Jump to content
Advertise With Us! Or Sign Up To Remove Ads!
TheToolman

MORE then 15,000 scientists from around the world have signed a terrifying letter warning of an imminent apocalypse. [Merged]

Recommended Posts

 TheToolman    728

:hide2:

Now the global scientific community's view of the future is even bleaker.

Apart from the hole in the ozone layer, which has now been stabilised, every one of the major threats identified in 1992 has worsened.

Runaway consumption of precious resources by an exploding population remains the biggest danger facing humankind, say the scientists.

Writing in the online international journal BioScience, the scientists led by top US ecologist Professor William Ripple, from Oregon State University, said: "Humanity is now being given a second notice ... We are jeopardising our future by not reining in our intense but geographically and demographically uneven material consumption and by not perceiving continued rapid population growth as a primary driver behind many ecological and even societal threats.

"By failing to adequately limit population growth, reassess the role of an economy rooted in growth, reduce greenhouse gases, incentivise renewable energy, protect habitat, restore ecosystems, curb pollution, halt defaunation, and constrain invasive alien species, humanity is not taking the urgent steps needed to safeguard our imperilled biosphere."

https://www.thesun.co.uk/tech/4904635/15000-scientists-sign-warning-to-humanity-letter-detailing-the-grim-future-of-our-planet/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 Osgrot    274

The problem is the only so-called 'solutions' to the depletion of fossil fuel reserves involve the creation of a global carbon tax - i.e. the preferred tax system for the forthcoming satanic NWO/OWG! :scream1:

Edited by Osgrot
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 TheToolman    728
7 minutes ago, Cinnamon said:

They needed to address it to the global corporations and governments who keep everyone addicted to fossil fuels. 

EDIT: Which is it? Over population or not enough workers?  

"By failing to adequately limit population growth

^^^^ They can kill themselves first.  

I think because of our current population rates, we are going to consume more as the rest of the world moves up to middle class and will need a car and iphone.  As we move to 8 billion people to 10 billion people, we will be at the tipping point of being able to sustain life because of a lack of good clean water and food.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 LuckyBolt    1,234

Maybe they need to just open the bridge in Antarctica and let us through to the other side where there are more continents.

:kermit:

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • WTF 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 Cinnamon    21,940
1 minute ago, TheToolman said:

I think because of our current population rates, we are going to consume more as the rest of the world moves up to middle class and will need a car and iphone.  As we move to 8 billion people to 10 billion people, we will be at the tipping point of being able to sustain life because of a lack of good clean water and food.

If governments and corporations were not full of scum and slime looking to profit off of every single thing they can see, smell or touch, common sense would take over and their way of doing things would quickly become obsolete. There's no reason for people to starve, but they've been so dumbed down they won't even bother to grow lettuce in a pot by their kitchen window or put some sprouting seeds in a jar on their kitchen counter. Just think if everyone did that instead of being discouraged from being the slightest bit independent. 

Everything there is too much of, is bad. Everything there is too little of, is bad. lol  Fn hell, I give up. :gsbrnint:

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, TheToolman said:

I think because of our current population rates, we are going to consume more as the rest of the world moves up to middle class and will need a car and iphone.  As we move to 8 billion people to 10 billion people, we will be at the tipping point of being able to sustain life because of a lack of good clean water and food.

So what's the problem ?  When the conditions get bad enough there would be a mass die off (with no need for humans to deliberately kill other humans).     When the population drops to the level that resources will sustain, then the die off ends.   Problem solved.  No need for humans to deliberately kill other humans. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 Cryptic Mole    4,290
1 minute ago, John Prewett said:

No need for humans to deliberately kill other humans.

They won't... well, not directly, anyway.
They'll create a global pandemic to do that!
They've done it before, and they'll do it again!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 LuckyBolt    1,234

Natural systems eventually balance themselves out.  We’re a part of that system and Gaia has a pretty good way of cleaning things up.  Always has, always will.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 sybdragon    1,491

This world is dying. The people on it are dying. We are not evolving higher. We are degrading. The Bible is proven correct again. All life is corrupted. :nodl:

And the answer to life, the universe and everything is......  42. Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy's computer, Deep Thought,  is correct.  :) 

https://creation.com/mutations-are-evolutions-end

Snippet: All multicellular life suffers

Two recent reviews of the mutation literature not only confirm Sanford’s claims, but extend them to all multi-cellular life.

