| Submit your comments on this article |
| Britain |
| DoomsDay v47.26: Man's footprint on ecosystem of Earth 'too heavy to be sustained' |
| 2006-10-24 |
| A WWF study says that we have been living beyond the environment's means for two decades I didn't know this. I'm sure it was very scientific 'n stuff. Say Doom! The Earth’s natural resources are being used 25 per cent faster than the planet can renew them, analysis by WWF indicates. Measurements of crop yields, carbon-dioxide emissions, fishing and the use of forests suggest that Mankind’s ecological footprint is too big to be sustained. Gotta kill off some folks, I guess. So, who's first? Since 1961 it has more than tripled in size and, for the past 20 years, mankind has been living beyond its ecological means, a WWF report said. It is the equivalent, in banking terms, of living off capital rather than interest. Big feet. Getting bigger. Okay, so who out there is breeding like maggots, eh? Using United Nations projections of the worldwide growth of the human population and economies, the report predicts that by the middle of the century “large-scale ecosystem collapse” is likely. Ah, UN figures - excellent source! Did the soon-to-depart-for-greener-pastures (Think: Maurice Strong's Power Corp or similar) Jan Egelund provide the numbers, perhaps? The world’s average footprint is calculated to be 2.2 hectares per capita but only 1.8 hectares of each person’s consumption can be regenerated by the planet each year. Got it calculated down to the quick, I see. Carbon-dioxide emissions are the biggest single factor within the footprint, accounting for up to 48 per cent of man’s impact on the globe, according to the WWF Living Planet Report. Gotta kill off those cows and sheep, too - all that methane, y'know. Medium rare good for you? The speed at which resources are being used has had the effect of destroying biodiversity at an unprecedented rate. Uh oh, I feel a snail-darter moment coming on. By tracking the fortunes of 1,313 species of vertebrates from around the world, the report indicated that there had been a 30 per cent slump in wildlife since 1970. Slump? Wotta weird choice of words. Tropical species, including mammals, reptiles and birds, were the most badly hit of the 695 land-based animals monitored. They declined by an average of 55 per cent, while the populations of temperate creatures have, overall, remained stable since 1970. So, um, it's obviously the fault of the countries in the temperate zone! Cuz they have the deep pockets, ya think? Marine species declined by an average of 25 per cent in the Pacific, Atlantic, Indian and Southern Oceans. The index monitored 274 species and there was particular concern about the loss of cod, tuna and turtles. Now they're actually onto something of substance. Over-fishing does, indeed, occur. I suggest sinking the intruders - that will create some new fish reefs - a two-fer. Late last century the land habitat that vanished fastest were tropical grassland, flooded grasslands and savannas, and tropical dry forests. They were replaced with either crops or grazing land for livestock. Man. Fuckin' parasite. I prefer salamanders 'n stuff. Obviously the developed world's fault. Get those populations under control you filthy 1st-Worlders - or we'll do it for you, by Gum. Mangroves were highlighted as the most endangered habitat, with more than a third being lost to developments between 1990 and 2000, twice the rate at which tropical forests are being destroyed. The crocs 'n gators are doomed. I guess I'll hafta switch to cowhide products. Jonathan Loh, of the Zoological Society of London, one of the authors of the report, said: “The Living Planet Index is a stark indication of the rapid and ongoing loss of biodiversity worldwide. “Populations of species in terrestrial, marine and freshwater ecosystems have declined by more than 30 per cent since 1970, a rate that is unprecedented in human history. In the tropics the declines are even more dramatic, as natural resources are being intensively exploited for human use.” Kill the humans! Kill 'em all. Gaia! His colleague, Ben Collen, added: “It makes depressing reading. It’s another stark indication that we are losing biodiversity at an unprecedented rate. But one of the messages is we do have a choice at this point. We can moderate our consumption and become a less throwaway society.” "I'm depressed. So you should kill yourselves. I'll feel much better if you do. Thanks." The ecological footprint is designed to measure the extent of human demand on the land and seas, and the report concludes that, for the past two decades, people have been turning resources into waste faster than the planet can turn waste back into plants and creatures. “Humanity is no longer living off Nature’s interest but drawing down its capital,” the authors said. Wow, I thought it was yet another scheme to extort money from the PC idjits into a big pot that could be skimmed and distributed to "scientists" who would then produce more studies "proving" more money was needed. Silly me. “This growing pressure on ecosystems is causing habitat destruction or degredation and permanent loss of productivity, threatening both biodiversity and human wellbeing.” Odd that human "wellbeing" isn't mentioned until the 17th paragraph. Serves us right. They called for radical changes in human consumption, and said that a 50 per cent reduction in carbon-dioxide emissions and fish catches would make it possible to close the gap between resource use and replacement by 2080. Wow, full phoney science employment for the next 74 years plus a big pot of money. Good plan! The report added: “Moving towards sustainability depends on significant action now. Population size changes slowly, and human-made capital — homes, cars, roads, factories or power plants — can last for many decades. Okay, everybody back to the trees! “Given the slow response of many biological systems, there is likely to be a considerable time lag before ecosystems benefit significantly from people’s positive actions. Meanwhile, back at the Institute of Planetary Schemery, we'll “We share the Earth with five to ten million species or more. By choosing how much of the planet’s biocapacity we