thebackpacker.com - backpacking, hiking and camping Welcome to thebackpacker.com
create account   login  
     home : trailtalk
    articles  beginners  gear  links  pictures            

Tarpy's farewll

View Messages

Viewing posts 51 to 86 of 86 messages posted.
Jump to Page   << prev   |  1   |  2  |

To add this thread as a favorites, you need to first login.
 

yingyang
What was I supposed to do with his I'
I'
I'

diatribe?

He seems like a fruitcake. I,I,I my ass.
bacpac
4:48:12 PM
4/16/03

It's just fun to see you get annoyed rather than you annoying someone else ;o)
ynamiynami
5:11:29 PM
4/16/03

hehehe
bacpac
5:13:30 PM
4/16/03

Hello?
I am very drunk right now and none of this makes sense to me.

Hello? Does this make sense to sober people?

Hello?
bacpac
6:44:30 PM
4/16/03

From Ananova.com --

"Quarter of plant species under threat"

Researchers believe a quarter or more of all the world's plants are now threatened with extinction.

Officially the proportion of endangered plants is said to be 13%, but two US experts produced evidence that the true figure is at least 22% and may be as high as almost half.

They pointed out that the previous figure did not include a reliable tally of species at risk in the tropics, where most of the world's plants grow.

Nigel Pitman, from Duke University in Durham, North Carolina, and Peter Jorgensen, from Missouri Botanical Garden in St Louis, estimated the missing tropical data using the number of plant species endemic to each country.

Looking at 189 countries and territories, the pair calculated that the global proportion of threatened plants is between 22% and 47%.

The vast majority of threatened tropical species grew in "biodiversity hotspots" where high variation and massive habitat loss happen to coincide.

Based on evidence from a diversity project in Ecuador, the researchers estimated that the cost of maintaining a global database of threatened plants would be about £64.50 per species per year.

Writing in the journal Science, they said: "Only with the species-by-species information generated by such an undertaking will conservationists be able to monitor and prevent the large-scale plant extinctions foreseen to occur in the tropics in this century."
social scientist
12:39:49 AM
4/17/03

"I wonder what things will be like in a couple of hundred years. After all, it's just the blink of an eye, geologically speaking."
Tilt
12:46:35 PM
04/16/03

From Time magazine's Earth Day 2000 special edition:

"Researchers of biodiversity agree that we are in the midst of the seventh mass extinction. Even if the current rate of habitat destruction were to continue in forest and coral reefs alone, half the species of plants and animals would be gone by the end of the 21st century. Our descendents would inherit a biologically impoverished and homogenized world.

"Not only would there be many fewer life forms, but also faunas and floras would look much the same over large parts of the world, with disaster species such as fire ants and rats widely spread. Humanity would then have to wait millions of years for natural evolution to replace what was lost in a single century."
social scientist
12:43:09 AM
4/17/03

And all because folks don't clean their boots after a hike and take purple loosestrife seeds to new areas....that's right, purple loosestrife.
Sassafras
7:26:38 AM
4/17/03

Hmmmm.... What's that water plant that's spreading all over the place because people move their boats from lake to lake without washing them off... ?

Exotic species have certainly done a number on the wildlife in Hawaii.
Tilt
7:38:24 AM
4/17/03

Social Scientist seem to have a handle on what I've been getting at. This thread is not about Tarpy, but about a thought he passed along.

It's not that we are crap.

It's about our place on the planet and the arrogance we exhibit. The earth existed for hundreds of millions of years before the first critter stood upright and swung up into a tree. It will exist for hundreds of millions of years after we are gone. We need to think about this, not because we will be around then, or even our great grandchildren for all that matters, but because somewhere down the road our descendents will have to deal with what we leave behind.

Biodiversity will establish itself in time. It has after every mass extinction event in recorded earth history (i.e., the fossil record). The question after a mass extinction is this: what is left behind? Who survives?

Current extinction levels exceed those of past mass extinctions already, if you carry out the rate over a period of geologic time. Climate alteration is another factor that will ultimately come into play, and although we were already in a warming trend from all accounts, burning fossil fuels is accellerating that rate. If it continues at the current level, it will alter agricultural production in this country. Agriculture has been the main strength of the United States. Lose that and then what?

At the very same time, water is becoming scarcer in parts of the country. Farmers in southern California have to fight for water against resorts in Vegas so they can run illuminated fountains at night so people can get drunk and lose their paychecks.

Whether we choose to acknowledge the facts or not, there are certain realities already in motion, and if we don't begin to address these issues, we won't be around long enough to worry about asteroids.
Geobeet
8:18:21 AM
4/17/03

So, where's the cockroach this morning?

Geobeet, I've been enjoying your ramblings and agree fully. The only people who don't see a problem with what's happening are those who don't want to deal with it.

But the question is, what do we do about it?

