World resources will run out by 2050

[Skyclad1uhm1]

Originally posted by: hans007
what a load of crap.


the study is by the "world wildlife federation" this is the same reason we have the WWE for wrestling now btw.


so stupid. t hey say that the U.S kills tons of animals that can't be used again. first off lots of our food is grown, and we can live on nuclear power by the 2050 age. not to mention, that possibly only these endangered species are dying off.


i always figured endagered species were gonna die anyways. i mean, if they cant adapt like rats and pigeons obviously have, they arent fit to survive right?

Good luck powering your car with nukes

Wonder how many Americans would be prepared to drive electric cars, which do not have roaring engines and stuff. You'll stop next to another car at a traffic light, let your engine buzz a bit louder a few times, and then impress him by accelerating from 0 to 60 in 45 seconds!

 

[Zebo]

I've seen reliable estimates of Saudi Having 500 years of oil at current consuption rates. So don't worry your SUV will become obsolete it won't. So the one resource that is'nt trivially recliamable we have 500 years and I think by then fuels cell will be in wide use so will never run out of paint and plastics. All the other resources are renewable. Metals can be melted down. Topsoil can be made from bark, poop, and sand. Nuke power is basically infinite.

Of course the problem is the waste and air we have to breath because of more poeple and over fishing the oceans which upsets that ecosystem. I won't even get into the Ozone or global warming because most ATOT's have choosen to ignore peer review science and go with what their favorite AM talk show host has to say

Hegde your bets buy land in the Yukon. I saw a 640 acres parcel for 30K recently.

 

[B00ne]

Originally posted by: Carbonyl
I've seen reliable estimates of Saudi Having 500 years of oil at current consuption rates. So don't worry your SUV will become obsolete it won't. So the one resource that is'nt trivially recliamable we have 500 years and I think by then fuels cell will be in wide use so will never run out of paint and plastics. All the other resources are renewable. Metals can be melted down. Topsoil can be made from bark, poop, and sand. Nuke power is basically infinite.

Of course the problem is the waste and air we have to breath because of more poeple and over fishing the oceans which upsets that ecosystem. I won't even get into the Ozone or global warming because most ATOT's have choosen to ignore peer review science and go with what their favorite AM talk show host has to say

Hegde your bets buy land in the Yukon. I saw a 640 acres parcel for 30K recently.

The infinity of nuclear power is a common misconception. I read in a lecture that if all of earths electric energy was produces using nuclear (fission) power plants, the known nuclear fuel reserves of the world would last like 15 years. Of course that could be wrong, but I havent heard of any massive Uranium findings

 

[gigapet]

Originally posted by: Alienwho
Maybe there is a reason why the US doesn't care.

Maybe the US has developed some kind of secret cheaper alternative fuel sources and the faster we suck up all the natural resources, the faster we can seel our new alternative source to other countries that don't have it.

Maybe.

i wouldnt doubt it

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: B00ne

Originally posted by: Carbonyl
I've seen reliable estimates of Saudi Having 500 years of oil at current consuption rates. So don't worry your SUV will become obsolete it won't. So the one resource that is'nt trivially recliamable we have 500 years and I think by then fuels cell will be in wide use so will never run out of paint and plastics. All the other resources are renewable. Metals can be melted down. Topsoil can be made from bark, poop, and sand. Nuke power is basically infinite.

Of course the problem is the waste and air we have to breath because of more poeple and over fishing the oceans which upsets that ecosystem. I won't even get into the Ozone or global warming because most ATOT's have choosen to ignore peer review science and go with what their favorite AM talk show host has to say

Hegde your bets buy land in the Yukon. I saw a 640 acres parcel for 30K recently.

The infinity of nuclear power is a common misconception. I read in a lecture that if all of earths electric energy was produces using nuclear (fission) power plants, the known nuclear fuel reserves of the world would last like 15 years. Of course that could be wrong, but I havent heard of any massive Uranium findings

H+, this is why I said basically, The US has a 10 year reserve stored of U-235 at current rates I think we'll see fussion in 25-50 (unless you believe those guys a Utah state we have it already) and most of this reserve is imported. I should have said Power is basically infinite when you consider natural gas reserves, hydro electric, wave power, nuclear, and potential fussion. Here's a scientist who say billions of years

 

[Amused]

I don't know how sharp most of you are on modern history, but this proclamation of doom is an old and tired ploy by the greenies/whacky college professors. They did it in the fifties, sixties, in the seventies, in the eighties, and now the 00s. Every time their deadline is passed, they skulk away, and come back again when they hope everyone has forgotten their last act of stupidity with a revised doomsday estimate.