appropriate, we determine how much is left for their use. Five to ten million? Holy Shit! I feel so, um, insignificant. I'm getting Helstrom Chronicles flashbacks! “To maintain biodiversity it is essential that a part of the biospehere’s productive capacity is reserved for the survival of other species.” Okay. They can have Belgium. James Leape, WWF’s director-general said: “We are using the planet’s resources faster than they can be renewed. We need to stop. We must balance our consumption with the natural world’s capacity to regenerate and absorb our wastes. If we do not, we risk irreversible damage. As countries improve the wellbeing of their people they are bypassing the goal of sustainability and going into what we call ‘overshoot’ — using far more resources than the planet can sustain.” The Boss's Summation. The calculations for the report are based on figures up to 2003. In 2003 the global ecological footprint was calculated to total 14.1 hectares. Only 11.2 hectares of the world’s productive surface was restored to previous levels. And you know it has only gotten worse. Blame Bush, not Lulu or Mugabe. Among the animals to have suffered the largest declines is the saiga antelope, whose numbers have dropped by 90 per cent in the past decade because of hunting in Mongolia. Mongols. Never were very sensitive or moderate. I say we ace the lot of 'em. Wildebeest have declined by 20 per cent in the past 30 years because of encroachments on their migration routes by farmers. Polar bears have suffered population falls of up to 30 per cent, mainly because of the loss of sea ice, which is attributed to global warming. OMG! Polar bears, too? Global In Britain, the corncrake was one of the animals monitored. From 1970 to 1993 there was a fall from 3,250 calling males to 478, a reduction of 80 per cent. But since then conservation programmes have halted the decline and helped the species to recover slightly. A comeback? So, did they kill off a buncha Brits, or what? In the marine environment, the creatures that are among the worst affected include the endangered fin whale, the jackass penguin and the dugong. I'm sold. |
| Posted by:.com |
| #19 Meanwhile in Denver, experts say the best way to save the bison would be to eat more of them. |
| Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418 2006-10-24 23:32 |
| #18 I would be much more impressed with the sincerity of these pukes if they would say something like: "In order to demonstrate my belief that this is a real problem, I am going to kill my wife, my son, his wife, and our granddaughter, and then commit suicide. There are too many people in the world, and I want to do my part to reduce the number" |
| Posted by: Rambler 2006-10-24 21:35 |
| #17 .com: I like it, heh. I, um, lost my entire ginormous library of "art". All of it. Gone. So to see one of the oldies but goldies makes me smile - Thx! Crap. I feel like the Louvre just burned down... |
| Posted by: Ptah 2006-10-24 21:28 |
| #16 I like it, heh. I, um, lost my entire ginormous library of "art". All of it. Gone. So to see one of the oldies but goldies makes me smile - Thx! |
| Posted by: .com 2006-10-24 16:51 |
| #15 Ok, that worked. |
| Posted by: anonymous5089 2006-10-24 16:45 |
| #14 Argh, formating is wrecked, yet I had photobucket resize it, sorry, my bad. |
| Posted by: anonymous5089 2006-10-24 16:42 |
| #13 Initially posted by .com. |
| Posted by: anonymous5089 2006-10-24 16:41 |
| #12 Does this mean all the WWF bozos are gonna commit harakiri? |
| Posted by: mojo 2006-10-24 16:26 |
| #11 I'm in favor of walking softly but carrying a big stick. I don't know what that does to your footprints. |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2006-10-24 13:51 |
| #10 Dr. Malthus, paging Dr. Malthus- the study you ordered is ready. Please report to the dustbin of history for pickup. |
| Posted by: Baba Tutu 2006-10-24 13:43 |
| #9 The worldÂ’s average footprint is calculated to be 2.2 hectares per capita but only 1.8 hectares of each personÂ’s consumption can be regenerated by the planet each year. Carbon-dioxide emissions are the biggest single factor within the footprint, accounting for up to 48 per cent of manÂ’s impact on the globe, according to the WWF Living Planet Report. So, BA, the President of The Reality-Based and Science Using Dept. at Rantburg U says this is ALL bunk. Just takin' their own numbers, if we quit using CO2 as a "pollutant" (like the |
| Posted by: BA 2006-10-24 13:39 |
| #8 Um, are you ready to rummmmbbbbllleee? |
| Posted by: .com 2006-10-24 12:40 |
| #7 #6 A WWF study... And why exactly is the World Wrestling Federation doing ecology studies? It's for the CHILDREN, Punk! |
| Posted by: Freddie Blassie 2006-10-24 12:34 |
| #6 A WWF study... And why exactly is the World Wrestling Federation doing ecology studies? |
| Posted by: SteveS 2006-10-24 12:21 |
| #5 Well, if that is the case, let us start thining the herd by starting with the WWF and then the Muzzies. That should free up a lot of resources. |
| Posted by: DarthVader 2006-10-24 11:23 |
| #4 So we should leave our BMW's and Big Screen TV's behind, bad? Lol. |
| Posted by: .com 2006-10-24 11:07 |
| #3 Here's how I see it. Environmentalists |
| Posted by: badanov 2006-10-24 11:05 |
| #2 The WWF is in full line of the "zero growth/ungrowth" theory, has been since its creation, along with other malthusian orgs and think tanks like the club de Rome. That's basically using ecology used to further a very malthusian, elitist worldview, with the sweaty masses being singled out for their impact on Mother Nature... kinda like Jacques Cousteau and his belief humanity should be reduced to 20% of its then current level to have a "sustainable" (another favorite notion) ecosystem. Of course, this goes well with the suicidalism of the West in general (think "deep ecology") and is used to advocate departing from the industrialized system, go back to an agrarain, egalitarian society,... this has some mainstream spilling, re-the "décroissance" leftists one can find showcased from time to time on the limousine-liberal news channel I-télé. |
| Posted by: anonymous5089 2006-10-24 11:03 |
| #1 Institute of Planetary Schemery Heh. |
| Posted by: Seafarious 2006-10-24 10:53 |