[Semper Paratus]

This is a rehash of the 'Club of Rome' crap I heard in the '70s.

Some conservative economist bet Paul Erlich $10,000 to name the commodity of his choice that will more scarce in 10 years and Erlich lost.

[B. A. Conservative]

Pure unadulterated BS!

[Alberta's Child]

. . . the average African or Asian consumes less than 3.5 acres per person . . .

And it seems that the only Asians and Africans who aren't peeing in their own drinking water are those who live in places that have NO natural resources (Singapore, Hong Kong, Japan, etc.).

As soon as I saw that this report had been published by the World Wrestling Federation, I knew not to take it seriously.

/sarcasm off/

[cruiserman]

What does the World Wrestling Federation know about dwindling resources?

What a load of BS.

[Alberta's Child]

"At the summit, world leaders will have a magnificent opportunity to address the root causes of our obvious failure to achieve sustainable development and set us on the path to a truly sustainable future."

Anyone who truly believes that human beings are a burden on the earth can start setting a good example for the rest of us by jumping off the nearest bridge.

[Crusader Rabbit]

Paul Ehrlich was singing this song thirty years ago. Every one of the resources he said we would run out of is cheaper today than it was then.

I guess these clowns figure that a generation later everyone will have forgotten. Or perhaps they are betting the thirty years from now everyone in the media will call them "experts" on this topic just like they do Ehrlich. The correct title would be "Paul Ehrlich - an academic who has never been right in his entire career", but you'll never see that on a TV screen.

[hellinahandcart]

So, unless our standard of living falls, our standard of living will fall.

Got it now...

[Kozak]

Yup, we better stop using up all the whale oil, baleen and rubber or our economy will grind to a halt. Same argument circa 1870.

[alloysteel]

Oh, does the whining NEVER stop? This is one of the more powerful arguments ever for going into interplanetary space and begin to mine the asteroids, or even other moons and planets. Thee is a LOT of universe out there, and in a million years, or a million million years, mankind cannot possibly pollute it all. SOME of it has to remain pristine.

And where is it written, that the resources we now have cannot be replenished? The earth even now, as we write of this, is restoring burned forests and scorched meadows with new growth, all taking up CO2 from the atmosphere and rebuilding the oxygen supply we all share. Incidentally making more wood, sugars, compost, and shade at the same time, too. In the oceans, the various decomposing wastes in the ocean depths are reverting to their basic chemical components, including methane, which in the depths of oceans off continental shelves, forms methyl hydrate in water that is at steady temperature of 38° F. and at about a half mile or more down. The silt from eroding land surfaces in river basins overcovers this quantity of methyl hydrate, and encases it in a layer of concretion, which turns to sedimentary rock, and new deposits of natural gas are formed. This seems to be happening fairly quickly, and at a rate equal to or greater than the fossil fuels are being consumed by mankind. This may be why oil wells, once thought depleted, seem to be filling back up.

But even if this natural replenishment is NOT proceeding at such a rate, it is technically feasible to create petroleum, should we need it, from organic waste that is now discharged into our streams and ocean bays. We can still reclaim some of the 97% or so of the energy remaining in "spent" atomic fuels now declared to be radioactive waste, rather than reburying it in Nevada, as seems to be the plan now. I have no doubt that technology will solve many of our seeming "shortages" in the next 100 years or so, and what is now termed "waste" shall prove to be among our most valuable resources as we learn how to apply the technology only now being developed in our laboratories and workshops across the world.

[dead]

I read this report thirty years ago.

[Gunner9mm]

"Essay on the Principle of Population (1798) was Malthus's observation that in nature plants and animals produce far more offspring than can survive, and that Man too is capable of overproducing if left unchecked. Malthus concluded that unless family size was regulated, man's misery of famine would become globally epidemic and eventually consume Man. Malthus' view that poverty and famine were natural outcomes of population growth and food supply was not popular among social reformers who believed that with proper social structures, all ills of man could be eradicated." Author unknown, copied from http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/history/malthus.html.

[Prodigal Son]

OK. Fair enough WWF. Let us assume for a moment that we should take you seriously. In 2030, if none of the things that you mention have happened, can we kill you and your offspring? Can we sue you for 10 gazillion dollars? Put your money where your mouth is. If the things you claim actually happen- we crown you dictator of the world and you can be in charge- if not, we castrate all of you and cut out your tongues. Deal?

[Physicist]

That scenario could be improved if new technologies are found to improve the efficiency of resource use.

Yeah, but that's the whole point. You could have picked any decade in the last two or three hundred years and made the argument that society was "unsustainable" and would collapse in 30 to 50 years, if only you had assumed that technology would not progress. But technology has progressed, and it will continue to progress, as long as the luddites and limitists STAY THE HELL OUT OF THE WAY.

[kitchen]

Well, here it is. Is this plagiarism or recycling?

[1rudeboy]

This AP article reads like a WWF press release. Imagine an AP article about the latest NRA report claiming guns cause less crime.

[Eddeche]

Associated Press | 7-9-02 | NAOMI KOPPEL

Relation ?

[hattend]

Human beings are running up an unsustainable "overdraft" on the planet's natural resources, and standards of living will start to plummet in less than 30 years if changes are not put in place immediately, a leading international conservation organization said Tuesday.

Why are the prices of most resources dropping? If they were getting rarer and harder to find wouldn't the price go up? Where's the proof?(beef?)

[Cindy]

Eco-Wackos, Eco-Weirdo's and Eco-Terrorists sure do seem to have a strong command of our main-stream media and easy access to a wide array of government organizations.

Click here for a small list of online common sense environmental resources!

[headsonpikes]

These environazi sloganeers are at least consistent in their belief in a robust eco-system.

They thoughtfully include within their membership not only the expected useless parasites, but also cunning predators and those indispensable scavengers to clean up the human scraps!

These profiteers of human misery WILL receive their just desserts someday. ;^)

[INSENSITIVE GUY]

I gotta finish cutting down trees!