Allan Savory: How to green the world's deserts and reverse climate change

Forbiddenbiker

Forbiddenbiker

The Enforcer
Suspended / Banned
Messages
11,048
Name
Adam
Edit My Images
Yes
[YOUTUBE]vpTHi7O66pI[/YOUTUBE]


Wow, caught this yesterday, anyone else excited by this mans words? Loving the way he carefully explains each step so concisely.

So the cycle seems to be. (Please correct be if I've misunderstood him)
1. Rain falls some green grows. ...takes time to start, didn't quite get this bit?
2. Cattle trample grasslands flat and also eat some for food
4. Removing livestock once flattened then protects the grasslands from water evaporation and inevitable desertification.
5 More green grows through protective covering increasing grazing yield massively each year
6. Desertification is reversed and CO2 is safely stored.

I'm excited by all that but also left wondering how, in our crazy 'driven' world will we respond if there's no great profit to be had? or, is there a great profit to be had? Can a good profitable business model be built out of this I wonder?
 
Fascinating. It was an oustanding presentation eloquently delivered but could it become reality? I'd like to think so and we can but hope.
 
Brilliant, really interesting stuff.
It sounds feasible, but would the "powers that be" block it all from happening, because it is not in their interest?
 
It may be possible, who knows? But my personal opinion is that climate change is cyclicle. What may be occurring now has surely happened before, and will happen again way in the future. I don't believe we've screwed it up, more like we like to think we're important enough to have done so.

As a species we'll survive climate change. Catastrophic population control will be bought about by something biological. As I said, this is simply my opinion.
 
as a biologist I enjoyed that video immensely

viv1969 said:
What may be occurring now has surely happened before
Click to expand...

the CO2 keeling curve shows that in our "cycle" we are likely to see the highest levels of Carbon in the atmosphere for the last four ice ages, each of them have had a rise and fall but nothing compared to what is predicted for us.
 
Is it my browser? the video isn't showing here and won't play on youtube site.
 
Works fine for me.
 
A reboot fixed it ta :)
 
joescrivens said:
as a biologist I enjoyed that video immensely



the CO2 keeling curve shows that in our "cycle" we are likely to see the highest levels of Carbon in the atmosphere for the last four ice ages, each of them have had a rise and fall but nothing compared to what is predicted for us.
Click to expand...

Yes I don't disagree...But that's the key word, prediction.
 
The concept fascinated me but cannot say I'm an expert on this subject by any means, so I did a little google-fu to see if there were any informed responses to the video.

Found this:

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=684479

Post #9 sounds like he understands the subject and has some interesting comment.
 
viv1969 said:
It may be possible, who knows? But my personal opinion is that climate change is cyclicle. What may be occurring now has surely happened before, and will happen again way in the future. I don't believe we've screwed it up, more like we like to think we're important enough to have done so.

As a species we'll survive climate change. Catastrophic population control will be bought about by something biological. As I said, this is simply my opinion.
Click to expand...

Totally agree Ruth. Loada hippie nonsense. We'll never change nature on that scale and shouldn't bother trying.
 
Interesting Adam, a kick up the arse for Al Gore and his cronies :lol: Yes Viv, climate change is cyclicle but this desertification has been caused mainly by people not fully understanding in the past why it has happened. There is around 12-15 million hectares of forest lost each year due to deforestation, that imho is not a good thing. No we have not screwed it up Viv, but we are heading towards it. The problem is we tend to just look at the whole picture in our own life time, and say oh well it`s only this and only that. But when our children`s children and so on are around, what will it all be like then? Too late maybe :shrug:
 
u8myufo said:
Interesting Adam, a kick up the arse for Al Gore and his cronies :lol: Yes Viv, climate change is cyclicle but this desertification has been caused mainly by people not fully understanding in the past why it has happened. There is around 12-15 million hectares of forest lost each year due to deforestation, that imho is not a good thing. No we have not screwed it up Viv, but we are heading towards it. The problem is we tend to just look at the whole picture in our own life time, and say oh well it`s only this and only that. But when our children`s children and so on are around, what will it all be like then? Too late maybe :shrug:
Click to expand...

Maybe that's the key...maybe that's why I truly don't give a rat's. No Kids.
 
viv1969 said:
Maybe that's the key...maybe that's why I truly don't give a rat's. No Kids.
Click to expand...

That's OK then. We will ignore the 800 plus scientists from 85 plus countries who are preparing the latest report for the UN IPCC and carry on regardless. :shrug:
 
Suvv said:
That's OK then. We will ignore the 800 plus scientists from 85 plus countries who are preparing the latest report for the UN IPCC and carry on regardless. :shrug:
Click to expand...

