Tags
6th Mass Extinction, Capitalism, Climate Change, Collapse of Industrial Civilization, Dark Mountain Project, Ecological Overshoot, Economic Collapse, Mass Die Off, Mike Ruppert, Neoliberal Capitalism, Paul Kingsnorth, Peak Oil, Uncivilization
Originally posted at: Prayforcalamity.com
The flowering dogwoods are in bloom. Along the country lanes, the pink petals have already exploded into ephemeral radiance and begun to wither and fall from the branches of the Jane Magnolia trees. For me this means no longer having the agonizing luxury of hours to sit and write. After six months of bi-weekly essays, I feel I have expressed much of what had become balled up and cluttered in my mind, and now it is time to ruminate in the garden once again.
I named this blog, “Pray for Calamity,” because there are several major crises converging which threaten human civilization, and there are no existing structures capable of mitigating them. Democracy, capitalism, neo-liberal globalization; they are all incapable of undertaking the work necessary to avert cataclysm. The paradigms of thought and approach which are almost hardwired into the modern mind at this point, need to be scrubbed. Of the remaining, solvable ecological crises, which may not include climate change, there is no tool available to attend to them that comes from the conventional tool box of legal, lawful pursuit. These ecological crises, which range from topsoil depletion to tree extinctions to massive die off of oceanic life, cannot be remedied without a fundamental shift in the thinking of the people in the civilized world. If people do not begin to perceive the world as a living entity, interconnected, conscious, and with intrinsic value beyond how it can be carved up and sold, then it is only a matter of time until the human race begins to suffer on a massive scale due to their callous disregard for the other beings with whom they share this planet.
And then there are the political and economic and resource depletion crises as well.
Changing our minds, changing how we think, is physically speaking one of the easiest things we can do. However, when our egos and our identities are wholly interwoven with an idea or an ideology, changing our way of thinking and discarding the old ideas, can be the hardest thing we are asked to undertake. If our physical reality changes, this can create a rip in the threads that stitch our view of ourselves with a dogma or a paradigm. So I await calamity because the egos of the civilized have hardened their hearts and deafened their ears, and until those in the first world middle class feel the gnawing pain of persistent hunger and the fear of deafening uncertainty, they will refuse to consider that maybe everything they have been taught to believe about themselves and their collective destiny, is abjectly wrong.
—
“We’re many generations overdue for a revolution, in our thinking. I’m not talking about blood and violence although I’m afraid thats already happened. I’m talking about a revolution that’s probably the hardest kind, the kind that takes place within the human soul and the human mind. To be able to tear everything down, throw everything out, and start with a completely fresh piece of paper and say, ‘OK, how do we solve this problem?’”
Mike Ruppert said that in the documentary “Collapse.” While by no means a perfect man, Mike was a good person, and did his best to tell the truth as he knew it. He shot himself two weeks ago. He left many insights like this one as gifts for us.
People who become aware of the depth of the problems facing humanity at this juncture in time, often seek answers. They want to know what we need to do. Some suggest we need a revolution. Some suggest we need to take to the hills and hide on personal homesteads, to perhaps form communities of these homesteads and just hold on white knuckled through the bottle neck of collapse. Then there is Paul Kingsnorth of the Dark Mountain Project, who speaks of the difference between problems which are to be solved, and predicaments which are to be endured.
“What do you do,” he asked, “when you accept that all of these changes are coming, things that you value are going to be lost, things that make you unhappy are going to happen, things that you wanted to achieve you can’t achieve, but you still have to live with it, and there’s still beauty, and there’s still meaning, and there are still things you can do to make the world less bad? And that’s not a series of questions that have any answers other than people’s personal answers to them. Selfishly it’s just a process I’m going through.” He laughed. “It’s extremely narcissistic of me. Rather than just having a personal crisis, I’ve said: ‘Hey! Come share my crisis with me!’
