Human activity is adversely affecting the environment & having a negative impact on humankind

When one speaks of the human race self destructing, I consider that the end of the world or doom if you will. The human race is the only species that can think in abstract to comprehend doom or self destruction in the context presented here. "If we're not careful, we'll be just another mutation gone wrong." This is not a matter of if, it is going to happen no matter how hard we as a people of the earth try to prevent it. The only way for the human race to live on indefinitely is to have the ability to leave this planet and colonize on another planet before this one and everything on it is destroyed by an asteroid or commet. This is 100% guaranteed to happen. "Your opening argument shows a limited scope of your understanding of the world around you." Liberals just can't resist insulting peoples intelligence when they disagree with them. Text book response from a typical liberal "You live in a bio-dome or in a magic castle in Disney world" No, I live in beautiful Sarasota Florida and I pay taxes through the nose to live in a clean beautiful environment. I can swim in the oceans and I can eat any of the fish I catch without any fear of being poisoned. We as a community have strict guidelines on toxic waste disposal that is enforced vigorously. That is why I don't have these problems where I live. It is my assertion that all environmentalists believe there is a one size fits all policy with regard to pollution and any environmental condition. I think you are naive about people and economics and what makes the world go around.I think you think nothing about the economic impact that extreme environmental regulation would have on the economy. As a matter of fact I don't think you understand just how important the free flow of oil is to your very existence. It is also my assertion that you think anyone who would even question any data or any interpretation of any data that doesn't promote your view of the environment is against new forms of energy or any kind of environmental standards. You use text book Democrat politics to argue your position. You single out industries that you believe to be evil and then demonize them. Take oil companies for instance. They are demonized to no end by people of your political persuasion. They did not secretly concoct crude oil and put things in it to purposely pollute the air. Oil is perhaps the cleanest natural resource there is if put into context. Hundreds if not thousands of different things are made of oil not just gasoline. Alternative fuels are single purpose and pollute that's it, no other uses and require the use of oil to produce. "People of Nunavut, Canada can no long eat the food they've been eating for thousands of years because of the toxins, mercury and what not that accumulates at that latitude" THE ABOVE STAEMENT IS BLANTANTLY FALSE AND MISLEADING. Here are excerpts from a case study of this town and it's people concerning contaminantes. It is filled with contradictions and uncertainties. "Perceptions, understandings, and concerns regarding contaminants are complex. Even within a small community, consensus does not exist with regard to the causes of contamination and its effects on animals, or indeed, on humans." A high rate of heart defects was an important contributor to the nearly two times rate of total birth defects in the Inuit compared to the ACASS. Further study should be carried out to determine the contributing factors. Genetic predisposition to specific heart defects, and a diet low in folate and vitamin A are considerations. The use of alcohol may exacerbate vitamin status in pregnancy. Optimizing vitamin status in the periconceptional period may reduce the rate of birth defects. "While these concerns were related to external sources of contamination, many Arviarmiut, in particular elders, blame their own practices for damaging the environment on which they depend. Garbage being dumped in the sea is perhaps the biggest and most commonly cited explanation. During the Oceans Project interviews, elders agreed that animals are sick now because of the amount of garbage left on the ice in winter, which then falls into the sea once the ice melts. One man said, "We used to throw all kinds of garbage into the bay in spring and a lot of the garbage sank to the bottom. We were told not to throw garbage away onto the ice. Older people warned us not to do that because the animals will move away." Another elder pointed out that once break-up occurs, this garbage sinks to the sea floor, drifts out to sea or is washed back up on the coastline. The elders all agreed that the coastline is littered now with the detritus of the modern hunting lifestyle—oil barrels, skidoos, sleds, and boats. One man suggested that the sewage lagoon to the south of Arviat has led to declining numbers of fish and sea mammals in the area. The fluid household waste from the entire community is dumped into the sewage lagoon, from whence it slowly leaches into the sea. People no longer gather mussels or set nets in this area, although they do still fish and hunt for seals at Nuvuq, a point of land northeast of the lagoon." Scientists are increasingly aware of the potential negative impacts of their findings on local communities. Poirier and Brooke (2000) have written of the social disruption that ensued in Nunavik in the 1980s, when Inuit were told they should no longer eat seal meat because it contained high concentrations of contaminants. The psychological and economic hardships that resulted were compounded by a switch to a diet of store-bought foods that led to other health risks, including heart disease, type-2 diabetes, and tooth decay (Myers and Furgal, 2006). Link to the complete report http://pubs.aina.ucalgary.ca... The people of the town you mention do eat the food in their enviroment and to add this, the report admits that it does not include local polution as a source for contaminates. As you will read in this report there are virtualy no rules with regard to disposal of toxic waste and garbage, they just dump it all into the ocean right where they live. HMMMM I wounder if that would have an effect on contaminate levels in that area where the research was done. Another blatant Lie. "The Great Lakes, fish cannot be eaten" SPRINGFIELD, IL -- The Illinois Department of Public Health today issued new and revised fish consumption advisories for fish caught in Lake Michigan that include the lifting of a do not eat warning for fish taken from Waukegan Old North Harbor. The change in the consumption warning for Waukegan Old North Harbor fish, PCB levels in fish species have declined significantly due to harbor cleanup activities. "Nor do I recommend drinking the water" I wouldn't drink water from any lake or body of water no matter how clean a bill of health it has, they all pose bacterial risks because it has not been treated for human consumption. I would think that would be common sence on anybodies part. "The fish you buy with the Highlander guy on it" What the...? "Unless, of course, you the buy the fish from the moat around you magical pollution-free castle." I don't buy fish, I go out in my boat and catch it and bring it home and then eat every single mouth watering bite. In conclusion to this round: I find most of what you say in your last round to be pretty much flat out lies and I have proven it. "The truth is always in the report or study, It is the truth that is never reported" (Brian Boyle 8/21/2008) I have traced back everyone of your claims back to its source, local incompetence by the governing bodies to control local polution.