Oh calm down.
 
:lol::lol:
 
This is my opinion too ;
viv1969 said:
It may be possible, who knows? But my personal opinion is that climate change is cyclicle. What may be occurring now has surely happened before, and will happen again way in the future. I don't believe we've screwed it up, more like we like to think we're important enough to have done so...
Click to expand...
But in any case : more beef = good!
 
So the 7 billion people who live on this planet have no effect on it?
 
We are nature, and like a cancer we are clearly consuming everything in our path just as nature intended. We all know once we're done sucking our host dry we die, I mean look around, how much have we consumed, how much rubbish goes into your bin every week, how your fuel costs, how many things have you replaced and wasn't it so so cheep to do so?

Surely the only difference is whether we choose to coexist in order to keep our host alive, so it seems to me taking part in any solutions can only empower us to that end... Any negativity is as pointless as our sort lives, mostly inevitably lost and forgotten I guess, but do we really want to see the whole of human history go to dust, our struggle to live never to be found and understood. I mean in the futures history of the Milkyway, it could be as if we never even existed, look under earth or humans in a future alien encyclopedia and there will be no entry, nothing, not even a hint of our struggles and conquests, nor the beauty and compassion.... that seems such a sad thought to me, unbearable in fact.

What's not to take part in I say...erm soz bit of a rant lol

Hacker said:
Fascinating. It was an oustanding presentation eloquently delivered but could it become reality? I'd like to think so and we can but hope.
Click to expand...

I hope so too. ... but only if a profit can be found is so often the reality.

------

Could I go farming in Africa and make a profit? ...land pretty cheep right.


andy700 said:
Brilliant, really interesting stuff.
It sounds feasible, but would the "powers that be" block it all from happening, because it is not in their interest?
Click to expand...

No exactly, in fact is it in the powers interest to feed us at all? ...too many of us right.

viv1969 said:
It may be possible, who knows? But my personal opinion is that climate change is cyclicle. What may be occurring now has surely happened before, and will happen again way in the future. I don't believe we've screwed it up, more like we like to think we're important enough to have done so.

As a species we'll survive climate change. Catastrophic population control will be bought about by something biological. As I said, this is simply my opinion.
Click to expand...

Yes what Joe says below.

And in bold. Yes maybe, scary thought paranoia time but yes some thing has gota give right! ... How about the fact that antibiotics will be useless in twenty years ...that's thousands dying of previously fixable diseases they say.

joescrivens said:
the CO2 keeling curve shows that in our "cycle" we are likely to see the highest levels of Carbon in the atmosphere for the last four ice ages, each of them have had a rise and fall but nothing compared to what is predicted for us.
Click to expand...

Your a biologist!!! :eek: ;)

desantnik said:
The concept fascinated me but cannot say I'm an expert on this subject by any means, so I did a little google-fu to see if there were any informed responses to the video.

Found this:

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=684479

Post #9 sounds like he understands the subject and has some interesting comment.
Click to expand...

Yeah thanks good read. Seems number nines views run along similar methods too, nearly parallel with the same aims ...its all good, who ever gets heard and understood right.

u8myufo said:
Interesting Adam, a kick up the arse for Al Gore and his cronies :lol: Yes Viv, climate change is cyclicle but this desertification has been caused mainly by people not fully understanding in the past why it has happened. There is around 12-15 million hectares of forest lost each year due to deforestation, that imho is not a good thing. No we have not screwed it up Viv, but we are heading towards it. The problem is we tend to just look at the whole picture in our own life time, and say oh well it`s only this and only that. But when our children`s children and so on are around, what will it all be like then? Too late maybe :shrug:
Click to expand...

I agree too late and they kind of know it from all out words..., Personally I find our children, my son, are already setting the examples. Like if you told them we'd have to turn the power off at TV time to save the planet they mostly say..GOOD, do it and do it now! ...poor buggers what have we done!. :gag:
 
Last edited:
All i can say, is very interesting presentation and as he is the subject matter expert in his field i'd have to say it sounds like a good ides.
Unfortunately as seen all too many times, greed, politics and resentment will probably stop it from happening.
Evolution requires evolving to survive. If we do not adapt, evolve we will not survive FACT.
 
Forbiddenbiker said:
We are nature, and like a cancer we are clearly consuming everything in our path just as nature intended.
Click to expand...

You didn't pee me off, as I totally agree. :) The human race is like a virus, generally feeling the need to reproduce without even questioning why - just as the rest of the natural world does.

