Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > The Greatest World Problems      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 jay.m83
Joined: 5/18/2011
Msg: 151
view profile
History
The Greatest World ProblemsPage 7 of 26    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26)
Here is a quote from Myron Ebell who is Director of Global Warming and International Environmental Policy at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. He is also Chairman of the Cooler Heads Coalition, which is a national organization that is skeptical of the cause and effects of global warming, to answer one of your previous questions. Anyway here is the quote regarding high level nuclear waste.

"This stuff is not very dangerous, it can be dangerous over a very long period of time, but its not very dangerous today, or tomorrow, or for a week. So if they tipped over a car, or blew it up, you're not going to have a nuclear explosion, you are just going to have some solid nuclear waste lying around on the ground, and you will just have to pick it up and put it back on the rail car."

The World Nuclear Organization is always going to try and enforce the strictest of precautions when it comes to nuclear waste management. Is it possible to contract cancer from touching nuclear waste if you touch it for a minute, sure. You have a better chance of contracting cancer from the sun though.

Cooler Heads Coalition states
"the science of global warming is uncertain, but the negative impacts of global warming policies on consumers are all too real."

Life is about assessing the risks and placing your bets. And as Las Vegas proves, if you keep the odds always in your favor, you will always win in the end.
 FrankNStein902
Joined: 12/26/2009
Msg: 152
The Greatest World Problems
Posted: 6/10/2011 3:02:54 PM
I think we need to make the ride better for the most amount of people. You know, feed the poor, give them our technological advances, you know, actually help people. I want to save people. Humans are the first species on earth that can take charge of its own evolution. And that is a beautiful thing. The planet is eventually ****ed no matter what, with or without us. Sooner or later, we are going to need to get off of it to survive.

I agree helping people is a good thing, but I think that the answer is not found in technology advances it is found in information, understanding and most importantly unfettered compassion.

Technology actually is somewhat responsible for the problems we face today.

As soon as we got a grasps on medicine and started creating drugs, we saw survival rates sky rocket and what followed that was a population explosion.

So there is really the root of the problem, there are too many of us which was created in part by our survival instincts.

It is basic biology, as we are pretty much living at the top of the food chain unchecked, we need as a group understand that and at the very least admit it. We as a species are out of control, and if any other living thing on Earth was even remotely like us, we would do something about it and cull that herd.

Also every living thing has a beginning and end, as will we, nothing we can do to change it.

Life is very fragile and requires a pretty strict set of consideration for it to take place. Any gardener can attest to this.

As our environment changes which is always has and always will regardless if we are here or not.

It is disingenuous not to say we do not have one influence on the environment, it is also disingenuous to think that is every drove a pirus it would make any difference at all, because it would only have a very minor effect at best. Most gas powered lawn movers dump more crap into the atmosphere than a few thousand cars combined. Now if every painted their roofs white and converted flat tops to green spaces we would see a significant impact in global temperatures. City and structures are giant heat sinks and they do affect temperatures.

This is where the people of the world are being screwed, because the truth is, we could solve global hunger and actually do things to sustain us with less impact to the Earth with less money than is currently being spent on wars.

All the answers are within our reach.

If we do not stop killing our brothers, we will never be able to save our sisters.


I think is the most real perspective on global warming and someone who found out how the system works with regards to corporate and political influence can be found here:

Cool It

A documentary that takes an alternative approach to dealing with the global warming crisis.

http://coolit-themovie.com/videos

(they also talk about next generation Nuclear power that uses the spent rods that we are current creating with the 3rd gen reactors out there now.)


The media is to Global warming is like what a missing pretty white girls are to Nancy Grace.
 jay.m83
Joined: 5/18/2011
Msg: 153
view profile
History
The Greatest World Problems
Posted: 6/10/2011 4:25:03 PM
As soon as we got a grasps on medicine and started creating drugs, we saw survival rates sky rocket and what followed that was a population explosion.


Well that's not entirely true. Population really starting booming after World War II. The Baby Boomers! So it was a combination of modern medicine and Horny soldiers that caused the population boom in the west. Thankfully now thanks to an aging population and modern technology giving us birth control we have a declining population in the west, and the ability to keep it under control. If we only gave this technology to the developing world.

Unfortunately the aging population and a short sighted government coming up with social programs like social security(or Canada Pension for us Canucks), we now have a economic dilemma to go with our declining population.

I've watched Cool it, its a good one no doubt.
 jay.m83
Joined: 5/18/2011
Msg: 154
view profile
History
The Greatest World Problems
Posted: 6/10/2011 5:22:56 PM
Here is another quote from David Vaughn who is a glaciologist in Britain where he states "predicting natural systems and how they will change in the future is actually really difficult, because it is essentially almost non scientific"

Little more food for thought.
 wvwaterfall
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 155
view profile
History
The Greatest World Problems
Posted: 6/11/2011 6:10:41 AM

THAT is a very common sense approach....... however, common sense seems to have gone out the window lately............................... and replaced with a religion called "Environmentalism".

Paul K


"Environmentalism" is no more a religion than anti-environmentalism, capitalism, democracy-ism, or common sense - ism.

We all have things we care about. I presume all of us would like to be able to breathe and rehydrate ourselves, eat what food the planet supplies us, etc..., so I maintain each and every one of us is an 'environmentalist' whether we embrace the label or not.

What's disingenuous is trying to pigeon hole people into positions they don't hold. I've been told I want everyone to shiver in a cave, that I want every business to fail, that I think trees are more important than people, and that if I do anything that impacts the environment in any way I have no right to promote minimizing the impacts we all have on natural ecosystems.

It gets old.

We seem to crave driving wedges between each other when we'd gain so much more if we sought our common ground and built strategies from there. We really do have far more in common than areas of strong disagreement.

So, Paul, can we agree that there is such a thing as appropriately including environmental concerns into future strategies?

Dave
 Earthpuppy
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 156
view profile
History
The Greatest World Problems
Posted: 6/11/2011 12:56:19 PM

"So, Paul, can we agree that there is such a thing as appropriately including environmental concerns into future strategies?"

I guess you haven't read much of what I have written on the subject, or perhaps have just read what others have said about what I write. The answer is not only "YES", but that it is very necessary............. BUT........ It can't be done from the top down, such as is being attemted by the current regime. You can't legislate/force people to believe in God, nor can you legislate/force people to do what is best for the environment. This is one area that can be likened to trying to push someone with a rope.......... it can't be done. You can go past them with a rope dangling, and they can hang on, but you can't force them.


The people who run corporations would never have allowed the air and water to be cleaned up or quit dumping toxic waste into neighborhoods and water supplies had it not been top town ropes dangling to hang them if caught doing bad. While the regulatory agencies have been far from stellar, the air is far less toxic than it was in the 60s, rivers no longer burn, untold millions of lives have been saved and legislated accountability has worked with fines or jail time for failure to do right. Food safety and worker safety legislation from the top down has also saved millions of lives. While the coal and gas industries are still getting by with murder, most industries have cleaned up their acts. Saying you can't force people to do right seems to imply that speeding laws, stop signs and driving on the right side of the road are futile efforts.

I believe in carrots and sticks. Most will respond to the carrots, but there will always be a percentage that will only respond to the stick. The same goes for being a responsible consumer in a world of rapidly diminishing resources. Someone stealing or poisoning the water of those downstream has to be legislated not to do evil. Same thing with diminishing soil resources, contaminating food with GMO poisons, etc. I also believe that a carbon tax and consumption taxes are appropriate to pay for the transition from unsustainable to sustainable tech and practices are appropriate to control the herd.

As for the chicken and egg Co2 arguement, we are seeing a negative feedback loop as global wierding takes hold with vast amounts of Co2 being released from the anthropogenic warming, causing weather extremes causing wildfire conflagrations, peat deposits oxydizing, dust bowl conditions in the south of the US with that soil carbon being released, etc. The vast amount of LEGITIMATE science falls down on the side of anthropogenic causal factors. Corporate science and Faux News science withstanding, there is no real debate on human induced climate effects. Nor is there any legitimate debate on who is draining the aquifers, poisoning the planet, destroying our food supplies, dumping chemicals into groundwater, releasing oil spills, etc. either.
 wvwaterfall
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 157
view profile
History
The Greatest World Problems
Posted: 6/11/2011 10:14:28 PM
Paul, earthpuppy covered many of the points I might make. The difference between water and air quality before and after top down federal legislation is dramatic. I was an adolescent living just a few miles from the cuyahoga when it caught fire. I remember the stench in the air and thick foam on the water near the paper mill my grandfather worked at in NH.

