Lovelock: 'We can't save the planet'

"Yousuf Khan" wrote in message
...
BBC News - Today - Lovelock: 'We can't save the planet'
"Professor James Lovelock, the scientist who developed Gaia theory, has
said it is too late to try and save the planet.

The man who achieved global fame for his theory that the whole earth is a
single organism now believes that we can only hope that the earth will
take care of itself in the face of completely unpredictable climate
change. "
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today...00/8594561.stm

Good! Then maybe he'll shut the hell up and not disturb me while I burn some
wood in my fireplace, and run my gas guzzling car until the engine falls out
of it!

BBC News - Today - Lovelock: 'We can't save the planet'
"Professor James Lovelock, the scientist who developed Gaia theory, has
said it is too late to try and save the planet.

The man who achieved global fame for his theory that the whole earth is
a single organism now believes that we can only hope that the earth will
take care of itself in the face of completely unpredictable climate
change. "
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today...00/8594561.stm

On Thu, 01 Apr 2010 08:09:52 -0400, Yousuf Khan wrote:

BBC News - Today - Lovelock: 'We can't save the planet' "Professor James
Lovelock, the scientist who developed Gaia theory, has said it is too
late to try and save the planet.

The man who achieved global fame for his theory that the whole earth is
a single organism now believes that we can only hope that the earth will
take care of itself in the face of completely unpredictable climate
change. "
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today...00/8594561.stm

Gaia "theory" isn't a theory, it is a pile of emotional bull****. A
hypothesis can be tested, Gaia "theory" can't be tested. Further, a
theory is a hypothesis known to make useful predictions. Gaia "theory"
doesn't predict anything.

Lovelock is an idiot pandering to fools, not a scientist. He went to
medical school; which is a useful art, not a liberal art. Like so many
pre-med students passing through my physics class, he has no interest or
inclination for science.

Sorry.

On Apr 1, 8:17*am, Marvin the Martian wrote:
On Thu, 01 Apr 2010 08:09:52 -0400, Yousuf Khan wrote:
BBC News - Today - Lovelock: 'We can't save the planet' "Professor James
Lovelock, the scientist who developed Gaia theory, has said it is too
late to try and save the planet.

The man who achieved global fame for his theory that the whole earth is
a single organism now believes that we can only hope that the earth will
take care of itself in the face of completely unpredictable climate
change. "
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today...00/8594561.stm

Gaia "theory" isn't a theory, it is a pile of emotional bull****. A
hypothesis can be tested, Gaia "theory" can't be tested. Further, a
theory is a hypothesis known to make useful predictions. Gaia "theory"
doesn't predict anything.

Lovelock is an idiot pandering to fools, not a scientist. He went to
medical school; which is a useful art, not a liberal art. Like so many
pre-med students passing through my physics class, he has no interest or
inclination for science.

Sorry.

Don't mock Yousuf, he knows better.

It's the Beeb that's Liberally stoopid.


Mark L. Fergerson

wrote:
Don't mock Yousuf, he knows better.

It's the Beeb that's Liberally stoopid.


Mark L. Fergerson

The point Lovelock was trying to make is that there's no point in
blaming ourselves for bringing the temperature of the Earth up, and
there's even less point in trying to reverse it. The Earth can exist in
several stable temperature states, and it'll regulate those states itself.

Yousuf Khan

"Yousuf Khan" wrote in message
...
wrote:
Don't mock Yousuf, he knows better.

It's the Beeb that's Liberally stoopid.


Mark L. Fergerson

The point Lovelock was trying to make is that there's no point in blaming
ourselves for bringing the temperature of the Earth up, and there's even
less point in trying to reverse it. The Earth can exist in several stable
temperature states, and it'll regulate those states itself.

Yousuf Khan

Yep. We are part of Nature, whatever we do. We behave like locusts
and we'll die like locusts when the food runs out. As individuals we'll
all die anyway. A few will survive until the next swarm and it will go
on happening that way until Man becomes extinct like other species.
The insects will outlive us, Nature doesn't care.

Yousuf Khan a écrit :
BBC News - Today - Lovelock: 'We can't save the planet'
"Professor James Lovelock, the scientist who developed Gaia theory, has
said it is too late to try and save the planet.

The man who achieved global fame for his theory that the whole earth is
a single organism now believes that we can only hope that the earth will
take care of itself in the face of completely unpredictable climate
change. "
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today...00/8594561.stm

Consequence:

We can go on polluting like before, it is "too late" to do
anything about it.

I am sure that coal companies, oil companies, and many others
will appreciate that.

Androcles a écrit :

Yep. We are part of Nature, whatever we do. We behave like locusts
and we'll die like locusts when the food runs out. As individuals we'll
all die anyway. A few will survive until the next swarm and it will go
on happening that way until Man becomes extinct like other species.
The insects will outlive us, Nature doesn't care.


Who is "we"?

