Poll: Do mankind's actions make any difference to the planet?

Do mankind's actions make any difference to the planet?


  • Total voters
    151

njp

Well-known Member
A view has been expressed in this forum that nothing mankind does makes any difference whatsoever to the planet; that we have no control at all over our destiny.

This is simply a poll to attempt to discover how widespread that belief is.
 
N

NEIL J JONES

Guest
Casted my Vote njp considering the poll relates to me.
 

pingu

Novice Member
I went for the minor impact option. I've assumed the question is not confined to climate change but includes pollution, population growth, deforestation, etc, etc.

If it was meant to be purely about climate change then I would have gone for none.
 

Solomon Grundy

Distinguished Member
I voted assuming you meant environment rather than planet itself. I think we physically have a large impact upon how the planet appears but have little impact on the environment itself.
 
N

NEIL J JONES

Guest
Yes the poll is very broad so its not going to give any real results.

I assume the poll is saying well in say 1000 years time will the planet be any different to what it is now and if it is will that be mans fault. I.e will we do anything that nature cant correct resulting in a different planet to what we know now.
 

njp

Well-known Member
Just to clarify, this is not a poll asking if you think mankind is causing global warming. Those who have chosen to interpret it more broadly are treating it as I expected.
 

njp

Well-known Member
As you would expect njp, I have voted for minor impact.
I'm not sure what I expected, but thanks for voting.

To be honest, I am mostly interested in how many people take the extreme view that nothing we do makes any difference. In retrospect, I'm not entirely happy with my choice of questions because it makes it look as though "major" and "none" are both extreme views at opposite ends of the spectrum, so that "minor" might appear as the more reasonable alternative.

I will vote "major", because of course I do believe that some of the things we do can have a major impact. But that doesn't mean to say that mankind's impact on the environment has not sometimes been overstated. My actual views on this are more nuanced than my vote might appear to suggest.

Perhaps I should just have asked "Do you agree with Neil?"...
 

damo_in_sale

Well-known Member
In retrospect, I'm not entirely happy with my choice of questions because it makes it look as though "major" and "none" are both extreme views at opposite ends of the spectrum, so that "minor" might appear as the more reasonable alternative.

No, your questions are sensible, sorry if you don't like the result.
 

njp

Well-known Member
No, your questions are sensible, sorry if you don't like the result.
Yes, having considered them again I think they are reasonable. And the result is what it is! I just wanted to know what people think. How they form those beliefs would be much more interesting, but rather hard to establish, I suspect.
 
N

NEIL J JONES

Guest
Also the current results are what you expect as well. You can almost guess exactly who is going to be in what category before people started to vote.
 

damo_in_sale

Well-known Member
I just wanted to know what people think. How they form those beliefs would be much more interesting, but rather hard to establish, I suspect.

Perhaps you might want to look at my recent poll. It would seem there's a relationship there.
 

MikeTV

Distinguished Member
Yes, having considered them again I think they are reasonable. And the result is what it is! I just wanted to know what people think. How they form those beliefs would be much more interesting, but rather hard to establish, I suspect.
I am quite encouraged by the results - currently 80% of voters think that man impacts the planet. You sometimes start to wonder, reading this forum.
 

damo_in_sale

Well-known Member
I am quite encouraged by the results - currently 80% of voters think that man impacts the planet. You sometimes start to wonder, reading this forum.

Nice spin, Mr. Mandleson.
 
N

NEIL J JONES

Guest
I am quite encouraged by the results - currently 80% of voters think that man impacts the planet. You sometimes start to wonder, reading this forum.

Yeah and you could have named virtually each one prior to the poll even being available, so predictable. Thankfully the general public is not so easily conned.

The most annoying thing is, all these people say we are damaging the planet but wont do nothing about it. They think recycling a few bits and pieces is all they need to do. If you believe we are damaging the planet then do something about it.
 

njp

Well-known Member
I am quite encouraged by the results - currently 80% of voters think that man impacts the planet. You sometimes start to wonder, reading this forum.
Whereas I'm rather shocked that 20% of voters think that man has no impact at all!

