Quantcast
Opinion

Letter: Outdated climate

Comments

Return To Article
  • marxist Salt Lake City, UT
    July 27, 2014 2:15 a.m.

    I sympathize with the writer, and I agree that a reckoning is coming with growth colliding with biological reality. But as the Keynesians demonstrated to economics, a capitalist economy must grow continually to stay out of trouble.

    Savings accumulated do not induce investment. So unless there is constant new investment (not just equipment replacement) the system can come into equilibrium at less than full employment. So it has to be full bore peddle-to-the-metal.

    At some point though we need to learn some new tricks. China, the new #1 economy, which has been through multiple transformations, and is a major polluter, may show the way.

  • embarrassed Utahn! Salt Lake City, UT
    July 27, 2014 6:57 a.m.

    Do people even understand that this planet can survive without us.
    Humans will be wiped off the face of the earth and life will begin anew without us.
    Also, if humans are the most intellectually advance form of life on earth, then why are we destroying our home? You don't find those other "sub-human" animals doing the damage.

  • higv Dietrich, ID
    July 27, 2014 9:56 a.m.

    Humans have no control over the climate, Way to control us, and the earth was built for man we were not built for the earth.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    July 27, 2014 9:58 a.m.

    Use it up, wear it out, make it do or do without

    ===

    Having travel this vast world,
    I have found countries who have been around for thousands of years live by this rule.

    It was not uncommon to find buildings 600 years old still being used daily, profitable, and very much sought for.

    Utah is a 30 year disposable, moving, train wreck.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    July 27, 2014 9:58 a.m.

    Out here, we're told there is always infinitely more to consume.

  • Eli Tesecular PhD Salt Lake City, UT
    July 27, 2014 12:07 p.m.

    We definitely need Democrats to take the reins in Utah. We could then become a progressive and sustainable state, say, like Michigan.

  • ugottabkidn Sandy, UT
    July 27, 2014 12:34 p.m.

    hivg, I am positive your maker does not approve of our abuse. I wonder if He approves of the high man caused levels of methane in the Uinta Basin or in the Denver area. I personally believe He doesn't approve of our ignoring the opportunity to improve our living conditions throughout the world. I believe there are few sins greater than not trying.

  • Curmudgeon Salt Lake City, UT
    July 27, 2014 12:41 p.m.

    Everyone should read Richard Heinberg's "The End of Growth." Very enlightening.

  • high school fan Huntington, UT
    July 27, 2014 1:56 p.m.

    Not sure what the author was really trying to say here as there was a lot of assumptions on unrelated items. If the author really wants to convey a message then that message must be identified and an argument made for their point of view.
    As best as I can tell, this is just several random thoughts bunched together with no coherent argument backing it up.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    July 27, 2014 2:09 p.m.

    Perhaps not, VST. But how about if we continue trying to educate the voters who put them there?

    The biggest problem we face in doing that is finding some way to get them to unplug their ears and begin listening to something besides big money, right wing propaganda.

  • higv Dietrich, ID
    July 27, 2014 2:29 p.m.

    @Embarrased Utahn The earth is the only planet or moon in our solar system that can sustain life. Other planets and moons of course survive but they cannot sustain life. And humans are not destroying the planet. Our survival and comfort is dependent on Agriculture, drilling, mining, and use of electricity and cars that is what our Creator gave us to use wisely. You obviously use electricity, I am sure drive and live in climate controlled houses. No other apeceies uses rational thought or learns new things and passes them on. They eat the food that is there and rely on mostly instinct and some learned behavior by experience. Can't compare what other creatures do. Human survival and feeding the world is dependent on what you criticize.

  • Sven Morgan, UT
    July 27, 2014 3:48 p.m.

    The author said:

    “We are now facing severe environmental, population...”

    Actually, we’re not.

    The Warmers and their “scientists” have not only been dead wrong in their predictions concerning global warming, but they’ve also misrepresented the data, and outright lied to push this myth. The Warmers are the true “deniers.”

    Once again the Left is pushing population control. Any wonder these ghouls love abortions.

    Just like their bogus predictions concerning AGW, the Left also got it woefully wrong in their predictions concerning over-population. Consider the "predictions" of liberal icon, and Stanford University biology professor, Paul Ehrlich, from his 1968 book, “The Population Bomb”:

    * In the 1970s, hundreds of millions of people would starve to death.

    * In the 1980s, food riots would cause the president to dissolve the US Congress, and 65 million Americans would die of starvation and disease.

    * By 1999 the US population would be reduced to only 22 million, and India and Great Britain would cease to exist.

    The left do not deal in science or facts, they deal in fear mongering. These two issues are simply the means by which they can control and suppress the people. These people are nothing but oppressive statists.

  • Eli Tesecular PhD Salt Lake City, UT
    July 27, 2014 4:19 p.m.

    high school fan said.... "Not sure what the author was really trying to say here as there was a lot of assumptions on unrelated items."