Kingsnorth was recently interviewed by the New York Times. As a long time environmental activist who years ago lost faith that there is much we can do to “save the planet,” he decries the false hope sold by mainstream environmentalist groups. With friend Dougald Hine, Kingsnorth wrote the “Uncivilization” manifesto, on which The New York Times writes:
“Uncivilization” was firm in its conviction that climate change and other ecological crises are predicaments, and it called for a cadre of like-minded writers to “challenge the stories which underpin our civilization: the myth of progress, the myth of human centrality and the myth of separation from ‘nature.’ ”
On this matter I think Kingsnorth and Hine are right on the mark. We will never weather the predicaments before us, let alone solve what problems remain solvable, if we refuse to take an honest look at who we are, where we are, and just what the hell we are doing. I think this is a meditation that would benefit revolutionaries and those hiding in the hills alike. We must ask if civilization is something we are even interested in continuing. We must ask what it is we value most and whether or not the lifestyles we are cordoned into are even in line with those values. We must ask what it means to be human. And if we are to trust any of our conclusions, we must first find a way to step outside of everything our culture has programmed us to believe.
—
Civilization is a power structure. It is a rejection of natural law in favor of the control of those high on social hierarchies. Civilization is the domestication of nature and people alike. It is the creation of a once regional, now global farm where the multitudes of humans are livestock, restricted by the borders of various owners, and subjugated and exploited for the extraction of the surplus values generated by their labor. Non human life forms and entire ecosystems are subjugated likewise, and as this control apparatus is now world wide and hell bent on growing in scale year over year, life itself is at risk. Simultaneously, this architecture of domestication and control has blunted the souls of the humans it dominates, and like house pets, the great many people have been declawed and broken. This is the existential portion of the crisis we face. The meaninglessness of life on the inside. The dull static of the best case scenario, where those in the first world yearn for the life of tepid, safe predictability offered by the owner class, should only one produce enough without question or complaint. We are a wretched bunch who fetishize our oppressors and spew vitriol at insurrectionaries who would in trying to shake us loose even for a moment, dare make us late for work.
Navigating circumstances beyond our control in which masters are hostile to us, constantly maneuvering to exert more control over our lives as well as to extract more value from us even in our imprisonment or death; most people are surviving, not thriving. Merely jockeying through a preset condition of work and fee schedules has muted the potential of our species. What has been throttled cannot be measured in discoveries or inventions, but in the satisfaction of individuals and communities to thrive on their own terms. To be fully actualized and autonomous creatures. To witness the assembly line life of modern man is to suffer a snuff film.
If we are to rescue our own hearts and our minds, if we are to save the last embers of burning wildness in our souls and to break the tethers that bind our thinking to suicidal paradigms, then we must uncivilize. Like Buck in “The Call of the Wild,” we must seek to undomesticate ourselves, no only to survive the realities of the world into which we are being thrust, but because to be a house mutt lying bored at master’s feet is to barely exist at all.
—
So what does any of this really mean? What are the steps, the actions to undertake which will align the force of our arms with the rhythms of our hearts? Do we fight or do we flee? Or do we stand upon the hill and bear witness until the fire consumes us? Or is there perhaps some combination of all; a time for rebellion, a time to tend our gardens, and a time to merely sit and say goodbye?
Certainly, if people seek a recipe for action that can maintain society in a form even remotely similar to its present incarnation, then I offer nothing. If what people desire is a map of the future from which plans can be derived and survival assured, I have none. I think maybe it is time to give up on maps. Maybe it is time to just be in the territory for a while. Maybe it is time to give up on human words and to leave the electronic buzz of the internet and to set foot on soil and rock. If domestication is the product of being in the domicile, in the house, then perhaps what we need is to step outside. If the stories we have been told for generations have poisoned us; if these myths about the greatness of the lines on maps and the men who ruled those patchwork lines have only served to make us slaves to abstractions, engendering in us a self righteousness and a malice towards all that isn’t of our hands and seeding in us a fear of what lies outside comfortable walls, then perhaps it is time to go and to hear some different voices. To hear some new stories. Maybe, lost in the ballad of crowing frogs and moaning trees we can crumple up what is written before us and find a blank piece of paper, and on it we will write of our sadness and our fear. We will admit our weakness in the face of all that we have made and we will scratch out our apologies and our gratitude.
Then we will collect up everything that we think the future needs to be given, and we will carry it within us to barricades and to garden gates, to jail cells and to barn bays and to graves. We will find the fire that will make tomorrow worth struggling towards, in that dark, when we are bent and cold heaps of hungry, smoke smelling bone and sinew beneath taught and blackened skin. The madness of the world will grow raw, and real. Privation and awfulness will bloom, and we will endure it.
The first steps in the deprogramming process are to turn off your TV if you have one, eschew other forms of mass media, and spend meaningful amounts of time in nature. If you’re in a city, find a park.