By way of contrast, Paul Crutzen, joint winner of the 1995 Nobel prize for his work on atmospheric chemistry, believes that mankind's activities have become such a significant geological and morphological force on the planet that the current geological epoch deserves a new name. He calls it the anthropocene.
 

damo_in_sale

Well-known Member
Whereas I'm rather shocked that 20% of voters think that man has no impact at all!

By way of contrast, Paul Crutzen, joint winner of the 1995 Nobel prize for his work on atmospheric chemistry, believes that mankind's activities have become such a significant geological and morphological force on the planet that the current geological epoch deserves a new name. He calls it the anthropocene.

I saw him in the pub tonight. He said he was talking a load of old tosh.
 
N

NEIL J JONES

Guest
Whereas I'm rather shocked that 20% of voters think that man has no impact at all!

I am rather shocked that its only 20%, this poll sure dont agree with the opinion of the man on the street.
 

MikeTV

Distinguished Member
I am rather shocked that its only 20%, this poll sure dont agree with the opinion of the man on the street.
Shortly after the "swindle" programme was aired, Channel 4 ran a poll on whether man's activities were believed to be impacting the climate and, from memory, I think about 80% of voters agreed. I cannot find the link now, but perhaps someone will post. And this was just after the swindle programme had aired.

Whether this represents the man on the street, I don't know. Just saying.
 

Chox1988

Distinguished Member
Its hard to say, of course mankind makes an impact on the planet, whether that impact in the long term will be a negative one or what the earth will do as a result is argueable, so the poll should really say does mankind have a negative impact on the environment.
 
N

NEIL J JONES

Guest
Shortly after the "swindle" programme was aired, Channel 4 ran a poll on whether man's activities were believed to be impacting the climate and, from memory, I think about 80% of voters agreed. I cannot find the link now, but perhaps someone will post. And this was just after the swindle programme had aired.

Whether this represents the man on the street, I don't know. Just saying.

Yeah, well I think your find a lot more then 20% of people know all this GW stuff is just crap. That may have been the case 2 years ago but things have moved on since then, people are now moving away from the GW claptrap in their millions.
 
N

NEIL J JONES

Guest
Its hard to say, of course mankind makes an impact on the planet

We make an impact on our own lives not on the planet. Nature continues to do what she has been doing for the past billions of years. The fact that humans have lived on this planet for a nano second is neither here nor there. When we have occupied this planet for a few million years then we should review it again to see what damage we have done. But doubt we will be around then, we would have been removed long before we can harm this planet.
 

njp

Well-known Member
Yeah, well I think your find a lot more then 20% of people know all this GW stuff is just crap. That may have been the case 2 years ago but things have moved on since then, people are now moving away from the GW claptrap in their millions.
And, um, how do you know that they know that? How have you measured the defection of millions of people away from the "GW claptrap"? By sitting in your armchair and pontificating - the same way as you measure oceanic CO2 fluxes or deforestation?

When we have occupied this planet for a few million years then we should review it again to see what damage we have done. But doubt we will be around then, we would have been removed long before we can harm this planet.
So in your rather strange philosophy, might it not be the case that global warming is nature's way of removing billions of people from the planet to reduce the harm caused by their CO2 emissions? Why would that be antithetical to your views?

I think your beliefs are far more self-contradictory than you realise.
 

The latest video from AVForums

Podcast: Best Home Cinema Sources and B&W 805 D4 Speaker Review and more...
Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Latest News

StormAudio launches ISP Core 16 AV processor
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Cabasse launches limited edition Pearl Pelegrina speaker
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
AVForums Podcast: 22nd September 2021
  • By Phil Hinton
  • Published
Creative introduces Sound Blaster Katana V2 soundbar
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Audeze introduces reference LCD-5 planar magnetic headphones
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published

Full fat HDMI teeshirts

Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom