Warning to Humanity: 15,000 scientists say damage irreversible

Ok, so don't need to be a scientist to know what they are saying in the article but it's still worth the time and so I thought I'd make a thread. I've included the main parts of the article so you don't really need to go to sky to read it but if you want to read more: news.sky.com...

"We are jeopardising our future by not reining in our intense but geographically and demographically uneven material consumption and by not perceiving continued rapid population growth as a primary driver behind many ecological and even societal threats. "By failing to adequately limit population growth, reassess the role of an economy rooted in growth, reduce greenhouse gases, incentivise renewable energy, protect habitat, restore ecosystems, curb pollution, halt defaunation, and constrain invasive alien species, humanity is not taking the urgent steps needed to safeguard our imperilled biosphere."

The scientists said over the past 25 years: :: The amount of fresh water available per head of population worldwide has reduced by 26% :: The number of ocean "dead zones" - places where little can live because of pollution and oxygen starvation - has increased by 75% :: Nearly 300 million acres of forest have been lost, mostly to make way for agricultural land :: Global carbon emissions and average temperatures have shown continued significant increases :: Human population has risen by 35% :: The number of mammals, reptiles, amphibians, birds and fish in the world has collectively fallen by 29%. They said progress made in some areas, including reducing ozone-depleting chemicals and increasing renewable energy generation, had been far outweighed by the damage.

I'm fed up with some people, including those on ATS who keep saying "over-population" is a myth. It isn't and we need to do something about it. I'm also fed up with those people who continue to breed like rabbits when there's more important things going on in their Country that they need to deal with instead of fleeing to other Countries or risking their lives becoming refugees. The Rohingas' being the new lot of refugees fleeing Myanmar. Why aren't the Bangladeshi Government taking them in? They are right there and I believe Bangladesh to be mainly 'Muslim' isn't it? Anyway that's a different thread. The point of this thread is to point out that "over-population" IS a problem. STOP denying it. Not only that but Globalisation too. Big businesses need to stop raping the forests to make way for building all over it. They need to stop thinking that Money is the be all and end all of everything, they need to stop thinking of themselves.

I know someone is going to post in here that everyone can fit into Texas. That is a myth. That is bs. That will not solve the problems.

a reply to: TruthxIsxInxThexMist

Humans are deep down inherently selfish only thinking of their own future and legacy. For some reason we evolved to pass on our genetics whether others like it or not, and since we are such a complex social creature there's a myriad of 'reasons' people (mostly men) seem to think their superiority complex is better than the next. Capitalism is nothing more than a fancy word for I'm better than you, I deserve to have this and that.
Nothing will change when you have people who will outright deny the struggling state of our planet and continue to consume and breed. It's also funny how most people who deny this are those with the most luxuries in life, a home, car, readily access to internet, etc. etc.

a reply to: TruthxIsxInxThexMist

Are they out of their minds?!

We arent curbing population growth? Really?
Then why are birth rates in decline world wide mostly?

Should this warning not be addressed just to the third world, like India and China?

This is why people dont trust science lately. Its sold on yellow paper.

We are jeopardising our future by not reining in our intense but geographically and demographically uneven material consumption and by not perceiving continued rapid population growth as a primary driver behind many ecological and even societal threats

Finally! It's about time scientists spoke out about the biggest problem in the world.

Too bad people are too stupid and selfish to listen to scientists.

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: TruthxIsxInxThexMist

Are they out of their minds?!

We arent curbing population growth? Really?
Then why are birth rates in decline world wide mostly?

Should this warning not be addressed just to the third world, like India and China?

This is why people dont trust science lately. Its sold on yellow paper.

You are mostly correct however Africa is projected to have over 4 billions souls in the near future... So what are the earthlings to do.. Sic Monsanto on them ?

a reply to: TruthxIsxInxThexMist

This seems to be a continuation/update of the original warning from scientists in 1992. The first version had 1500 signatures and can be found here.