I recycle,drive a fairly economical car, turn the water off while I'm shaving, don't put chemicals on my lawn, contribute a few dollars a year to environmental orgs and donate a little time when possible. Is it enough?
Indiana John
8:43:45 AM
4/17/03

Geobeet, why do you buy into the fallacy of an old earth? Clearly, the earth is only a few thousand years old, and the fossil record can be explained by the Great Flood. Sheesh.
Mutt
8:56:59 AM
4/17/03

Well I believe we all need to rethink things. To my thinking, whatever we are doing is not enough. How to we divert development of wild lands? How do we deal with the mentality that we are kings of the world and the rest of the critters and life on the planet exists for our sole benefit?

There are no easy answers, but if those of us who see what is happening continue to talk about it and think about it, then maybe we can be the seeds from which general awareness begins to grow. Only when general awareness reaches a critical mass can we begin to change things. Obviously, we are not there yet if some who claim to love nature snicker at the realities around them.

Just because things look pristine does not mean they are. What we don't seen in these pristine views may be what is going to alter the views dramatically.

I don't pretend to have answers. I wanted to start a discussion, perhaps get some people to think a little more critically, and see where it would lead.
Geobeet
8:59:35 AM
4/17/03

Natural Selection
GEO is right...we are trashing the planet...what's debatable is the extent of the damage and when/if it will kill us off as a result. I agree with George Carlin, we CAN'T DESTROY the planet (Only ourselves), when Mother Nature has had enough, she will shake us off like a bad case of fleas.
SuperTroll
9:20:50 AM
4/17/03

Troll, I think Geobeet and I both agree that it is us that will go before the earth, but if we're not careful, we could have a pretty ugly earth to live in during the latter days.
Indiana John
9:29:28 AM
4/17/03

Mutt, I was collecting fossils at a pit in Central Pa., and an old man came up and started talking about all the seashells. I thought it was interesting that the guy had such a great handle on fossils, then he said, "Isn't it amazing that the Great Flood rose up this high?"
Geobeet
9:34:01 AM
4/17/03

Aren't there states here where teaching Evolution is barred from the school curriculum?
ynamiynami
9:48:26 AM
4/17/03

The great flood of blind ignorant faith?
Phaedrus
9:50:52 AM
4/17/03

well, if it isn't the Phaed-man! tell us how you really feel, dude.
;-)
lyra
9:52:17 AM
4/17/03

ynami, I'm not sure. There was a debacle in Kansas not long ago. It backfired in a major way against the religious right sickos, and made Kansas the laughinstock of the nation for awhile.
Mutt
9:56:28 AM
4/17/03

The American Talibans still hold that creationist theory is a valid counterpoint to evolution. I think the furor was that they wanted to get it taught in school alongside evolution.
Geobeet
10:25:55 AM
4/17/03

It's hard to have a valid counterpoint to something that isn't valid itself.
StickmanWalking
10:37:18 AM
4/17/03

"The great flood of blind ignorant faith?"

Phaedrus
09:50:52 AM
04/17/03

LMAO!!! Niiiiiice.
>:D


Some interesting discussion here...I enjoyed wading through it. I think there have been some similar threads in the past, regarding the human race as a cancer.

The population is certainly out of control and, logistically, our resources are finite. Still, I hate to take a fatalist point of view...
there are things being done to conserve resources and preserve the planet. Hopefully, it won't be a case of "too little, too late."

Most backpackers that I know seem to have a heightened appreciation of nature. Thus, it is a natural mentality to conserve water, recycle, be more environmentally oriented...on and on.

I think part of the process of saving the wilderness is educating people. A big part of that is getting them out there to appreciate the treasure that could be lost...

I would also vote for mandatory sterilization of some people!! LOL
AmyG
10:44:35 AM
4/17/03

Yeah, yeah, yeah! The earth will get used up, we'll all die and leave this big empty, used up rock. But...BUT, what would happen if something else happened that could speed us to the end of our days? There are things going on in this world we have no clue are getting ready to happen, much less what to do about it when it DOES start. Stuff like THIS!...


"Pope Announces Zombie Crusade


VATICAN CITY--The Vatican announced today that Pope John Paul II, a long-term member of the army of the living dead, has decided to lead a massive zombie crusade against France.

"It's like God told Job in the Old Testament," said the Pope in this morning's press conference. "Sometimes, you just have to follow your deepest, most spiritual instincts, and send your loyal army of zombies and skeletal minions on an all-out rampage upon the unsuspecting citizens of France. The primary aims of this crusade will be spreading the word of Jesus and eating a lot of brains."

Cardinals and bishops who remained in non-zombie form quickly called for a council to resolve the latest crisis. In the end they decided to do nothing except pretend that they really cared. Their decision to do nothing was then vetoed by the infallible Pope, who declared that in response to the Zombie army, all priest should bring their tasty skulls to Vatican, preferably pre-opened for easy consumption.

