Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesqf
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by IamIan
I've pointed out what is actually happening ... thus none of those are extraordinary claims ... rate of population growth % has been declining for over 40 years (true)
|
This frankly seems like extraordinary blindness. |
If you think that pointing out what is actually happening (or has already happened) as being extraordinary blindness ... that's your opinion .. I disagree.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesqf
It doesn't matter what the growth rate is.
|
I disagree.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesqf
As long as it's a positive number, the population still grows.
|
I'm not aware of anyone saying otherwise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesqf
You're also ignoring the mountains of evidence showing that current population levels and practices are not sustainable.
|
Incorrect.
I am not ignoring any such thing.
Quiet the contrary ... I've already written (in this discussion) the opposite of this claim about me.... From Post #24:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by IamIan
I don't think anyone is claiming it already is sustainable in it's current form today.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesqf
You are, it seems to me, just indulging in a lot of hand-waving, arguing that a bunch of 'and then a miracle occurs' changes will allow a larger population to be supported, but give us absolutely no reason to think that those miracles will appear on schedule.
|
Your 'perception' is incorrect.
I am not doing that.
I do not recall ever claiming ... 'and then a miracle occurs' ... I also fail to see why I would give reasons for something .. like miracles ... that I never claimed would happen in the first place ? ... Or why you would even expect me to do that ?
Is there some specific claim (I actually made) that you want a reason / evidence / explanation for ??
I don't mind trying to give that to you .. but I'm not psychic .. You have to help me a bit to know what specific claim (I made) , you want this additional reason / evidence/ explanation for.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesqf
But we over-use many resources that are limited, and not replaceable by others.
|
Who claimed otherwise ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesqf
Yes, because the fossil carbon burning of today is happening at least 1000x faster - a few centuries vs several hundred thousand years. The more rapid shock would, I think, produce more drastic results.
|
Bold added.
It is possible you might be correct ... but .. your opinion might also be incorrect... hardly extraordinary evidence to support an extraordinary claim.
Sense we have actual data showing periods in earth's past where the atmospheric CO2 level reached up to as high as ~7,000 ppm during the Cambrian area ... vs the ~400 ppm of today ... and even at ~7,000ppm there was not the magnitude of extinction event you describe.
Given the historical record (of what has happened) ... in order to exceed the CO2 levels that didn't produce the magnitude of extinction event you describe ... we would have to also assume peak oil , peak coal , peak (fossil fuel) ... pretty much won't happen for several hundred more years ... and you would have to assume we abandon our trends for increasing ability and amounts of RE.
The data of what we have been and are doing disagrees with the RE assumption ... and I am not aware of a peak Fossil fuel prediction that would push it out that far.
Further the CO2 levels during the Triassic extinction event you pointed to only reached a maximum of ~2,000 ppm ... sense ~7,000 ppm did not trigger the same kind of extinction event ... that actually looks to be evidence that the bulk of the Triassic extinction event you sited ... was actually not primarily the result of just the CO2 increase itself .. one of many contributing factors , sure.