LikeLike
There is no more nature around here. All the trees are at their last extremity, the sky is permanently heavily veiled with condensation gazes, the air is unbreathable, the city is dirty, smoggy, dusty, ugly. The constant humming and noise is unbearable. The zombies are texting and the tension is palpable all around. The parents are carrying their babies around in strollers right at the level of car exhaust pipes. The parks are very, very sad places to be. It is too late for nature here in my city. It is already just a big cemetery. It is already dead.
And the “country” is not much better around my city. It is way too late. There is no more redemption or consolation. Everything is beyond repair.
LikeLike
LikeLike
unknown/montreal
LikeLike
Can you imagine Michele if Montreal (I’m from MTL as well) how shitty it must be elsewhere, particularly in Asia. My friend spent 8 months there and when he came back to MTL he said the air here in the city is amazing compared to there. It’s hard to see how all things will get better…
LikeLike
Space.
We need to establish a colony of around 100,000 people in near-orbital space.
Once we do that, we (as a species) stand a better chance of surviving this, and then comes the possibility that future generations can do what they can to clean it up.
If we can get one colony established — in, say, a Stanford Torus-model space colony — there is a good reason to believe we can mass produce these on a large scale. Provided with a high capacity space elevator, we can crank out 50K to 100K of these and put all of humanity (that wants to leave) up in orbit and out of harm’s way.
We can mine the moon and harvest material from the asteroid belt for a few thousand years while the Earth recovers.
All is not lost. There is reason to be optimistic in the face of this overwhelming horror that is rapidly approaching.
LikeLike
Baloney
LikeLike
That is such a well-formulated rebuttal to my comments that I am forced to admit that I am wrong. I humbly retract my post, and offer my apologies to all those who I offended with my arrogance, ignorance and simplistic view of reality.
What was I thinking? Really?!
LikeLike
Mine and harvest what exactly? And where will the funding come from? And what will these lucky orbiters eat?
LikeLike
“Mine and harvest what exactly?”
All the minerals available in the Asteroid Belt, as well as in the gas giants and the moons thereof — which probably means most of the natural elements in the Periodic Table, as well as some resources that would be particularly valuable: one of the moons of Jupiter may have oceans of methane, for example.
Gigantic, mostly-roboticized factory ships (with a minimal complement of a few dozen humans for trouble shooting purposes) can set out and demolish a smallish asteroid (say, the size of Manhattan), load its bits onto the ship, and process it on the long trip home. Once back in Earth’s orbit, the ingots are moved over to the orbital colony, refitted with supplies and a new crew, and sent back to get more. Alternatively, a completely roboticized ship can slingshot into the atmosphere of one of the gas giants, scoop in a massive amount of its gases, and head back (also processing it on the way).
These are not my ideas. Scientists from NASA and elsewhere have been theorizing about this stuff for decades now.
“And where will the funding come from?”
I assume that, if the choice is total extinction or life in space, money will somehow become available. But the question of “will this get done” is not really the point of my post. Its “can we avoid extinction?” And the answer is “yes, we can”.
“And what will these lucky orbiters eat?”
Go to Wikipedia and look up “Stanford Torus”; as you can see, its a rather largish (or can be scalable to reach large sizes) space colony that can handle growing its own food and thus sustaining a large population. If you saw the movie “Elysium”, that was a Stanford Torus. [While a so-so movie, “Elysium” is a good example of the horrors that await us in the coming decades, BTW.]
LikeLike
EK, what’s the net energy on those schemes? Is it better than the tar sands ratio of 5:1?
LikeLike
“EK, what’s the net energy on those schemes?”
I have no idea. Since it is a project that is not even in the concept stage yet, answering such questions (related to that kind of detail) is somewhat of a fool’s errand. However, it should be noted that the station’s can be located in such a way that a steady (and constant; i.e., no clouds) source of solar power is available and would likely provide more than what is required for the operation of such a colony. [At least, that is what I’ve read about it in years past. That may have been speculation, and it may also have been shot down since. But barring that, I’m going to assume the hypothesis is still valid.]
“Is it better than the tar sands ratio of 5:1?”
I would hope so. 😉
LikeLike
It may not be baloney. It may be possible to utilise most of the remaining reserve of oil left on Earth to build a fleet of rockets that could carry the tens of thousands of tonnes of lead shielding necessary to prevent long term exposure to cosmic rays rendering everyone aboard ‘Arks’ extremely sick and eventually sterile or dead.