And while we agree on the strong need for more critical thinking, we diverge sharply on it's application to climate science. For you or anyone to claim there is an equal amount of sound science disputing the human role in a warming planet shows a clear disconnect between what we accept as sound science. Al Gore is not a scientist. Nor is Rush Limbaugh. How about if we both agree not to cite talking heads on the opposite side of our positions on global warming and apply critical thinking to actual scientific research? And that means not citing talking heads who may have some sort of scientific credentials but have done no independent research of their own as well.

There is certainly much science that still needs to be done to understand the intricacies of climate science and the implications, but the basic premise that human activity has influenced and will continue to influence the climate is broadly accepted in the science community.

Honestly, the eagerness of skeptics to reject out of hand the overwhelming amount of research supporting anthropogenic global warming seems far more "religious" than the practice many of us have of closely following new research on the topic and modifying our understanding as appropriate as new information comes to light.

Dave
 jay.m83
Joined: 5/18/2011
Msg: 158
view profile
History
The Greatest World Problems
Posted: 6/12/2011 5:57:27 AM
we all have things we care about and we have to look at things at a way that will make things better for humanity as a whole. Giving up our advances to me seems like the worse thing we could do. We are at the point for the first time in industrial society where things are actually getting better for the generation ahead of us. We are not leaving it worse. The Attitude seems to be one of guilt, Instead of problem solving. Again I come back to saying we need to look at ways to do things better. Not stop doing things all together. We need to stop wasting our time trying to stop people from living the good life. Waste of time, and it does NO good. The answer to the question what do we do about all the miserable people when there are few of us that live in luxury is not make everyone live in misery too.

We need to spend money in alternative energy methods. Making nuclear safer, making wind, and solar more efficient and reliable. And experimenting with other energy methods as well. Someone mentioned Hyperion energy, I did look it up, but wasn't able to find much. If someone could provide me some starting links it would be appreciated, but that is the sort of thing I'm talking about. We need to look into Adaptability options as well, In case Climate change is not caused by us. And I'm not saying that it isn't. Just merely recognizing the fact that it is possible, and that we need to be ready for it. Because even if climate change is caused by us now, there will be a time in the future where the change of the earth's climate is not within our control. We need to be ready for that. We can't put all our eggs in 1 basket. Its a gamble no matter which basket you put it in. We need to look at how we can help industrializing the third world. And not by just giving them technologies. There is a great benefit in helping troubled countries, and helping them when they need it will only help us. There are things in Africa that can help us, just like there are things in the west that can help africa. Free trade, and love my friend. The current system, of lets go take over a country and force them to give us their shit is broken, and just plain wrong. People helping people is the world I dream of. But people need to want to help people, not be forced compassion from a socialist, or statist government. It will likely not happen even in my lifetime, But the message needs to be said.

I've been citing the opposite extreme in an attempt to show people that their view is not the be all end all, And we need to be prepared for both extremes. I personally like the majority of the scientific community believe that neither extreme will happen. Climate Change will have a noticeable effect. But it won't be cataclysmic. But we need to be prepared in case it is. I'm promoting Geo-engineering methods here. Which I'm sure will be another unpopular idea. Oh well. I'll be evil for wanting to be prepared apparently

Oh and one interesting fact. Water and Air quality in the west is amazing compared to the rest of the world. Complain about the quality all you want, but it is getting better, no help to the environmentalists.
 Hibernian1960
Joined: 9/13/2008
Msg: 159
view profile
History
The Greatest World Problems
Posted: 6/12/2011 7:05:10 AM
No help for it, we obviously have to evacuate the planet.
 aremeself
Joined: 12/31/2008
Msg: 160
view profile
History
The Greatest World Problems
Posted: 6/13/2011 9:57:54 PM
wasted resources


a lot of land and water is wasted on lawns and toilets.

and HALF the food in north america is wasted.
most of it in you're own house!

and our following shrines.

our houses are way too big!
how about our vehicles?
 nipoleon
Joined: 12/27/2005
Msg: 161
view profile
History
The Greatest World Problems
Posted: 6/14/2011 2:40:48 AM
The Worlds Greatest Problems ?