"This doesn't exactly come as a surprise," commented Cardinal Anthony Bevilacqua. "I mean, the Pope has obviously been dead for several months now at least, plenty of time for him to amass a suitable army of the living dead with which to invade France. I mean, come on, it's France. I bet I could take over France with twenty or thirty thousand zombies, easy. Hell, screw that, I could take over France with an eight by ten picture of a fairly threatening poodle."

Despite the gravity of this comment, French Prime Minister Lionel Jospin declined to respond, instead making only strange gurgling sounds and dripping brain fluid onto the ground in the typical French fashion."

So tell me friend, what the hell are you going to do when a zombie priest shows up on your door? Show him your Sierra Club Card? Take heed young ones!!!
Nigal
10:50:38 AM
4/17/03

well, i guess i know where all you people will be if everyone quits posting for awhile!
lyra
10:53:45 AM
4/17/03

Nigal, you are outta control!
>:D
AmyG
10:54:50 AM
4/17/03

Oh sure. Laugh at me all you want! Today France. Tomorrow England. But mark my words, it'll hit our shores sooner than later. Marvin wouldn't ridcule me this way. He'd lend an ear and hear what is true!

Global warming is the least of our problems friends....
Nigal
10:57:41 AM
4/17/03

He's right. If it weren't for Marvin saving out butts, we'd all be goners. Get your tinfoil hats on, right Nigal?
Geobeet
11:11:21 AM
4/17/03

Ouch
Out=Our
Geobeet
11:11:42 AM
4/17/03

bitpusher - do you have a link providing more info about your last post (populations actually declining or leveling off in industrialized nations)? That's interesting.
Artex
11:07:20 PM
4/17/03

The one you CALL NIGAL is telling the TRUTH. HERE IS the proof:

Marvin Gardens
9:11:00 AM
4/18/03

Artex, I found a few numbers that I'll post here but there are many more out there.

According to the PRB(Population Reference Bureau) The percentage of population change for more developed (industrialized) nations is projected at 3 percent between 2002 and 2050. In contrast, the population change for less developed countries is projected at 57 percent for the same period.

From the same site, population trends show a significant increase in population by the year 2050, but a declining growth rate from 2.07 percent in 1970 to .45 percent in 2050.

The world population was at 2.5 billion in 1950, 6.1 billion in 2000 and is projected to be 7.6 billion by 2020 and 9.3 billion by 2050.

OK there are a few numbers to start with. I'll try to find more later.
Indiana John
9:16:16 AM
4/18/03

That's very interesting, IJ, thanks for posting that info. It kind of puts my mind at ease a bit about overpopulation.
Artex
9:18:53 AM
4/18/03

I wish there was a single source for that, Artex, but it's all over the place. I'm really good at remembering things I've read, less good at remembering where I read them.

The "greying of Europe" is pretty well documented; a quick websearch with that as the search criteria would probably yield a lot of good hits. Govt. sources would probably yield the figures for the U.S. I'm not sure where to find the UN study, but they probably have a website too. I've never actually read the UN report, mind you, just read other sources quoting it.

A lot of the stuff you read on the "scary overpopulation" sites is from the '70s, when everyone was terrified that the baby boomers would multiply at the same rates as their parents. It didn't happen, but it's hard to get that idea out of the general mindset. The non-industrialized third world nations are about the only ones with significant birthrates anymore.

The only real thing that worries me, population-wise, is that the geneticists will unlock the key to longer lifespans. That will throw a real monkey wrench in to the works. I've read stuff (Wired magazine, fortunately I remember that one) that says in two generations, we could be looking at 250yr lifespans as the norm.
bitpusher
9:23:24 AM
4/18/03

Eeek, 250 year old life spans?! Hell, people's faces look like wet-bread at about age 70, I'd hate to see what they look like at 250!
Artex
9:26:25 AM
4/18/03

Part of the trick of extending the lifespan genetically is being able to repair stuff like collagen loss and skin thinning, etc. There's no point in living to be 250 is all your skin falls off when you're 175. Basically, they'll find some way to defeat cell death without triggering cancer, and poof, you'll look 18 until you're in your 60's probably.
bitpusher
9:29:35 AM
4/18/03

Oh, and not to throw a wet blanket on your day, but if you're reading this message, it's too late for you. Sorry. Maybe your grandkids.
bitpusher
9:30:57 AM
4/18/03

Jump to Page   << prev   |  1   |  2  |
<< back to Trail Talk main page

 

Post a Message

In order to post a response to this thread you must first be logged in. If you do not already have an account, you must first create a new account.

 

Login Form

Username:
Password:

 

 

Post a New Thread
Search Threads
Browse Archive

Create a New Account

Trail Talk Main Page