Eco-Logical: A Group for Environmentalists

Information

Eco-Logical: A Group for Environmentalists

Eco-Logical is a group for anyone who cares about clean air, drinkable water, a sustainable economy, and environmental justice.

Location: The Irreplaceable Earth
Members: 338
Latest Activity: on Sunday

Welcome to Eco-Logical: A Group for Environmentalists

 

Note: Sylvain Duford, the group's creator, has left A|N. I am acting as moderator of the group in his place. Please contact me if you have any questions. - Dallas the Phallus.

Discussion Forum

Step Changes in Your Future

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Ruth Anthony-Gardner on Sunday. 46 Replies

Cyclones Delay Arctic Refreeze

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Ruth Anthony-Gardner Feb 11. 16 Replies

Current Climate Models Miss Feedbacks

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner Feb 11. 0 Replies

2017 Arctic Drama

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner Feb 9. 0 Replies

Non-linear Climate Change signal

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Ruth Anthony-Gardner Feb 4. 1 Reply

Is the Northern Hemisphere entering a new atmospheric regime

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Ruth Anthony-Gardner Feb 3. 1 Reply

Another Positive Feedback we'd missed

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Ruth Anthony-Gardner Jan 24. 15 Replies

Global Warming Rate Accelerating

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner Jan 21. 0 Replies

Hadley and Mid-Latitude Cells Changing

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Ruth Anthony-Gardner Jan 19. 3 Replies

We'd Underestimated Ocean Heating

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner Jan 19. 0 Replies

Soil Carbon - Dangerous Lock In

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Ruth Anthony-Gardner Dec 2, 2016. 2 Replies

Why the Arctic is warmer than Siberia and Greenland

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner Nov 30, 2016. 0 Replies

Methane, more scary than we thought

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Ruth Anthony-Gardner Nov 26, 2016. 57 Replies

Pollution reaching the lower stratosphere

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner Oct 28, 2016. 0 Replies

We're All Living on False Hope

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner Oct 20, 2016. 0 Replies

Dump the Big Green groups

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Ruth Anthony-Gardner Oct 12, 2016. 6 Replies

Abrupt Sea Level Rise

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Ruth Anthony-Gardner Oct 5, 2016. 5 Replies

Global Warming - The Math Test

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Grinning Cat Oct 1, 2016. 3 Replies

Two degrees rise by 2050 or sooner

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Grinning Cat Sep 30, 2016. 1 Reply

Climate Denial Crock of the Week

Loading… Loading feed

Comment Wall

Comment

You need to be a member of Eco-Logical: A Group for Environmentalists to add comments!

Comment by Joan Denoo on November 25, 2012 at 2:02pm

fossil fuel independence, energy independence. Separate these two issues. Oil is in well defined decline since 2000. Ladder for growth ...?

Gregor Macdonald

US energy policy with Gregor Macdonald

Comment by Grinning Cat on November 23, 2012 at 1:48am

MONSANTO: Ain't nothing wrong with genetically modified corn. We promise. [giant chick towering over farmer]

Comment by Grinning Cat on November 23, 2012 at 1:21am
Comment by Ruth Anthony-Gardner on November 12, 2012 at 11:38am

Comment by Joan Denoo on October 14, 2012 at 1:03am
Comment by Joan Denoo on October 13, 2012 at 3:14pm

What Climate Change Just Might Ruin

Thanks to Ruth Anthony-Gardner

"According to a 2011 U.S. Interior Department report, "annual flows in three prominent river basins - the Colorado, Rio Grande and San Joaquin - could decline by as much [as] 8 percent to 14 percent over the next four decades," reported the Associated Press. Expected changes in temperature and precipitation are likely to alter river flows 'with increased flooding possible in the winter due to early snowmelt and water shortages in the summer due to reductions in spring and summer runoffs.' 


"Mike Connor, commissioner of the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, said, "Impacts to water are on the leading edge of global climate change." 

"Earlier this year, the Bureau of Reclamationasked the public to suggest ideas for meeting future water demand around the Colorado River basin."

Comment by TNT666 on October 12, 2012 at 12:39am

As our technology increases, so goes our "carrying capacity", which is why the word sustainable is no longer useful... carrying capacity is entirely dependent on economics and technology. It's why so many people are going vegetarian... the argument being... we'll need to feed more people so we need to become vegetarian! (along with a few other arguments of course). Spaniards are building vertical gardens, also increasing the Iberian peninsula's "carrying capacity". It is a value which is impossible to pinpoint. I come back to the number of humans must be in proportion to the numbers of large animals... any other standard is movable, flexible, cheatable.

Comment by Ruth Anthony-Gardner on October 11, 2012 at 11:42pm

TNT666, when I use the word "sustainable" I mean human beings living within the carrying capacity of our planet. No particular economic theory implied.
I do agree with your sentiment that thinking breeding is a "right" is as ridiculous as the "right" to own slaves".

Comment by TNT666 on October 11, 2012 at 11:11pm

IMO the rational biological approach is best. Discounting large animal populations past their tipping point such as lions/tigers/rhinos/polar bears who's numbers are too small, we can still look at other large animal populations, certain whales, moose, deer. Looking at those other lifeforms populations truly puts our own ridiculous population into perspective.

1-Our governments/corporations subside population growth through baby programs and marriage incentives. Eliminating those two would put a good starting dent.

2-The next hurdle is harder to overcome: getting away from religious morals, which look onto breeding as the morally righteous thing to do. Most atheists on these sites are recent deconverts and still pursue religious values, even though they don't believe in gods. If convincing atheists of this is a challenge, it's 10-fold harder going after faithers.
3- items 1 and 2 can only I reckon accomplish less than 30% of the breeding changes the planet needs. Whence enough people understand that us outnumbering all other large animals is ridiculous, then we need to enshrine it into culture, to make breeding extremely unpopular, and to have the sense that breeding is a "right" is simply ridiculous, as ridiculous as the "right" to own slaves. Once the "morality" of breeding has reached a tipping point, then we can legislate that away completely, and ensure that healthcare providers are freely doling out sterilisation, and encouraging it at all age groups. I wish for a day when only a very small percentage of the population partake of breeding, hopefully under some sort of lottery system that would ensure an reasonable level of fairness.

Comment by Chris on October 11, 2012 at 10:17pm

Ning's AN kills me. It's sooooo slowwww! I would probably have to wait about an hour before the editor boxes appear.

I understand your point about "sustainability" being hijacked by economists. Anthropologists should decide which groups have fewer children for immigration policy that reduces population.

 

Members (338)

 
 
 

line

Update Your Membership :

Membership

line

line

Nexus on Social Media:

line

© 2017   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service