The world has no problems......... we people have the problems.
And, our main problem is figuring that out.
 xlr8ingmargo
Joined: 1/4/2011
Msg: 162
The Greatest World Problems
Posted: 6/14/2011 4:24:16 AM
^^^ Less is definitely more in this post.
 IgorFrankensteen
Joined: 6/29/2009
Msg: 163
view profile
History
The Greatest World Problems
Posted: 6/14/2011 4:47:08 AM
Yes, 'environmentalism' can be, and has been turned onto a religion by SOME people. Anything can, and has been turned into a religion. It doesn't MATTER that it has, and the fact that some people HAVE done so, has nothing whatsoever to do with whether or not we should or shouldn't do something on a legal level to address a given concern.

As for the idea that NO action should be taken by the majority to limit how the environment we all live in is used, that's flat out ridiculous. To think that the world would be better to live in with NO environmental controls, requires one to be completely ignorant of the history of the planet, both the human and non-human aspects thereof. That, or one must genuinely believe that no species or group or individual should ever seek to protect themselves from the vagaries of life.
Environmentalism starts the moment you realize that your cousin just peed upstream from you, or took a dump in your favorite sleeping area. ALL rule making is based on improving our ability to NOT spend our lives physically fighting each other.
I know that Paul DOES believe in SOME legal limits on the use of the environment, he's said so elsewhere. He just doesn't support blind refusal of all human desires to change or use the environment, and neither do I. But we could all do a better job about being SPECIFIC about what we do and do not think ought to be legislated. That takes more time, and doesn't "feel a fun" as pretending to believe that ALL human interaction with the environment is "bad," or that ALL people should be allowed to do ANYTHING they want, all the time, so we end up with silly clap-trap and posturing like we've seen here on both sides of the issue.
 jay.m83
Joined: 5/18/2011
Msg: 164
view profile
History
The Greatest World Problems
Posted: 6/14/2011 5:14:07 AM
I would like to point out that I never once said that no action should be taken, I never once said that human interaction with the environment is bad, and I never once said that climate change isn't happening. I was suggesting that things should be done differently. And pointed out that climate science is hardly perfect, and that there is a wide variety of things that could be causing it, and a wide variety of outcomes. So if any of that was directed to my opinions you need to go back and actually read my posts.
 IgorFrankensteen
Joined: 6/29/2009
Msg: 165
view profile
History
The Greatest World Problems
Posted: 6/14/2011 5:26:41 AM
Unless you said one of the things I was talking about, i.e. that all environmentalism is "good," or all environmentalism is "bad," or that the fact that SOME folks treat it like a religion means that everyone should ignore all environmental concerns, then it didn't apply to you. Did you read MY post? I did not read yours in particular.
 jay.m83
Joined: 5/18/2011
Msg: 166
view profile
History
The Greatest World Problems
Posted: 6/14/2011 7:46:01 AM
I'm liking the idea of the ARC, but the cost question is definitely one to consider. It seems like the biggest cost, as it always in with nuclear, is going to be the initial cost. I hope they can find an investor for such a project. We will need it in full scale to fully appreciate the benefits, and possible dangers.
 BonneyBones
Joined: 3/14/2010
Msg: 167
The Greatest World Problems
Posted: 6/14/2011 12:10:21 PM
the biggest problem in my opinion is overpopulation. we breed like rats but consume way more resources and take up more space. and most of the people breeding dont have good enough genetics to be doing so.
 jay.m83
Joined: 5/18/2011
Msg: 168
view profile
History
The Greatest World Problems
Posted: 6/14/2011 12:30:47 PM
Nuclear has an unfortunate political stigma associated with it. The Public can't disassociate the word "Nuclear" with the word "Bomb". Until that changes, government bodies will just do what the people who scream the loudest want. "Stop those Nuclear Plant Bombs, or something, man, I could sure use a soy based snack."

