You’re 100% right about this Dos, I suggest you drink some of that ocean water to quench your virulent case of stupidity. Where do you think the “melting” icecaps go? Does it go straight into your refrigerator, or perhaps the ocean where it is salinized, and thus unfit for human consumption. You don’t have that problem though, so I suggest you drink up!

Jimmy the Dhimmi and DosPeros, don’t forget to mention our great alley India, you know, the people we are selling our nuclear technology to. They’ve been carrying out a lovely Gendercide policy of their own that is far older than China’s and on an equal scale if not more so. Female infanticide is nothing new genius. I love how you and your neocon buddy Dos try to pin statements on others, of which they have not made.

I believe in abortion and a population that the planet can realistically support. I’m not some dogmatic fool that thinks 3rd world countries that are already bursting at the seams should continue to let their populations pop out children like Pez candy dispensers.

I thought we were going to get a bunch more water when the ice caps melted – so much so the coastal regions were going to flood and blah, blah, blah….whatever happen to the TOO MUCH WATER concern. You people confuse me.

Who said anything about “killing half the population?” China’s current one-child policy isn’t a conspiracy of eugenics, it’s called reality. China realizes that it has an enormous population problem, they have instituted the one-child policy out of sheer pragmatism. Say what you will about it, but the fact is the world cannot afford two China’s. The earth can barely sustain the current population as it is.

Regarding my statement: ‘We’ve already outstripped the world’s water supply.’ What’s is so “dumb” about it? Consider this; “97.5% of all water on Earth is salt water, leaving only 2.5% as fresh water. Nearly 70% of that fresh water is frozen in the icecaps of Antarctica and Greenland; most of the remainder is present as soil moisture, or lies in deep underground aquifers as groundwater not accessible to human use. 1% of the world’s fresh water (~0.007% of all water on earth) is accessible for direct human uses. This is the water found in lakes, rivers, reservoirs and those underground sources that are shallow enough to be tapped at an affordable cost. Only this amount is regularly renewed by rain and snowfall, and is therefore available on a sustainable basis.”

Also take into consideration that a good deal of the world’s population live in arid climates which lack the necessary supply of fresh water to sustain that population and therefore governments must resort to costly and unsustainable desalination methods to acquire the necessary water to support their human populations, agriculture and livestock. This doesn’t take into account at all the water required by wildlife in order to survive. That’s right, there are other species on this planet besides us. Do you suggest we just take every last drop for human consumption and let 90% of the species on this planet disappear?

Oh yeah! I forgot, what a dumb statement that was. Look up the definition of “outstripped.” My statement stands as is.

We’ve already outstripped the world’s water supply.

Yeeeeeeesssssss. Indeeeeeeeeeed. Justin – PLEASE start a link on the side called “The Dumbest Things Ever Said on Donklephant.” You can put on sorts of DosPeros quotes in there (I won’t be offended), but honestly this has to take the cake and it should be rewarded.

To answer your dimwitted moronic questions: Do I come up with this all by myself? No. My influences in regard to the rights and dignity of humanity are manifold. But congratulations, your comments are quickly changing that…

And the claim that the article states that most pollution in L.A. comes from China is is a false one. Here is what it says:

Much of the particulate pollution over Los Angeles originates in China, according to the Journal of Geophysical Research.

The United States has worked on reducing particulate pollution for decades now so it isn’t that far fetched that with the huge amount of particulate pollution heading east from China could make up a significant proportion of the particulate pollution on the west coast of the U.S.

Umm. I’d choose to not increase the world by a “few” more degrees. A degree is not a small matter, two degrees is significant. What do we need more of? degrees or people? This world is already overpopulated. I don’t advocate that people stop having children, I advocate that 1.3 billion people not have 3 or 4 children apiece, in affect doubling their population. With affluency comes responsibility.

The world cannot carry on as it has to this point and expect that our precarious situation will get better and not worse. Humanity needs to use its collective brain and make some very wise decisions fast. If not, this world is doomed to learn the hard way. You think the fight over oil is bad? wait until the world’s over population outstrips the world’s water supply.