The last date I personally remember was in the late seventies we were supposed to run out of oil.

Sorry, but it reminds me of Pat Robertson proclaiming that the end of the world was going to be a specific date in the eighties, and then looking like a fool when that date passed.

As I said, it looks like the chicken littles need attention again...

 

[Zebo]

Every time thier deadline is passed, they skulk away, and come back again when they hope everyone has forgotten their last act of stupidity with a revised doomsday estimate.

I think you confuse activists with scientists and scientific journals. There is overlap sometimes since no one is perfect but I have never seen a dooms day shroud pronounced by Nature or Science. But greed n' peace etc like to distort and interpolate these sources for thier own polical gains. Nothing wrong with wanting cleaning air just don' t lie and misinform the public to get us there which is why some think they have a credibityl gap/ The pree is happy to obilge since we buy bad news.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Carbonyl
Every time thier deadline is passed, they skulk away, and come back again when they hope everyone has forgotten their last act of stupidity with a revised doomsday estimate.

I think you confuse activists with scientists and scientific journals. There is overlap sometimes since no one is perfect but I have never seen a dooms day shroud pronounced by Nature or Science. But greed n' peace etc like to distort and interpolate these sources for thier own polical gains. Nothing wrong with wanting cleaning air just don' t lie and misinform the public to get us there which is why some think they have a credibityl gap/ The pree is happy to obilge since we buy bad news.

Scientists and their Journals can't be biased or activist minded?

 

[Zebo]

I'll answer this later. I'm late.

 

[B00ne]

Originally posted by: AmusedOne
I don't know how sharp most of you are on modern history, but this proclamation of doom is an old and tired ploy by the greenies/whacky college professors. They did it in the fifties, sixties, in the seventies, in the eighties, and now the 00s. Every time their deadline is passed, they skulk away, and come back again when they hope everyone has forgotten their last act of stupidity with a revised doomsday estimate.

The last date I personally remember was in the late seventies we were supposed to run out of oil.

Sorry, but it reminds me of Pat Robertson proclaiming that the end of the world was going to be a specific date in the eighties, and then looking like a fool when that date passed.

As I said, it looks like the chicken littles need attention again...

Hmmm dont u mistake running out of oil with the oil crisis??? In my whole lifetime the date for the running out of oil has always been somewhere in the middle of the 21st century. Seems like it is still that date.

 

[Fritzo]

Back in the early 80's, they said we'd run out of oil by 2005 and out of fresh water supplies by 2010. Gee...that's really going to happen.

These people that make these reports always fail to add the words "At the current rate of consumption..." to their statistics. New farming techniques have quadrupled food output in the last 20 years, cars have gotten 10-15 miles per gallon more than 20 years ago, and new techniques to produce energy are being devoloped. I'll be 81 in 2050, so if they're not right, I'm gonna sue them for inducing undue stress and make my grandkids rich

 

[Fritzo]

?THE U.S. GOVERNMENT in particular seems completely insensitive to some of the consequences of what it is doing,? WWF Director-General Claude Martin told a news conference.

What do a bunch of wrestlers know about natural resources anyway????

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: B00ne

Originally posted by: AmusedOne
I don't know how sharp most of you are on modern history, but this proclamation of doom is an old and tired ploy by the greenies/whacky college professors. They did it in the fifties, sixties, in the seventies, in the eighties, and now the 00s. Every time their deadline is passed, they skulk away, and come back again when they hope everyone has forgotten their last act of stupidity with a revised doomsday estimate.

The last date I personally remember was in the late seventies we were supposed to run out of oil.

Sorry, but it reminds me of Pat Robertson proclaiming that the end of the world was going to be a specific date in the eighties, and then looking like a fool when that date passed.

As I said, it looks like the chicken littles need attention again...

Hmmm dont u mistake running out of oil with the oil crisis??? In my whole lifetime the date for the running out of oil has always been somewhere in the middle of the 21st century. Seems like it is still that date.

Nope, not at all. These predictions have been going on for decades.

 

[UNCjigga]

Originally posted by: glenn1

can't we just club babies? i mean, the world won't be around for them anyway....

Haven't you read "A modest proposal"? Babies are for eating, not clubbing...

Club them first...it tenderizes the meat...

