"The biggest environmental issue facing our world. What is it?

Global warming and climate change wreaking havoc with the planet’s weather systems? Deforestation, leading to soil erosion and collapsing ecosystems? Water shortages, leading to crop failure and resource wars?

The true answer is “none of the above”. Every one of the issues I’ve mentioned has roots in swathes of people using huge amounts of resources and producing equally huge amounts of waste, whether individually or in groups. Each human being needs a certain amount of resources just to survive, let alone thrive. So it would seem a logical topic to discuss under the banner of “environmental issues”."

More at:
http://rulehibernia.com/2010/09/saving-the-world-one-condom-at-a-time/

Why hasn't anyone come up with a solution of using oh...maybe...ocean water to help with water shortages? Other species of animals large and small have all had to deal with global changes for millions of years...people didn't just show up and then the planet went south....think of all the dinosaur waste...could you imagine the size of pterosaur dropping?....also...have you seen the earth at night?....there's alot of open spaces out there...and with the advancement of agriculture, you can now have an entire farm inside empty warehouses, without using any soil, and reusing rain water for irrigation...you my brother have been brained washed with bleach....all this talk about what people have done, are doing, and will do to the planet, and animal species was drummed up to do what?....tax, and control you forever....wake up

People have come up with a "solution" of using ocean water to provide drinkable water: desalinisation. The only minor snag is that it uses collossal amounts of power to desalinate any useful amounts. So unless we want to up energy production by a huge factor, it's not a solution.

Do you honestly think there is any comparison in carbon output between some dinosaur shit and us burning up all of the accumulated fossil fuels that have ever been laid down? Do you really think we can keep filling warehouses with soil (which is degrading faster than it is created I might add)?

You are the one who needs to "wake up".

Uh yeah, about the whole filling up warehouses with soil?....that's exactly what they don't do...they grow without soil....also, why would we not hook up just one nuclear power plant to create all the energy needed to produce water for people who don't have any and need it...I'd pay more on my energy bill if I new that poor little kids in Africa or wherever could have water to drink...wouldn't you...I'm awake alright...and there people go again with the term "fossil fuel"...why? We are not finding oil in the "Bad Lands" while we dig up dinosaur bones...just wondering...I do like your vigour

Well first there is no global warming, its just the latest in a long string of leftist scams on the american people, what happen to the rain forest, el nino, and global cooling? so we cut our Co2 so how do we make air? (with Co2) where are the tree huggers when you need them?
in 1900 our earth was approx 18 mile east of true north (thats magnetic north) today it is approx. 650 mile west of true north that is a large shift in 100 years. so what can do that...shift the earth? Co2 "No" hair spray cans? "No"
The planets lining up in the 1990's the pull from them started volcano's blowing, earth quakes, and global shifting. Yes it takes a galaxy to shift a planet. (look it up library of congress and look out 2040 another big shift is on the way)
Heres a good question how much money does al gore have to make to save the planet? Lets see...his father or grandfather ect grew tobacco, got in to the senate, got rich. Then Al gore was against tobacco and was part of the law suit against tobacco (where did that money go to anyway? big question no one seems to ask) Then suddenly he was for global warming later changed to global climate change, because every time he opened his mouth the area's seemed to freeze over.
So please the reason scientist agreed with him? Simple agree or no federal grant..."Show me the money"

We must educate everyone that we must not average more than two children. It is morally wrong because it causes children to die at the rate that the average is above two. For example, if we have three children on average, then one in three will die.

See stopattwo.org

jt

I share your frustration. It has always been interesting to me that no government or NGO, including Friends of the Earth, is willing to take the bull by the horns and deal with the global threat of overpopulation. It seems to be a taboo subject.

27 years ago, I was so horrified when the Earth's population hit FIVE billion that I started writing a book as a vehicle for presenting my own ideas on population control. By the time I had finished writing the book and published it (last month), the population was SEVEN BILLION.

There are far too few voices willing to confront the issue of too many people in the world. There's a lot of noise about feeding all the billions to come, but not in reducing birth rates. That in my mind is insane. I present a fairly controversial and radical solution to the problem in my book (The O.D. by Chris James) in which the human population is reduced by 90% over a 250 year time span. The good news is that nobody gets killed.