Fukishima didn't help matters, even though the negative repercussions we will see from it will be dwarfed by the mortality rates associated with Oil, and Coal extraction.

People just need to be educated on Nuclear Power. They don't realize that newer designs are safer, and more efficient than the one that melted down in Japan. New Plants haven't been built since the 70s. Its like hating the taste of adhesive used on stamps so bad, that you apposed the production of self stick ones. Its seems that we choose what we are afraid of by randomly drawing from a hat.
 jay.m83
Joined: 5/18/2011
Msg: 169
view profile
History
The Greatest World Problems
Posted: 6/14/2011 12:36:57 PM

the biggest problem in my opinion is overpopulation. we breed like rats but consume way more resources and take up more space. and most of the people breeding dont have good enough genetics to be doing so.


An issue in the developing world perhaps, but in the west as stated earlier we actually have a declining population.
 jay.m83
Joined: 5/18/2011
Msg: 170
view profile
History
The Greatest World Problems
Posted: 6/14/2011 3:08:02 PM
Yeah Paul but it that really isn't the fault of the government. Well it kind of is. But The government shouldn't have that much control over our energy consumption, but forgetting my libertarian ideals for a minute and focus on working with the system in place. Can't really blame the government, they are just doing what the people want. It is up to us to educate people, and help them disassociate Nuclear from Bomb. Many won't like it. But people can be very objective if you talk to them correctly. You have to actually let them think about it, and not just ram stats down there throat, which I am guilty of more than I like. People tend to make logical decisions when they are presented all info good and bad, fairly.

And Kissmyasthma, I would like to apologize, population growth has greatly decreased, but population hasn't started to decrease yet. However UN projects that 75% of the developed world will have declining populations by 2050.

So in close, You are still wrong that population growth in the west is a problem, however, I was wrong too saying population had started to decrease.
 Earthpuppy
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 171
view profile
History
The Greatest World Problems
Posted: 6/14/2011 4:17:09 PM
Perhaps we can agree that big government needs to quit subsidizing all fuels, and make them more accurately reflect their true costs to society. Put them all on a level playing field. Coal, oil, nukes and gas would be considerably more expensive here if we paid the true costs at the pump and meter. Just today, our politicians attempted to remove subsidies for the ethanol industry, a subsidiary of big oil that uses nearly as much or more oil to produce a gallon of moonshine. Corn state whores reacted predictably, fighting any attempts to quit using our money to subsidize their pork. Why is it that some avowed conservatives are so hypocritical about subsidies when it's their only way to get elected. Whatever happened to consistency. And yes, Obama is a corn state whore on this as well.

Meanwhile, in Germany, more people are employed making solar panels than are employed in the US steel industry. In Italy, joining other EU nations, they are phasing out Nuke poopers, and a majority of Japanese now favor dumping the nuke poopers.

And in reality land..

http://www.bayjournal.com/article.cfm?article=4142&print=yes
I'm called radical about the environment, like it's a bad thing


Forum / By Tom Horton
Sometimes I forget I am a radical.

Maybe because I'm a middle class, home-buying, taxpaying, meat-eating, gun-owning Methodist, proud veteran of the Boy Scouts, public schools and the United States Army - I'm lulled into thinking I'm a mainstream American.

Recently, I was set straight by a well-stated letter to the editor from a reader (let's call him Gentle Reader).

My first reaction was to dismiss it as a rant. The headline said: "Environmental education will radicalize our youth."

Gentle Reader was concerned about the Maryland Board of Education's approval of adding environmental literacy to the curriculum for all students.

The aim of this, he argued, is nothing less than "radicalization of our young."

He explained that environmentalists like the Chesapeake Bay Foundation and the Sierra Club - and me and many other Marylanders who backed this greening of the public schools - want to stop human growth on the planet.

We want to raise the cost of energy.

We want to take productive farmland out of cultivation.

We are Chicken Littles sounding alarms about the ozone hole, global warming and endangered species.

Well, I think Gentle Reader is on to something. I want to plead guilty on all counts. It's something environmentalists ought to do more.

If we hadn't screamed until governments banned the airborne chemicals tearing a hole in Earth's protective ozone layer, we'd all be living at the dermatologists' office. As it is, children still get more cancer-causing ultraviolet light in several years than their grandparents did in a lifetime.