This is an excerpt from the website it originated from:

If you are a scientist from any scientific discipline (e.g. ecology, medicine, economics, etc.), we invite you to endorse our Viewpoint article in the journal Bioscience entitled “World Scientists’ Warning to Humanity: a second notice” by Ripple et al. (2017). In doing so, you will be included in the full list of scientists who have endorsed this article and 15,000+ scientists from 184 countries who signed the article before the publication deadline on Oct. 23, 2017. Before endorsing, we ask that you view our 1,000-word article by clicking “Read the Article” tab below (the text can be read in 6 minutes). When you click “Endorse the Article” and add your name, you will be indicating that you generally agree with our article, helping get this message to world leaders. You may also read the article in Spanish, Portugese, or French. ...

This is the online pdf version of the second letter you quoted from.

This is the 25th anniversary of the original letter they wrote. So far, the Ozone layer is the only thing we've impacted positively in that 25 years. Which I found here:

William Ripple of Oregon State University's College of Forestry, who started the campaign, said that he came across the 1992 warning last February, and noticed that this year happened to mark the 25th anniversary.

Together with his graduate student, Christopher Wolf, he decided to revisit the concerns raised then, and collect global data for different variables to show trends over the past 25 years.

Ripple found:

A decline in freshwater availability.
Unsustainable marine fisheries.
Ocean dead zones.
Forest losses.
Dwindling biodiversity.
Climate change.
Population growth.
There was one positive outcome, however: a rapid decline in ozone depletion.


The goal of the paper is to raise awareness about the fragile state of the planet.

"The scientists around the world are very concerned about the state of the world, the environmental situation and climate change," Ripple said. "So this allows them to have a collective voice."

Just wanted to give a bit more information as I found it.
Thanks,
blend

a reply to: TruthxIsxInxThexMist

I trust that all these scientists have made sure that they have no children, do not own cars and only consume the absolute minimum in resources?

As a childless, non driver who only has the tiniest amount of self generated income on which to survive. Im getting sick of people trying to guilt trip me over my lifestyle.

When someone leads by example I may be more inclined to respond.

As soon as you start to point at people with giant families, who waste resources and consume endless unnecessary products, all you get back is moral indignation and "who the hell are you to tell others what to do?".

I'm already doing my bit.

a reply to: TruthxIsxInxThexMist

Save the planet...kill the people!

/extreme sarcasm

a reply to: TruthxIsxInxThexMist

Well this will really annoy you, if you do not like being told that overpopulation is a myth. It bloody well IS a myth. Its CONCENTRATION of population that is the problem. If we were living in more places, spread out better across the surface of the Earth, rather than concentrated all in large cities, we would be having less impact total, on the situation globally, with regard to the climate and resource management, as well as habitat destruction.

There IS plenty of space, and all that is necessary for us to make a good fist of things from here, is to change the way we interact with the spaces we are in, how we produce our energy (large power plants are awful, whether they are nuclear or fossil burners), and the reasons we commute across the world and nations.

For example, rather than living in cities of teeming millions, there should be a drive to limit population centres to tens of thousands. Energy should be produced by and for the individual home, preferably by way of some sort of solar or renewable source, rather than any burnt product. Everything must be recycled, rather than thrown away. All biomass (uneaten food, for example) should be put back into the eco system in the form of fertilisation. Trips across country should be taken in emergencies only, and people should live where they work, not miles away.

We need to hyper localise our lives, stop over using transport methods, every small town needs a large and capable hospital, which can do the very best work, all to the same standard, so that no one ever has to be airlifted elsewhere after an emergency, but can be literally fixed right there in their hometown, no matter whether its their heart, brain or bones which are broken.

Food should be produced within ten miles of the location it is intended to be eaten, and it CAN be, because hydroponics is effective and proven to work just fine.

We need to reduce the amount of time we spend moving, the size of our cities, but not the size of the overall population. Again, population is not the problem. Irresponsible, lazy management of resources is the problem, and even IF we accepted limitations on birth rates (which would result in people who like their freedom more than their lives, as any good person should, killing any authoritarian who tried to enforce it), it would STILL be the problem, and STILL cause the end of the human race.

We could save the species and the planet both however, by learning to live in connection with the nature around us, by building homes in and around forests, and behaving in a manner which does not damage those forests or the habitats in them. We could learn to live in deserts, without being at risk of starvation and dying of thirst. We could, the technology is there and its greener than the Amazon rainforest too, so it cannot hurt anything at all.

