|
|
18-10-2010, 07:38
|
#556
|
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Ohio
Boat: Now boatless :-(
Posts: 11,580
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by beowulfborealis
I highly recommend the book Freakonomics if you get the chance. Its a hard-core look at economics. They study everything from Chicago street gang finance to sumo wrestlers fixing fights.
|
I keep picking this up in various airport bookstores but haven't bought it yet.
So you reckon it's a good read?
|
|
|
18-10-2010, 14:01
|
#557
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: W Florida
Boat: Still have the 33yo Jon boat. But now a CATAMARAN. Nice little 18' Bay Cat.
Posts: 7,086
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ex-Calif
I keep picking this up in various airport bookstores but haven't bought it yet.
So you reckon it's a good read?
|
Yep.
........
|
|
|
18-10-2010, 15:48
|
#558
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Boat in Panama
Boat: Vandestadt ketch 42
Posts: 357
|
I concur...Its an excellent read.
Regards
Alan
|
|
|
20-10-2010, 15:45
|
#559
|
Senior Cruiser
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Between Caribbean and Canada
Boat: Murray 33-Chouette & Pape Steelmaid-44-Safara-both steel cutters
Posts: 8,508
|
It seems the WWF Living Planet Report is out.
It is an interesting read on the state of the planet.
Quote:
The 2010 edition of the Living Planet Report presents new analyses on the health of our only planet.
It shows populations of tropical species are plummeting while humanity’s demands on natural resources are sky-rocketing.
We are currently using 50% more natural resources than the earth can sustain.
|
WWF - Living Planet Report
|
|
|
20-10-2010, 16:05
|
#560
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Shenzhen, China
Boat: Nauticat 42 (Jersey, U.K.)
Posts: 403
|
presumably this the same wwf that reported that all himalayan glaciers will have melted by 2035 only to have to later retract the statement as complete nonsense:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-verified.html
|
|
|
20-10-2010, 17:07
|
#561
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Massachusetts
Boat: 40' Silverton Aftcabin with twin Crusaders
Posts: 1,791
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by hpeer
|
How did anyone determine what the earth can sustain?
|
|
|
20-10-2010, 17:18
|
#562
|
Senior Cruiser
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Between Caribbean and Canada
Boat: Murray 33-Chouette & Pape Steelmaid-44-Safara-both steel cutters
Posts: 8,508
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobsadler
|
Ah geeze, you got me. You found a mistake in some climate change report which therefore proves beyond any shadow of a doubt that all climate change reports are bogus.
BTW......did you hear the one about the WMD in Iraq? Or how we were helping in New Orleans. Or how small the spill was?
|
|
|
20-10-2010, 17:23
|
#563
|
Senior Cruiser
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Between Caribbean and Canada
Boat: Murray 33-Chouette & Pape Steelmaid-44-Safara-both steel cutters
Posts: 8,508
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by foggysail
How did anyone determine what the earth can sustain?
|
By conservative estimates we are already over the sustainable level.
World Footprint
|
|
|
20-10-2010, 17:30
|
#564
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: W Florida
Boat: Still have the 33yo Jon boat. But now a CATAMARAN. Nice little 18' Bay Cat.
Posts: 7,086
|
You know, I don't know the answer but as far as sustainability I think we are a past it too.
But if we get fusion and a rice hybrid (or wheat) that produces twice as much, well then, who knows.
|
|
|
20-10-2010, 18:41
|
#565
|
Eternal Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: North of Baltimore
Boat: Ericson 27 & 18' Herrmann Catboat
Posts: 3,798
|
Don't gget people started on the Hydidization and gene splicing of our food supply....
It is bad enough that milk has so many growth hormones in it.....that it affects young girls and boys and their maturation rate.
|
|
|
21-10-2010, 04:47
|
#566
|
cruiser
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Probably in an anchorage or a boatyard..
Boat: Ebbtide 33' steel cutter
Posts: 5,030
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobsadler
|
Small point and not really relevent to the glacier discussion, but in the UK where the daily mail is published most people would laugh in your face if you used anything published by that paper as reliable. If you want anyone to take your points seriously you would be better off quoting sources from somewhere seen as being more objective, like Nature or New Scientist.
|
|
|
21-10-2010, 05:07
|
#568
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 834
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by conachair
Small point and not really relevent to the glacier discussion, but in the UK where the daily mail is published most people would laugh in your face if you used anything published by that paper as reliable. If you want anyone to take your points seriously you would be better off quoting sources from somewhere seen as being more objective, like Nature or New Scientist.
|
The Daily Mail is, IMO, a gossipy paper full of show biz and celebs, but even so, it's science and technology section is generally well written (admittedly to the level of the "man in the street") but factually quite accurate. The 2035 glacier faux-pas did happen and was widely reported in other media. New Scientist is no longer the magazine it was and I feel it has dumbed down considerably compared to where it was in the 80s and 90s.
Nonetheless, it would be nice if those issuing reports that steer government policy and effect global opinion proofread their contributions before publication rather than issuing blanket denials afterwards.
__________________
Arthur Dent: "I wish I'd listened to what my mother told me when I was younger"
Ford Prefect: "Why? What did she say?"
Arthur: "I don't know - I didn't listen!!"
|
|
|
21-10-2010, 05:23
|
#569
|
Senior Cruiser
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Thunder Bay, Ontario - 48-29N x 89-20W
Boat: (Cruiser Living On Dirt)
Posts: 49,139
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobsadler
presumably this the same wwf that reported that all himalayan glaciers will have melted by 2035 only to have to later retract the statement as complete nonsense:
|
You presume wrong.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and it’s “Fourth Assessment Report - AR4" ("Climate Change 2007") shouldn’t be confused with the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and it’s “Living Planet Report (2010)”.
The IPCC made the mistake to which you refer, and subsequently corrected it.
__________________
Gord May
"If you didn't have the time or money to do it right in the first place, when will you get the time/$ to fix it?"
|
|
|
21-10-2010, 16:03
|
#570
|
Senior Cruiser
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Between Caribbean and Canada
Boat: Murray 33-Chouette & Pape Steelmaid-44-Safara-both steel cutters
Posts: 8,508
|
Look here, who here is perfect?
So we need to get over this particular screw up, and the email thing as well.
That some bonehead, or group of boneheads made a mistake is irrelevant. Sorry, this is a sore issue not only on this argument but on other topics as well. It is merely a distraction away from the more serious points at hand.
If dragging up some incidental misstatement is the best shot you have to disprove global warming then you have nothing, NOTHING!
Stick to the point.
You PROVE to ME that we are NOT changing the earths environment.
Go ahead, PROVE IT. And don't make any silly mistakes and make sure all of the folks who support your idea are sane and meticulous in their statements and NEVER MAKE MISTAKES.
Sheeesh!
|
|
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
Display Modes |
Rate This Thread |
Linear Mode
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
Advertise Here
Recent Discussions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vendor Spotlight |
|
|
|
|