If you think global warming's a hoax, then you don't believe thermometers take temperature. A thermometer read for decades by scientists off the end of a pier on the Chesapeake shows a steady heating of Bay waters. This warming trend is killing eelgrass beds, submerged grasses that form one of the lower Delmarva Peninsula's most important fish and crab nurseries.

Endangered species? There are more every time scientists look. Sure, it has been worse before when humans weren't even around. As in 65 million years ago, when a giant meteor smacked into Earth. This time we've got some warning, got some choices.

As to raising the cost of energy - absolutely. The health, safety and environmental damages from fueling our economy are nowhere near reflected in the price of coal, oil, gas and nuclear energy. Until we account their true costs, we'll keep making wrong decisions, like living a long drive from work, in homes that guzzle energy.

And what about taking productive farmland out of cultivation?

Why, it's one of our greatest achievements. It's a national program that pays willing farmers to leave part of their fields in grass or trees, to filter and buffer waterways against polluted runoff.

If you seriously want to end farming, I'd advise continuing to oppose those Chicken Little environmentalists who keep sounding the alarms against sprawl development.

And finally we come to Gentle Reader's allegation that we greenies want to stop human growth.

Amen.

No one seriously thinks our population or our economy can expand forever on a finite planet. Especially if we care about leaving room for the rest of nature.

There is not a shred of economic theory that says you have to grow forever to prosper. Yet we blindly accept that message from developers and land speculators, with governments planning and spending more for those yet to move in than for those already living here.

With today's "grow or die" mentality, if we were Noah, we'd be busily evicting all of the ark's occupants to pack the decks with more people.

Bottom line though, Gentle Reader makes a point that needs more discussion than it gets. In today's hyper-consumptive United States, focused as it is on the short term and the self, espousing what is sustainable for our species and all others does come off as radical.

Environmentalists, sensing this, too often respond timidly, downplaying fundamental changes that are needed. Fundamental and radical, by the way, are essentially synonymous in my copy of Webster's.

So we see a current and laudable campaign to restore the Chesapeake Bay use the phrase "choose clean water" when it ought to say "demand clean water," or "clean water is a basic human right."

Aldo Leopold, a forester and early ecologist, warned 60 years ago that by attempting to make conservation sound easy and palatable, we risked making it trivial.

Will environmentalism really lead to the radicalization of our young?

We can only hope.

Tom Horton covered the Bay for 33 years for The Sun in Baltimore, and is author of six books about the Chesapeake. He is a freelance writer, splitting his time between Baltimore and Maryland's Eastern Shore.


 jay.m83
Joined: 5/18/2011
Msg: 172
view profile
History
The Greatest World Problems
Posted: 6/15/2011 8:54:16 AM
I agree that government should stop subsidizing energy. Wind and Solar will still come out on the bottom on the affordability scale however.
 Earthpuppy
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 173
view profile
History
The Greatest World Problems
Posted: 6/15/2011 12:12:41 PM
^^^ You're still not getting it on the huge hidden externalities that we are paying for that don't show up on your electric bill or at the pump. Saying that CONG is cheaper than solar is like saying that you can save money by dumping your trash into the neighbor's yard instead of paying for removal at the curb. Solar and wind are already far cheaper than king CONG (Coal. Oil. Nukes. Gas) when ALL the hidden costs are factored in.
 flyguy51
Joined: 8/11/2005
Msg: 174
The Greatest World Problems
Posted: 6/15/2011 12:40:54 PM
It seems that we can also add drinking water shortage to the list of problems. Overpopulation and climate change both weave into this looming issue.
 aremeself
Joined: 12/31/2008
Msg: 175
view profile
History
The Greatest World Problems
Posted: 6/16/2011 10:37:13 PM
about this reocurring, mindless, overpopulation concern that seems to be ingrained in almost all of us.

It's like, OK, I'm here, now slow down with your breeding folks!
anyone ever fly across canada?
holland and japan have bare land too.

now, if all on earth wasted resources like WE do, there are already 10 times too many people on the earth.

the western world seems to think we can consume as much as we can beg buy borrow, or steal.
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > The Greatest World Problems