Backyard Aquaponics
A place to discuss aquaponics

This might be open to misinterpretation by some....to "try and falsify claims" means to attempt to disprove the assertions of others, not "attempt to fake results."

PS: It is trout harvest time! Want to drop by Sonoma?

Yes. Good point. I tend to use the more technical language because I hate when people say such and such study "proves" x. Proof is for geometry. Science is all about degrees of certainty.

I've got several points to address here. But first... I'm not a real stickler about grammar but someone should change "their" to "there" in the poll questions. It is there twice so I doubt it is a typo.

The playing field would be more even if the government stopped subsidizing oil (and coal, and probably nukes too).

That argument shocks me, particularly when they say we are being arrogant to suggest we could change the earth. I always point out the example of Easter Island (my avatar). They probably didn't believe in "peak trees" or that they could have such a drastic affect on their environment. I wonder how long it took after chopping down the last tree till they realized their error. They couldn't even leave the island - no materials to left build with!

+1

Yep, plenty of civilizations have fallen before ours......

And often within a generation or two...

Not a great argument because it was such a finite area. However, the Aztecs and the Mayans did the same thing and they died out - i.e. nature adapted and won !

We certainly can change the earth, but I think it is a certain arrogance on our part to suggest we can change the earth more than nature can adapt for. It's definite arrogance to subsequently believe we can fix it better than nature can.

We've been here for the blink of an eye and we still don't know how nature works as a whole.

Are we living right - not at all - our material cycles are absolutely crap (no recycling worth speaking of) and we are living unsustainably - but none of that means we're going to *frack* up the planet. It just means we're going to *frack* up ourselves ! The planet/nature will carry on long after we're gone.

The question is though.. do we place so much strain on the natural corrective processes of the planet... that it is unable to rebalance within a period that could be totally detremental to human life....

I doubt that we could destroy the planet... but I do believe we can poison it and make it soo sick as to take hugely longer to repair and renuture itself...

And while it's toxically sick... it most probably wont support us....

Exactly - start focussing on what we need to make ourselves sustainable and stop worrying about a goddamn iceberg ! There's plenty of palaentological evidence to suggest that that the iceberg may have been going to melt anyway. There's also plenty of anthropological evidence to show that we've lived unsustainably in the past and it's wiped out whole populations. Where do you want to put your money/future ?

The earth is finite - that's why it is a good argument.

The planet/nature will adapt of course. Even if every nuke goes off, it will adapt, it's simply a matter of time. I've never heard a climate scientist suggest otherwise.

If the icebergs melting helps people focus on sustainability I don't see the problem. People will not go for sustainability out of the goodness of their hearts. I frankly doubt icebergs melting will do it either. I think rising energy costs is the only thing that will force people to change.

My big fear is that the global economic slow down will drive energy prices lower and people will continue be wasteful until we are past the tipping point.

Raising energy prices only drives the prices of everything up...including food and meds....the end result is that only the poor are hurt by taxing energy.

There is no political will to artificially raise energy prices (by taxing it). I'm talking about prices rising due lack of supply/ rising demand a few years down the road. The poor will be hurt either way.

How will a cashier making $7.50/hr be convinced that driving a truck that gets 12 mpg, 25 miles per day isn't sustainable?