You fail to see that there are *some* people that profit from the
pollution and will go on polluting as long as the *others* that
suffer from the consequences of the pollution will let them go
on.

All technologies for reversing clima change are here. All technologies
for stopping pollution are here. But they are "too expensive" for the
people that make the decisions. Much cheaper for them is go on polluting
and profit from it.

As a demonsration you can compare the investment done by the U.S. to
save the banks, and the investment to clean the production process.

Problem is for us, we inherited a hierarchical social organization
from our ape-like ancestors. We are still living in a social
organization that is 100% ape-like, with the alpha ape down to
the omega ape. Democracy doesn't exist in their society.

Now, we are confronted to the problem of developing a human
sociaty, and getting rid of our ape society before it is too late.

Are we intelligent enough to be up to the challenge?

I do not know, but I am doing my best to give mankind a chance
of surviving.

jacob

A member of Greenpeace since 1997.

On 4/2/2010 5:05 AM, jacob navia wrote:
Yousuf Khan a écrit :
BBC News - Today - Lovelock: 'We can't save the planet'
"Professor James Lovelock, the scientist who developed Gaia theory,
has said it is too late to try and save the planet.

The man who achieved global fame for his theory that the whole earth
is a single organism now believes that we can only hope that the earth
will take care of itself in the face of completely unpredictable
climate change. "
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today...00/8594561.stm

Consequence:

We can go on polluting like before, it is "too late" to do
anything about it.

I am sure that coal companies, oil companies, and many others
will appreciate that.

Until something is done about China, there's not much point in "fixing"
it anywhere else anyway, and in terms of practical politics, nobody is
going to do anything about China.

"jacob navia" wrote in message
...
Androcles a écrit :

Yep. We are part of Nature, whatever we do. We behave like locusts
and we'll die like locusts when the food runs out. As individuals we'll
all die anyway. A few will survive until the next swarm and it will go
on happening that way until Man becomes extinct like other species.
The insects will outlive us, Nature doesn't care.


Who is "we"?

"We" are the species homo sapiens sapiens, unless you happen
to be a different kind of ape. Homo neanderthalensis, perhaps.
You'll still die from overpopulation when the food runs out, as
locusts do.

You fail to see that there are *some* people that profit from the
pollution and will go on polluting as long as the *others* that
suffer from the consequences of the pollution will let them go
on.

You fail to see that Nature doesn't worry about profit or 200,000
dead from an earthquake or tsunami, even if those dead bodies
pollute the environment the vultures will profit from it. Nature
doesn't care.


All technologies for reversing clima change are here. All technologies
for stopping pollution are here. But they are "too expensive" for the
people that make the decisions. Much cheaper for them is go on polluting
and profit from it.

All technologies for reversing population growth are here. All technologies
for genetic engineering are here. But the people that make the decisions
go on reproducing like locusts with their dull little selfish minds and
never consider the consequences of a population that doubles every
33 years, so in just one century it will be eight times greater.

Much cheaper for them is go on polluting and profit from it.

Yes, that's what "we" are doing. If there were half as many people
there would be half as much pollution, so the solution is to halt
the rate of increase.

As a demonsration you can compare the investment done by the U.S. to
save the banks, and the investment to clean the production process.

Nature doesn't care about banks.

Problem is for us, we inherited a hierarchical social organization
from our ape-like ancestors. We are still living in a social
organization that is 100% ape-like, with the alpha ape down to
the omega ape. Democracy doesn't exist in their society.

Who are "us", and who are "their" (they)?
Let's have a war and kill off all the (some other ethnic group) that is
polluting "our" world, they are not really "us" and if "we" had their
land "we" could grow crops on it and double "our" population
ever 33 years instead of letting "them" do it.

Problem is for us, we inherited a hierarchical social organization
from our locust-like ancestors. We are still living in a social
organization that is 100% locust-like, eating and reproducing as
fast as we can. Contraception doesn't exist in their society and
the Pope condemns it. The "good" book says "Go forth and
multiply" but it doesn't say when to stop.

Now, we are confronted to the problem of developing a human
sociaty, and getting rid of our ape society before it is too late.

Don't worry, Nature will deal with us the way she deals with locusts.
When there is nothing left to eat we'll kill each other or starve,
a few scavengers will survive and they won't need banks or oil.

Are we intelligent enough to be up to the challenge?

Of course not. The human locust is driven by its instincts,
intelligence has nothing to do with it.

I do not know, but I am doing my best to give mankind a chance
of surviving.

Too late, the human locust has swarmed and it is hungry. Donate
money for that little girl in that distant land, that she can have clean
water and an education; in under 15 years she'll have whelped two
more hungry mouths holding out for aid, and it is your instinct to
aid her.

jacob

A member of Greenpeace since 1997.

A futile pursuit. Hug all the trees you want to, the land will be
cleared for farming until there is no land left, then we kill each
other in earnest. And we are very good at it, we've had plenty
of practice.