    Allow me to help you understand the author who, as I am, is a highly educated University professor trying to pound the reality of global (including Utah) doom into heads full of mush.

    Vastness is no more. We are cramming too many people into the world (and Utah). Global warming in conjunction with overpopulation has caused unprecedented drought, is destroying our environment and has robbed us of our vastness. Governor Herbert and his "hard wired" ilk have caused this catastrophe. Even though Utah currently has one of the most prosperous economies in the country, unless we elect new leaders, who care more deeply about the climate (e.g. President Obama), we will face cataclysmic loss of all the things we cherish.

    I hope this helps.

  • the truth Holladay, UT
    July 27, 2014 5:42 p.m.

    If we truly have all these problems,

    then shouldn't we be using science to solve them,

    and not use the "excuse of science" just to control others and make few on the left wealthy

    And let's not kid ourselves, climate science is just an excuse science, used by the left for control over others also for gaining of wealth of the few.

  • RBB Sandy, UT
    July 27, 2014 6:33 p.m.

    Why do we stilll isten to the alarmists who have been wrong so many times?

  • high school fan Huntington, UT
    July 27, 2014 10:06 p.m.

    I'm sorry Eli Tesecular PHD, but I still don't get it. You and your buddy are highly educated college teachers and I am just a fairly good educated college degreed athlete so I don't understand how the population is teaming up with your version of global warming to eliminate our vastness. And apparently Governor Herbert has enough power to push over the limit in his six years of being governor but if we elected somebody else like you this would all go away.
    But then I maybe have a head full of mush so that probably makes me incapable of a full understanding if your logic but I know the earth has not warmed in a very long time, like close to fifty years or so, and that people are having less babies today than anytime in recent history and for everywhere there is drought there is somewhere else getting a lot of rain since we don't lose water off of this planet.
    I'm sorry but vastness still has me buffaloed by exactly what you mean.

  • jsf Centerville, UT
    July 28, 2014 9:59 a.m.

    You would think the vicious ideas spawned in the first part of the twentieth century would go away. Margaret Sanger and here followers felt the poor and undesirables should be placed in interment camps, they should be sterilized to prevent the poor and undesirables from breading. Cared for by the elite progressives. This was the concept of the Third Reich, they just wanted to control the population. This was Wilson force sterilization policies. This was the plan of planned parenthood, genocide of a race.

    Eli Tesecular PhD “as I am, is a highly educated University professor trying to pound the reality of global (including Utah) doom into heads full of mush” like a true progressive elitist, knows that he has to eradicate the poor and racially inferior from the earth to provide the garden of Eden for the Elites.

    This guy is only moments away from reestablishing the final solution to save the air, the water, the planet. Eugenics is alive and well here in Salt Lake City. Got to eliminate all that mush headedness.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    July 28, 2014 10:58 a.m.

    vast
    adjective
    1. of very great extent or quantity; immense.

    Last time I checked, the earth is the same size it's always been. So if it was vast before... it's probably still vast today.

    The POPULATION has changed. But the actual size of the earth has not changed.

    =====

    You can say we have now officially "Over-populated" the earth. But over-population was a popular topic back in the 60s and 70s as well. And the predictions of doom and gloom were rampant, but they never happened. In fact, we learned that there are many things that would probably wipe man out before over-population.

    To the over-population folks still left over from the 60's... I would ask you to board a plane and fly over Utah, the United States, or any continent, or just watch video feeds from vehicles orbiting the earth... Look for man, and his impact.... you will see that we (collectively, meaning all of humanity) constitute a few specks on the face of this earth. It's still "vast".

    Now that doesn't mean we waste it.... but it's still just as "vast" as it ever was...

  • Sven Morgan, UT
    July 28, 2014 11:31 a.m.

    jsf said:

    "You would think the vicious ideas spawned in the first part of the twentieth century would go away. Margaret Sanger and her followers felt the poor and undesirables should be placed in internment camps, they should be sterilized to prevent the poor and undesirables from breading. Cared for by the elite progressives. This was the concept of the Third Reich, they just wanted to control the population. This was Wilson force sterilization policies. This was the plan of planned parenthood, genocide of a race."

    =====

    Let me just add to your excellent post:

    Margaret Sanger is a Liberal Icon and founder of Planned Parenthood. In her 1939 "Negro Project", she had as her goal, the desire to greatly reduce the Black population, or as she referred to them, "human weeds." Ever wonder why so many Planned Parenthood Centers are in the inner-city?

    Thanks to white liberals, and bought and paid for race baiters like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, 13 million Black babies have aborted since 1973.

    Marxists and totalitarians MUST always eradicate segments of their population...always! The environment is nothing more than the repackaging of Communism. After-all, who could be against the environment...right?