In nature's quest for survival, it is also relentless in consuming all the natural resources on which it relies for that very survival....until extinction is inevitable.
 
Unijak said:
The human race is like a virus, generally feeling the need to reproduce without even questioning why - just as the rest of the natural world does.
Click to expand...

I think parasite is a rather fitting word for the human race :)

What with modern medicine and mass automated farming providing plenty of food, I think controlling how many children we have would be a start as we don't need big families anymore.
 
u8myufo said:
But when our children`s children and so on are around, what will it all be like then? Too late maybe :shrug:
Click to expand...

What concerns me is that this "won't you think of the children" appeal to emotion is being trotted out by climate scientists. Scientists are supposed to be dispassionate men of science, not people invoking logical fallacies to shore up their arguments and gather support.

As Green activist and scientist Stephen Schneider said, as an activist climate scientist, "you can be either honest or you can be effective." Well I, for one, would rather choose honest.

The idea that man exists on this planet only as a cancer or a virus is IMVHO a very twisted and very wrong perception of our role on this blue marble.
 
SimonH said:
What concerns me is that this "won't you think of the children" appeal to emotion is being trotted out by climate scientists. Scientists are supposed to be dispassionate men of science, not people invoking logical fallacies to shore up their arguments and gather support.

As Green activist and scientist Stephen Schneider said, as an activist climate scientist, "you can be either honest or you can be effective." Well I, for one, would rather choose honest.

The idea that man exists on this planet only as a cancer or a virus is IMVHO a very twisted and very wrong perception of our role on this blue marble.
Click to expand...

1. I have never seen a climate scientist quoted as saying "won't you think of the children" - seems like a case of attributing a false statement to them and then rubbishing it, although I may be wrong and you can give some examples :shrug:

2. Scientists are not dispassionate, they have emotions and prejudices just like any one else but a good scientist will recognise that and go with the facts.

3. The Stephen Schneider quote is often trotted out - it needs to be read in context - try Wikipedia. :) The problem is getting the message to that part of the entertainment industry which is called "The Media" which is not really interested in lots of data but wants a "snappy" headline.
 
Kev, I'll address the points as you number them:

1: NASA GISS's James Hansen is the most obvious example of a climate scientist incessantly indulging in the polemic. I'm surprised you're unfamiliar. See http://www.ted.com/talks/james_hansen_why_i_must_speak_out_about_climate_change.html

2: Yes, in theory all scientists behave according to the tenets of the Scientific Method. But in reality they often don't. Dr Kevin Trenberth even attempted to make the argument, a year or 2 ago, that the null hypothesis should be reversed WRT man's impact on climate. Appalling.

3: Schneider's often quoted selectively, but please explain how he's quoted out of context. I will always argue that it is not enough simply to HOPE to be both effective and honest, it is an absolute requirement for scientists to be honest. Any dilution of the truth for the purpose of effectiveness is invariably at the cost of honesty and integrity.

[edit] In #1, did you mean you've never actually heard "quoted" those exact words? Puhleez.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Unijak said:
You didn't pee me off, as I totally agree. :) The human race is like a virus, generally feeling the need to reproduce without even questioning why - just as the rest of the natural world does.

In nature's quest for survival, it is also relentless in consuming all the natural resources on which it relies for that very survival....until extinction is inevitable.
Click to expand...


Its perhaps not so funny how we can cull elephants for a possible greater good, our empathy for natures protection having no end at times...When considering that, evolution wise are we yet to react a stage when we start to control ourselves with a cull.

The logic is indisputable. ..Horse! pah, no, Soylent green anyone?
 
gman said:
I think parasite is a rather fitting word for the human race :)

What with modern medicine and mass automated farming providing plenty of food, I think controlling how many children we have would be a start as we don't need big families anymore.
Click to expand...


But how? Tax relief and more? Make it cool to be single, not selfish. Restrain is to be respected. Its gotta be made fashionable to work and eventually grow into the norm I feel.
 
At 12:56 that's clearly two images stuck together, described as though it were the result of short-term cattle grazing :thinking:

And that horizon at 15:15 is way off :D
 
Last edited:
TriggerHappy said:
At 12:56 that's clearly two images stuck together, described as though it were the result of short-term cattle grazing :thinking:
Click to expand...

aye and 30 seconds before its a superimposd images of cattle too. But what is your point? It's clearly just being used for illustrative purposes.

You watch the superimposing occur so what's your question about it?
 
joescrivens said:
aye and 30 seconds before its a superimposd images of cattle too. But what is your point? It's clearly just being used for illustrative purposes.

You watch the superimposing occur so what's your question about it?
Click to expand...

There is no question :lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top