All if this is made worse of course because it is not just simply a matter of not having enough water. Nuclear proliferation has increased more than ever. Just since Bush took office a half dozen nations have made the decision to acquire nuclear technology. Even the mighty United States cannot control a world where dozens and dozens of nations have this awesome power.

We’ve already outstripped the world’s water supply. To think that [we] can control all of these variables because we are a [superpower] is naive. The title “superpower” doesn’t mean anything after the buttons are pushed. People die all the same with or without the title of superpower. Anyone that hasn’t noticed Bush’s huge push toward a neo-nuclear age should be alarmed.

You’ll have people that say what in the hell does water and nuclear technology have to do with each other, well, what does oil and nuclear technology have in common? Geopolitical wrangling, that’s what. Which can and does easily equate to war. Just look at where we are today. Just wait until China hits full stride, the “superpower” today is going to be a runner-up to China.

Yes there are pollution problems in China for many years. This article does not produce any breaking news. But to claim that most of the pollution over LA originated from China is laughable.

The quality of life for the Chinese people has greatly increased because of industrialization. This includes better education, health care, welfare, etc. If you had to choose between getting your country’s population above poverty levels, or deducing population so the world doesn’t increase by a few degrees in some decades from now, which one would you choose?

The author of this blog acts as if no progress is being attempted, which is not only untrue but destroys any credibility he once clinged to. There are huge attempts to stem pollution, $925 million devoted to it. http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUSPEK29274220070827

In the end, every country has their own problems. Focus on taking care of yours before attacking someone else’s.

DosPeros thinks China should double its population from 1.3 billion to 2.6 billion. Now that sounds like a logical plan to fix their water shortage problems.

I don’t know if you come up with these wonderful ideas all on your own or do you get all of this great information from the Christian Coalition?

DosPeros thinks China should double its population from 1.3 billion to 2.6 billion. Now that sounds like a logical plan to fix their water shortage problems.

I don’t know if come up with these wonderful ideas on your own or do you watch a lot of 700 Club?

This isn’t smog clogged London in the infancy of the industrial revolution, this is the accumulated affects of all the world, primarily the U.S. and now China. This isn’t another one of those cute little reports by some American Enterprise Institute “scientist” that claim we are “making the weather more pleasant” or “the earth is just going through one of its warm cycles.” This is China consuming as much as the U.S. did but not in 100 years as it took us but 20 years.

It’s already been proven that at the rate of consumption we are now seeing on earth it would take 5 earths to meet the need, we only have one.

Your question is loaded, you know I have no definitive answer to give you. And you are exactly the type of person that fosters this sort of environment where we remain inactive in the face of the destruction of civilization as we know it.

Here’s a very elementary question for you: How much of water on earth is fresh and fit for human consumption, then ask yourself the follow-up question, how fast is the human population growing, what it is projected to be in the year 2050?

A species that cannot reverse its irrational behavior in the face of clear and unquestionable evidence deserves extinction.

“Yes, those Nazis were real bastards….they dumped all kinds of pollutants into the Danube!!!” Oh, the outrage.

Good plan Jimmy, let’s just “hope” China has a change of heart in the next 20, 30 or 40
years from at which time there will be nothing to save!

Until and unless international pressure is brought to bear on China (and other developing countries) to curb their suicidal pollution levels, they have the capacity to bring the entire world’s environment to destruction. Of course we, the US are the prime polluters (and under Bush have no intent to even slow our sins), but they are poised to surpass us within a few years, and double us within a few decades.

Please, everyone, start listening to the majority mainstream climatologists and environmental scientists who say we are fast approaching the point of no return, if we have not already surpassed it, and start making changes in world energy policy, forcibly if necessary. I would like to grow old thinking that I won’t have to carry an oxygen tank and a radiation shield around with me whenever I leave the house.

WE – who are addicted to buying buying, buying…..(and a few other things)
with our (mighty, yeah right..) dollars – ARE THE DEVIL !

get real sheeesh