Just found the above chart backing up what I have been saying for years.
Global warming is a wholly natural event, if humanity disappeared tonight, global warming would still happen.
https://www.irishexaminer.com/farming/arid-20437662.html
I can and will
When you start submitting your suggestions. Yee have given plenty of scrutiny to my suggestions.
Lets hear others?
https://www.globalwarmingmitigationproject.org/blog/keeling-curve-prize-success-story-the-savory-institute
Yes plenty of organisations have backed them, and more are coming.
Can you name some of the reputable organisations (& I did say reputable in my original question!) that have backed this organisation?
With only a million people, desertification won't be an issue now, will it?
And yes, the only solution remains reducing population hence reducing the global warming impact. More food == more people, no different than animals.
Ah stop, no kids no civilisation. Cop on thats not a solution. Horrible mindset, you were a kid once
Jesus if thats a solution we are totally fcuked so.
Ok, lets get rid of everybody on the planet. Only 1 million people left.
whats going to happen.
Desertification is still going to continue until we end up like Mars.
We truly are going brain dead!!
More like educate the 3rd world countries so they don't have 8 kids per household!!
Its not knowledge. It's a hypothesis that hasn't held up to scrutiny. Basically, cultist. Like religion.
Only option is zero population growth to reduce the damage. Don't have kids.
Because it’s new knowledge, its counter intuitive to vested interests.
But anybody doing regenerative Ag is getting great result’s. All over the world.
you don’t have to use the animals to feed people if you don’t want, leave them for the lion’s or predators if you want.
The population is probably going to grow or stay at around a couple billion anyway so how are we going to feed ourselves?
The main point being, our soils and land are fcuked, only animals used as a tool can restore those.
Again, what other option’s are there?
But, Savory's methods don't stand up to scrutiny at any time, and he gets hostile about it. Even his own approved study failed to prove his point.
And, again, if suddenly cattle yield went up, there'd be more people produced to eat them, which is the worst possibility.
https://youtu.be/_ONUUC7SMs8?si=GymDAO65WjFj0W2g
I’m backing them because i believe it’ll work. I havent come across anything that makes so much sense.
I bet you didnt watch a single video of any of the stuff i put up did you?
If there methods wont work then we have nothing to lose by giving it a chance do we. Whats there to lose?
regenerative agriculture is starting to grow all over the world.
The only reason they aren’t world renowned is because of conflict of interests in institution’s. Big money coming in from machinery manufacturers, Monsanto aint going without a fight, our belief that cattle are bad etc.
what peer reviewed science are yee looking for? Put cattle onto the land for a small period of time, take them away grass grows. Everybody knows grass is better than sand doing nothing.
And please send some links to other solutions.
More from that group. You just be on some kind of commission!
Tell us, has any reputable organisation backed the advice from the Savory Institute?
I've no answer to what? I merely challenged your belief that this organisation have the solutions and that they're not a bunch of pretend scientists!
If their "discoveries" cannot be peer reviewed then it sounds more like they are a feckin religion or some kind of cranks that have amassed a bunch of idiot followers. Any proper scientific discovery can be peer reviewed. Any real scientific discovery can have its methodology challenged, its outcomes questioned, and be tested to check that the results are as predicted.
But no, you seem to think that their "discoveries" are so special that they cannot be peer reviewed 🙄
What evidence are people looking for?
You manage livestock holistically, the soil improves dramatically.
There research station in Zimbabwe is all the proof thats needed. They have hubs all over the world.
https://youtu.be/1TIL1sfFEkw?si=6yI-z3J1yldGQnyr
The hypothesis has been going in some form for over thirty years, so they should be able to point to actual evidence that can get through the peer review process at this stage. You've pointed to their social media content as proof... So no, they don't appear to have solutions.
See you’ve no answer.
Nobody criticising here has any answers to stop biodiversity loss causing all the problems of climate change.
What are your solution’s?
Oh wow, you are really going to try and head down this particular avenue of stupidity?
How, if i discovered something brand new today, a totally new idea how can that be peer reviewed?
How can new knowledge ever be peer reviewed?
Is that a serious question? 🙄 If you understood how scientific review works then you couldn't possibly come up with a daft question such as the above.
Yep you’ve no solutions so. Thanks again. How can new knowledge ever be peer reviewed?
If i told you year’s ago that the Earth was round when everybody believed it was flat, you’d have laughed also!
But we’re already 60 + year’s into it.
Dunno what the answer is to global warming, but it’s certainly the answer to stopping desertification, fires, floods, feeding people, employment etc
Peer reviewed research, meta analyses etc. Which is how scientific research works. Saying it'll be 200 years before this will be realised to be the solution to global warming is just nonsense.
Seriously, do you work for this crowd?
Ah stop now! It most definitely takes a long time for it to be accepted.
I’ll ask you this so. What causes overgrazing?
So what is your solution? What is anybodys solution?
what proof are you looking for?
It's relevant if you're claiming it is a solution for it. And no, it doesn't take two hundred years to accept something if you've got the research to back it up. Examples include CFCs being cause of hole in ozone layer increasing, by your logic it would have taken two hundred years for it to be accepted as the cause. 🤣
It's more that you're relying on a special interest group that can't actually prove their claims. It's as unscientific as you can get. I also posted research in relation to the topic and you simply ignored it.
not wasting my time with you anymore, you’ve nothing to add.
They only have credibility issues because new knowledge takes nearly 200 year’s for institution’s to accept it.
And stop focusing just on global warming.
Bullshit
So because it’ll happen anyway we should just rape the planet of all resources?
We ARE causing it, we are causing desertification and bio diversity loss
Your grandkid’s will surely thank you!
Watch the video link’s
And once again, citing an org that has major credibility issues and no research that backs up any impact on global warming...
https://youtu.be/qYbyJ9pbD-4?si=tqGfx94mN2-P7xyV
One of the best video’s and absolutely common sense approach to fixing pretty much all of our problem’s.
We can’t keep kicking the can down the road like everybody has done before us!
https://youtu.be/8vKvDib_PKw?si=6TEvXdekyNvMQzyw
If the whole world got rid of fossil fuels tomorrow, desertification & biodiversity loss will continue, thus causing climate change.
Whats are our options?
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://www.boards.ie/applications/dashboard/design/images/banned.png)
