dir: Culling of human beings like you implied is just wrong man. And questions of morals aside, it won't do anything since those who're most likely to die are the most helpless ones. The American who drives his gas guzzling Ford to work, from his suburban home with a huge swimming pool and hourly watered lawns, is more likely to survive than a poor farmer from Bangladesh.
Raistmar: Errrr. Let's get specific. Firstly, humans can only affect the environment on a small scale. Yes, arsonists can cause huge forest fires, deforestation causing landslides, extraction of groundwater causing sinkholes etc.
But the huge guys like cyclones, earthquakes etc are in no way caused or worsened by us! Someone mentioned that our mining weakens the crust. No no no. The world's deepest mine is a tiny shaft less than 4km deep, while the average continental crust is 40km thick. In no way does mining weaken the crush and cause/worsen earthquakes.
Furthermore, your Deutsche Bank report was released in 2001, and its stand is that "climate change is suspected to be the cause of more frequent and more severe natural disasters". Considering that even your source isn't certain, that sorta works against you doesn't it?
In addition, things are in such a muddle there is no way you can pin the blame of increase storms (yes they are increasing) on global warming. To namedrop, let's just use the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, the thermal halide cycle, el nino and la nina and lastly the Milankovitch cycle. Each of these affect global temperatures and each other, and their relationships are so complex, where will you even start to pinpoint, "There! Humans and CO2 are causing more hurricanes!"
To the threadstarter: Oh man I think we hijacked your thread and opened up a can of worms to go with it. My bad my bad.