In a review of the distribution of fitness effects (DFE) of mutations,19 the authors are unable to give any examples of beneficial mutations for humans. In their calculations regarding the rate of deleterious mutations (MD) and neutral mutations (MN), they use the equalities MD = 1 – MN and MN = 1 – MD which both imply that the rate of beneficial mutations is zero. They do give a few non-zero values for beneficial mutation rates in some experimental organisms, but qualify these results by noting the interference of other variables.

In a review of mutation rate variations in eukaryotes,20 the authors admit that all multicellular organisms are undergoing inexorable genome decay from mutations because natural selection cannot remove the damage.21 Their Box 2 and Table 1 list deleterious mutation rates for a wide range of multicellular organisms, noting they are all underestimates, with the possible exception of those for the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster with a value of 1.2. The value given for humans is ‘~3’.

Thus, all multicellular life on earth is undergoing inexorable genome decay because the deleterious mutation rates are so high, the effects of the most individual mutations are so small, there are no compensatory beneficial mutations, and natural selection is ineffective in removing the damage.

The wheels have come off the neo-Darwinian juggernaut! 

http://thetruthwins.com/archives/the-human-race-is-dying-dna-degeneration-would-eventually-lead-to-the-total-extinction-of-humanity

Snippet: So no, we are not going to “evolve” into bigger and better creatures.  Instead, the human race is steadily breaking down and our time is running out.

In essence, the blueprint of human life is being systematically destroyed, and there is not a thing we can do to even significantly slow it down.  The following is from a paper by Gerald H. McKibben and Everett C. McKibben…

Geneticists have long worried about the impact of mutations on the human population, and that at a rate of one deleterious mutation per person per generation, genetic deterioration would result. Earlier reports were based on estimates of mutation rates considerable lower than what we now know to be the case. Findings going back to 2002 show that the human mutation rate is at least 100 mistakes (misspellings) per person per generation. Some scientists believe the rate is closer to 300.

Even a rate of 100 has profound implications, and the mutation rate is itself increasing. Furthermore, most, if not all, mutations in the human genome must be deleterious.  “And nothing can reverse the damage that has been done during our own generation, even if further mutations could be stopped.” (P. 40). It would appear that the process is an irreversible downward spiral that will end in “mutational meltdown”.

So how long do we have until “mutational meltdown”?

Well, according to McKibben and McKibben, Dr. Sanford estimates that the human race has a total lifespan of approximately 6,000 years…

The author cites research showing that the human race is currently degenerating at 1 – 2 % per generation due to accumulation of mutations. At a 1% decline in fitness per generation, there is a sharp reduction in fitness after 300 generations (about 6,000 years). One of the most interesting revelations in Genetic Entropy is Dr. Sanford’s and other workers’ analysis of the Biblical account of life expectancies. In a statistical regression analysis of declining life spans since Noah (lived 950 years), after 32 centuries since Noah the life expectancy has declined to about 70. The remarkable aspect is that this curve, which shows a sharp drop-off after Noah and a more gradual decline about 1,000 years ago, is that it is very similar to theoretical curves presented by other researchers that show genetic degeneration. Either Moses faithfully recorded the events (and ages) recorded in Genesis, or he was a skilled statistician who made up data with a remarkable fit to an exponential curve! 

http://statedclearly.com/articles/human-mutation-rate-how-many-dna-mutations-happen-each-generation/

Snippet: When a child is born they receive half a copy of their DNA from their father and half a copy from their mother. When those copies are made inside the parents' bodies, errors or "mutations" can occur. So how many unique mutations does each human have in their genes?

A 2011 study in Nature Genetics examined the genomes of two human families and found that children in the study had an average of 42 unique mutations.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/yes-the-answer-to-the-universe-really-is-42-1351201.html

Snippet: It seems that Douglas Adams was right after all: the answer to Life, the Universe and everything, is 42.

Cambridge astronomers have found that 42 is the value of an essential scientific constant - one which determines the age of the universe.

In his novel The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy (1979) Mr Adams describes how an alien race programs a computer called Deep Thought to provide the ultimate answer to "Life, the Universe and Everything". After seven and a half million years' calculation, back came the answer - 42.
In slightly less time - two years- a team at the Cavendish Laboratory has managed the same feat, using a new technique to estimate the value of the "Hubble Constant". This measures how quickly objects in the universe are receding from each other - a natural outcome of the Big Bang that created the universe. Dr Richard Saunders, who led the research, sounded a trifle abashed by the result. "We have taken two measurements for the constant, and the average of them is, well, it's 42," he said. But he insisted this is "entirely fortuitous" - though thousands of fans of the Hitch Hiker novels might disagree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up to our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×