But we DON'T do what we can, because those with the power to direct it, are shills for those who benefit from our downfall in the short term, and care nothing for the future of mankind.

I will not allow the fact that this truth annoys you, to prevent me from issuing it forth. There is enough space, there is not an overpopulation problem. The problem is inefficient management of resources, and people being too weak and pathetic to survive a hardier, more natural lifestyle, in a smaller, more connected community.

a reply to: Tulpa

Exactly!

Nothing like a heaping serving of hypocrisy, huh?

Wow . Planned Parenthood , Agenda 21 , and the U.N. aren't doing their jobs. You would think they would be better at their eugenics programs. NO really , it's they way consumerism has left the manufacturer off the hook. We can only pollute , over use , indulge in , waste , etc,. in what corporations allow us to have . It is a ' take , make , throw away ' type of philosophy for these global deconstructionists. Companies need repeat consumers , and to obsolete their products , so a new version is sought after and elusively accepted and promoted and institutionalized into our must have in daily life. Soon the cycle repeats itself , and a big consequence is the unnecessary over use of limited resources. Nature has a way of keeping populations under control. Our world wide birth rate and fertility is declining. Those who make consumerism , must have a steady flow of ever increasing consumers. WE can only use what is made available to us . The way it's made available to use is the key.It takes a committed soul to take on a life with as little manufacturing influence or corporate consumerism being done . Who makes our reality ? The mechanics of how our everyday society and functional gadgets intermingle and become co dependent on one another . The down side is corporate greed is bad for the Earth and bad for humanity. It only benefits a few , and not in a good way.

a reply to: TruthxIsxInxThexMist

We are not over-populated. We over buy, over-consume and don't utilize resources to any decent standard of ability.

Just lengthen the "season"...and remove the antler requirements.

Sell 'any sex' tags at Walmart and remove all 'baiting' restrictions. Culling off a 'bling pile' is now not only legal, but encouraged!

a reply to: TrueBrit

What a stupid lib....err wait. No, wait! You're absolutely correct!









Being dependent upon various constructs and organizations has done the worst to humanity. Almost to the point of wilful slavery.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: Tulpa

Exactly!

Nothing like a heaping serving of hypocrisy, huh?

I think what they're trying to say is that there are too many people who do not generate profit for the few.

If you aren't funding the corporations, you are surplus to corporate requirements.

i for one think all that promote population control, they should be the first ones to put their money where there mouth is and step up and volunteer to be culled, sterilized, or go on ration control.

especially the old useless eaters, and the young ones who can breed.

that there would show me that they are truly concerned for planet and the future of mankind.
if your not willing to do that then shut up and stop pushing this. if this is that important to you, if your not willing to sacrifice your life for the cause, then your a hypocrite. put your money where your mouth is.

a reply to: Tulpa

That, or too many people and not enough research grants!

refer to this OP...... www.abovetopsecret.com...(do we deserve to even be here?)

The sooner we hit reset on Earth, very likely the better.
Civilizations are transient Emerging, building, growing then decaying into oblivion.

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: TruthxIsxInxThexMist

Are they out of their minds?!

We arent curbing population growth? Really?
Then why are birth rates in decline world wide mostly?

Should this warning not be addressed just to the third world, like India and China?

This is why people dont trust science lately. Its sold on yellow paper.

From what I've seen it doesn't look like birth rates are in decline. If they were, why are people still raping the World and building upon it?

Room to live in, between 20 and 30 % of earths surface is desert, depending on which site you ask, it would be nice if we all lived in the deserts, so all the good arable land now built on could be productive, I don't want to live in a bloody hot desert.
Food, more than enough is being produced, storage and distribution is the problem some years ago I read of India producing so much wheat it had to be stored on the road side, as there was no where else for the tonnage, the wheat rotted.
America feeds itself and the world, so long as they can pay for the wheat.
America and Canada are virtually empty of people, so no need for those two great nations to live in a desert.
Russia is 49 % forested, also virtually empty of people, Australia, fantastic place, 25 million people, also nearly empty, roughly the same area as the USA. Room everywhere I look, just no infrastructure for storage and distribution.