There's plenty around, it just needs to be made more available.  But, the comments I read in the Independent really are astounding.  I suppose this is what happens when you try and point out the obvious the the blinkered left.

"The world is discovering it has major shortages of water, food and energy"

...spouts some self-righteous wanker.  The only good thing about population control would be if arses like this weren't born to lecture everyone else on matters they obviously know nothing about.  And anyway, birth rates in prosperous countries are falling naturally, or is he advocating that we go back to the Victorian idea of producing huge litters, only to see them killed off by disease?

Well, I for one have more access to food, water and energy than ever before.  And that's got to be a good thing.  Well, maybe not necessarily the food ;)

Nutshell

| | Comments (0)
Chris Monckton sums up global warming in a nut-shell:

  • The IPCC's 2007 climate summary overstated CO2's impact on temperature by 500-2000%; CO2 enrichment will add little more than 1 °F (0.6 °C) to global mean surface temperature by 2100; 
  • Not one of the three key variables whose product is climate sensitivity can be measured directly; 
  • The IPCC's values for these key variables are taken from only four published papers, not 2,500; 
  • The IPCC's values for each of the three variables, and hence for climate sensitivity, are overstated; "Global warming" halted ten years ago, and surface temperature has been falling for seven years; Not one of the computer models relied upon by the IPCC predicted so long and rapid a cooling; 
  • The IPCC inserted a table into the scientists' draft, overstating the effect of ice-melt by 1000%; 
  • It was proved 50 years ago that predicting climate more than two weeks ahead is impossible; 
  • Mars, Jupiter, Neptune's largest moon, and Pluto warmed at the same time as Earth warmed; 
  • In the past 70 years the Sun was more active than at almost any other time in the past 11,400 years.

Cheer Up

| | Comments (0)
Here's a good example of the sort of complete crap that seems so common:

It's time to start leveling off population growth. It has to stop some time. There is no advantage in run-away human population growth. In fact, its effects are all negative: (1)drives wildlife into extinction, (2)dimishes the value of human life, (3) forces more government regulation and loss of freedom, (4) promotes a cause for war, (5)increases pollution of the earth, etc. Posted by:Kearney Smith August 31, 2007

  1. Less animals are in danger of extinction than ever before.  Indeed, many species that were almost hunted to the point of extinction are thriving.
  2. Can't understand this at all
  3. Absolute nonsense, although it would seem some people, such as the author seem intent on ever greater regulation.  It's probably worth reminding him how the fall of the old Soviet Union and the spread of democracy have empowered more people than ever before.
  4. There's less war today than there's ever been.  In fact, the chances of all out conflict such as in the first half of the last century seem very remote.  Going further back, war was far more widespread whereas today, we're more likely to have trade conflicts rather than war.
  5. The earth is being steadily less polluted than ever before.  The air quality in cities such as London has improved drastically over the last 100 years.  A quick glance at ancient buildings in my home city of Edinburgh shows just how bad pollution was 100 years ago.
Rather than utter such pish, maybe people would do better to dwell on facts such as 
  • 600 million people in China have been lifted out of poverty in one of the all time great economic miracles.1  
  • Advances in medicine mean that one time certain killer diseases have been eradicated for good.  
  • It's common for infertile couples to have children.  
  • I have an HD television and can pause live TV.  

It's not all good, but a lot of it is.  And ever greater wealth for everyone is created, not by whinging, but by increasing an ever productive workforce.
Hilary Benn in the Telegraph:

"Since three out of every four cars that is sold in the country are actually second-hand cars, not new ones, it is important that you have a change that also applies to the second-hand market, as it does to new cars. "It will act as an incentive as people take decisions about what car, second hand or new, to buy."

What a stupid, fucking cunt.  What difference does it make to the environment what second-hand cars people buy.  Is he suggesting that all those cars, many family models, should be scrapped.  Is that better for the environment, to simply scrap all these perfectly good cars and build new ones.  What a dick head.  

If you really are one of the gullible many who believe that somehow the CO2 emissions from your car are responsible for the 1.6C increase in global temperatures over the last 100 years, then surely it makes sense to alter the way new cars are manufactured but not existing ones.

How much better it was when we had a Prime Minister who encouraged people to work hard, and do well rather than Nu Labour who hammer the hard working with their punitive taxes.
Am I obsessed with food or something?

If people really were so concerned about buy one get one free deals, they don't have to take the extra bag of oranges. They're quite within their right to go for the old fashioned 'bogo' deal (buy one, get one). Personally I like to take my chances with the extra oranges, and throw them out if necessary. 

Of course, with all those freebies to carry home, I have to double bag everything. Thankfully, apart from evil M&S, the supermarkets still operate a buy anything, get as many free bags as you like policy :)