  • HaHaHaHa Othello, WA
    July 28, 2014 12:05 p.m.

    I've always found leftwing science and theory, (which is actually their religion) to be very useful. It's kind of like listening to my brother in laws advice and philosophies. Whatever they say, do the opposite, you will be better of and rewarded nicely, 90% of the time.

  • Pops NORTH SALT LAKE, UT
    July 28, 2014 1:04 p.m.

    That's funny, I "liked" Eli's first comment because I thought he was being sarcastic. Yes, we want to be sustainable like Michigan, especially Detroit. Not.

    Here's another perspective. You know the tar sands mining in Canada? That's our way of cleaning up Mother Nature's biggest natural oil spill. We ought to clean up the tar shale here in Utah, too. You know how we burn coal, oil, and natural gas? That's our way of returning CO2 to the atmosphere, to the great delight of plant life everywhere, which would prefer CO2 levels of, say, 2000 ppm instead of the starvation diet of 400 ppm it gets today.

    If you would like to hear or read some really sound reasoning about the environment, check out Dr. Patrick Moore, co-founder of GreenPeace and climate change skeptic. I especially like his idea that we should grow more trees and use more wood for construction and products. That's real sustainability. Given that trees grow so much better with elevated levels of CO2, we are either going to go broke fighting wildfires or we are going to learn to use this great gift.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    July 28, 2014 1:14 p.m.

    To "Eli Tesecular PhD" if you are half as smart as you claim, then explain why we should be listening to the conclusions and theories of the climatologists that are based on faulty models?

    The NOAA has stated that if there was more than 15 years without warming, that would prove that the models are wrong. We are now at year 17 with no warming, which more than meets the criteria for proving the models wrong.

    Would you accept a student's thesis if it was based on a mathematical model that was incomplete or wrong? If you wouldn't accept a thesis based on a bad mathematical model, why do you blindly accept the conclusions based on bad climate models?

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    July 28, 2014 1:51 p.m.

    HaHaHaHa,
    "Over-Population", Global-Warming, etc, are "Religion" to some folks.

    Science's motto is... "Question EVERYTHING". Religion is the opposite (don't question your beliefs).

    To GW faithful... you are a "Denier" or a Heretic, if you question their beliefs or present evidence it's a false-faith. It's how people respond when someone questions their Religion/beliefs.

    Scientists aren't offended when you question them. They EXPECT to be questioned and WANT to have people to try to disprove their theory (because IF the theory is true... you can't).

    Science/Natural-laws (math, kinematics, physics, chemistry, etc), can be tested, predicted, and mathematically proven (you don't take it on faith, or a consensus vote). Scientists WANT people to test and try to disprove their theories (because "Science" involves proofs, not beliefs)... and if their is something that disproves your theory... you WANT to know, because that would indicate your theory is NOT CORRECT. Scientists accept their theory being questioned and tested, they WANT mathematical proof (not pious belief).

    GW/Over-Population... is a man/science-based religion to believers who won't tolerate it being questioned. It's "Science" to those who encourage questioning it...

  • SG in SLC Salt Lake City, UT
    July 28, 2014 4:37 p.m.

    I'm not a "Neo-Malthusian", nor am I a "Denier" -- reality seems to lie somewhere in the middle, supporting the idea that there are climate and natural resource issues that need to be addressed sooner, rather than later, but not supporting the idea that global climatological cataclysm is imminent.

    Is the earth overpopulated? Compared to what? There certainly exists regional overpopulation, relative to the regionally available natural resources, but global carrying capacity and overpopulation is much more difficult to reliably ascertain. There are simply too many complex variables involved. For example, according to FAO-UN data, per capita food production trends have remained very stable for the past 50 years or so (Europe has declined, Asia has increased, and everyone else has stayed pretty flat). But before the Deniers start shouting, "I told you so!!” it should be noted that the data doesn't address the increase in GMOs and energy inputs that have occurred to maintain stable per capita food production (for now).

    However, regardless of whether you are a Believer or Denier, it is hard to argue against being a better steward of our planet, and using our natural resources more wisely and efficiently.

  • jcr103 Las Cruces, NM
    July 29, 2014 10:38 p.m.

    Sven,

    Denial doesn't do anything but make the situation worse. Denial isn't a solution. It's just avoidance and avoidance is counter-productive.

  • Sven Morgan, UT
    July 29, 2014 11:30 p.m.

    jcr103 said:

    "Denial doesn't do anything but make the situation worse. Denial isn't a solution. It's just avoidance and avoidance is counter-productive."
    =====

    So, are you calling me an AGW denier, or are you agreeing with me that the true deniers are the "Warmers"? I'm honestly not sure what angle you're taking here?

    If per chance you're referring to me as a denier, we can discuss the IPCC, NASA, NOAA, and the University of East Anglia in detail.