50+ million years. It doesn't matter if it goes to full turnover, and the Venus Effect. A Great Dying of over 95% with more acidic oceans than ever since life formed on Earth, will be more than enough.
So you can see why it is important that some catastrophe kill off most people before that happens or a super-eruption before the temperature goes up past +10*F as soon as 2047, or as late as 2100. I think Yellowstone is actually due more like in 2000 years, not 50 or so, therefore attempting to cause it to erupt by drilled deep around the magma chamber nuclear bombs, every ten miles, 1MGT 1/4 mile from the bottom of the magma chamber simultaneous detonation. About 120 MGTs total in the 120 miles around the chamber. Some people think it is a crazy thing to do, but I do not. I consider saving the biosphere, and hopefully the human species, as of paramount importance.
I believe it is God's Will to try. He certainly did not want all the lust, greed, jealousy, stealing, killing for allah, and the other shit, like using the God forsaken fossil fuels up faster than they were formed. Overpopulating to 8 or more times long term sustainable was also NOT God's Plan, IMHO.
The very first commandment is to "Replenish the Earth" and people ignored it, for thousands of years, and especially the last 100.
Users browsing this topic
Guest (2)
2 Pages12>
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Powered by YAF 1.9.5.5 | YAF © 2003-2011, Yet Another Forum.NET
This page was generated in 0.503 seconds.