 

[XFreebie]

finite resources cannot last forever

if saudi arabia really did have 500 years worth of oil, then they could dump 100 years worth anytime and become the richest nation in the world, yes? yes, they have 500 whole years of oil based on their bluff technology.

and for those of u future old f'oggies that want to leave the mess u made to your grandchildren, dont worry because we will put u in really bad nursing homes...

but then again, resources will not run out in 2050... cuz we'll all be dead from WW III in 2046. u know the big USA+Europe vs. China vs. Africa and South America vs. Antarctic Terrorists

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: XFreebie
finite resources cannot last forever

if saudi arabia really did have 500 years worth of oil, then they could dump 100 years worth anytime and become the richest nation in the world, yes? yes, they have 500 whole years of oil based on their bluff technology.

Um, no.

If they dump large amounts in a short period of time, the price of oil will plummet, and they'll make very little money. If they did what you suggest, they'd make less than it costs to pump the stuff.

Remember: Supply and demand is what controls prices. By cutting supply, OPEC raises prices, by flooding the market, they lower prices.

 

[XZeroII]

Originally posted by: redly1
I'm firing up the riciprical saw right now to cut off the catalytic converters on all of my cars

Better watch out. By me, we have a thing called "emissions testing" and if your catalytic converter is gone, they will not pass you until you fix it Even the gov't is involved in the conspiracy.

 

[AgentofEvil]

Originally posted by: boi
ET will save us!!!


<- running SETI@home[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]

I'm with on that one man.

 

[Daxxax]

Current trends will not continue in the future because it will become too expensive to keep doing the things we do. Cheaper alternatives will be developed. When there is money to be made, someone will exploit the opportunity. The Africa comment was hilarious. How many people die of disease and starvation in Africa each year? Those people didn't seem to eke out an existance on next to nothing.


I agree with you completely. I have seen studies and books that totally contradict what these wackos are sprewing. These are the same people that believe the world will soon become overcrowded. Personally I think earth can sustain a population of at least 500 billion people, right now we are at about 6 billion.

Keep this in mind every single person on earth could all fit in the state of Texas with enough room to hold there hands out and not touch another person. Kinda puts things in perspective dosen't it.

 

[XZeroII]

Originally posted by: XZeroII

Originally posted by: redly1
I'm firing up the riciprical saw right now to cut off the catalytic converters on all of my cars

Better watch out. By me, we have a thing called "emissions testing" and if your catalytic converter is gone, they will not pass you until you fix it Even the gov't is involved in the conspiracy.

It's overcrowded because the Greenies want to live in a secluded forest where the nearest neighbor is 100 miles away. Of course they will have to have a rugged SUV to commute to the store and buy some wood furniture and some clothing made from some animal.

 

[PistachioByAzul]

The problem with nuclear is that no one takes into account the cost of the waste.

 

[glenn1]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
can't we just club babies? i mean, the world won't be around for them anyway....
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Haven't you read "A modest proposal"? Babies are for eating, not clubbing...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Club them first...it tenderizes the meat...

Can't i just pop 'em in the blender, or run them through the salad shooter? Wouldn't that be easier?

 

[XZeroII]

Originally posted by: EngineNr9
The problem with nuclear is that no one takes into account the cost of the waste.

Actually, it doesn't cost much and it's very safe. I saw a show (I forget where) where a place interviewed some people and some guy held some in his hand. It was coated with a special material that hardened around it and made it safe. The reporter started freaking out because they thought it was really dangerous, but it's not. The capsule would last for many thousands of years they said. The problem is that no one knows the truth behind this stuff and the media spreads all sorts of rumors. That and the "not in my backyard" mentality...but that is understandable.

 

[PistachioByAzul]

The problem is that no one knows the truth behind this stuff and the media spreads all sorts of rumors.

That is exactly the problem.

At some point or another that nuclear waste becomes an enviromental threat, but all of that is put on in the face of cheap energy. What are we fueling anyway? Hair dryers, televisions, cars, basically non-essentials. The simple fact is that if everyone lived an enviromentally concious lifestyle then solar and wind energy would be more than sufficient. Who wants to hear that though...

<a target=new class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.ucsusa.org/about/warning.html">World Scientists' Warning to Humanity
Some 1,700 of the world's leading scientists, including the majority of Nobel laureates in the sciences, issued this appeal in November 1992. The World Scientists' Warning to Humanity was written and spearheaded by the late Henry Kendall, former chair of UCS's</a>

I don't put much faith in the words of people trying to rationalize their ravenously consumptive lifestyles. The government, the media, they all bow to the corporations who perpetuate our overconsumption...for these groups it's all about the money.

 

[JellyBaby]

The simple fact is that if everyone lived an enviromentally concious lifestyle then solar and wind energy would be more than sufficient.

An even simpler fact is that until current resources become cost-prohibitve, consumers will continue using resources as fast and as often as they do today.