It may be possible to expend a large portion of the remaining oil left on Earth to build a fleet of rockets to transport millions of panes of toughened glass needed to build space greenhouses (plus plenty of spares to cope with the inevitable impacts of high-velocity space debris). Also an even greater number to transport a few million tonnes of soil, plus the required water into space.
Let me see, it takes 10 Newtons to lift a 1kg mass, 10 Joules energy to raise it 1 metre. Unfortunately, there is the mass of the rocket and it’s fuel to contend with. Okay, one Saturn V multi-stage rocket (all up about 480 tonnes) lifts 3 astronauts and their life support systems So let’s say 30,000 Saturn V rockets to lift the 100,000 people and about 1 million times that number to lift all the stuff they’ll need to survive in space. That’s just over 30 billion Saturn V rockets required. Make it 31 billion Saturn V rockets (or their equivalents) in case of mishaps.
.
Since there are reportedly 1 trillion barrels of oil left, it should be a doable project provided it doesn’t take more than 30 barrels of oil to build a Saturn V rocket. Plus the fuel. Oops. Okay, coal fired rockets. If we use all the remaining oil and all the remaining coal and send the Earth’s temperature up like a rocket, say 15oC rise in a decade it might just be doable.
Step 1. Get the USA to stop arguing with Russia about who is going to frack Ukraine.
Step 2. Move the population of California to Poland because California doesn’t look like it’s going to be habitable for humans for much longer.
LikeLike
“It may be possible to utilise most of the remaining reserve of oil left on Earth to build a fleet of rockets…”
Stop. Go to Wikipedia and look up “space elevator”; or Google it with the name of Arthur C. Clarke and see what you get.
A space elevator is basically a vertical freight and passenger train that goes 15-20 miles straight up. If we can build three or four of them in the same location, we can easily have each train make dozens of trips a day. The tech required for this qould need to be developed, and would have to be done with a high degree of urgency. Using nanotubes/synthetic carbon infused steel for the structural requirements, for example, may actually require bypassing possible regulations regarding hazardous materials. But since its our extinction we are talking about, perhaps a few of those can be temporarily waved.
I would favor two locations on opposite sides of the Earth for these space elevators. One, as stated, to ferry materials and personnel up into the colonies. The other should be for removing the hundreds of millions of tons of radioactive materials (and billions of tons of other toxic crap) from the planet and sending them, perhaps, to crash land on Venus or something similar.
“…that could carry the tens of thousands of tonnes of lead shielding necessary to prevent long term exposure to cosmic rays rendering everyone aboard ‘Arks’ extremely sick and eventually sterile or dead.”
I would like to assume that we can come up with synthetic composites that would be lighter, less toxic and do the job much better than lead.
“…cope with the inevitable impacts of high-velocity space debris…”
Bots and other space drones can handle that task.
“Move the population of California to Poland because California doesn’t look like it’s going to be habitable for humans for much longer.”
An excellent suggestion regardless of climate change. 😛
LikeLike
So the elevator deals with the first 20 miles, what about the other 200?
Your clear lack of scientific knowledge is exposed when you talk of lighter elements stopping radiation.
‘I would like to assume that we can come up with synthetic composites that would be lighter, less toxic and do the job much better than lead.’
This planet maniacal political-economic system runs on false assumptions, which is why we are in the mess we are in.
Also, in industrial societies the main source of problems is ‘solutions’.
LikeLike
“So the elevator deals with the first 20 miles, what about the other 200?”
The concept has been updated in the many years since I last revisited it. Most of your questions can be addressed here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_elevators
“Your clear lack of scientific knowledge is exposed when you talk of lighter elements stopping radiation.”
So what stops it now? All that lead in the atmosphere?
“This planet maniacal political-economic system runs on false assumptions, which is why we are in the mess we are in.”
Over-simplification. We’re in the mess we’re in for a whole host of reasons. Failing to plan in advance for inevitable crises is a big one, and yet that seems to be what you are endorsing.
No one is making false assumptions; these are concepts that have been in the works since the 1950s or so; ever since we began launching stuff into space. That they have been updated is no small surprise (nor should they be).
But I will agree with you regarding the paraphrased Sevareid quotation.
LikeLike
What stops it now?
The Earth’s magnetic field.
Van Allen Belt discovered 1958 from memory.
LikeLike
Among others. There are a wide array of ‘cosmic rays’ that we need protection from. To immediately assume that we can’t produce technological shields against such harmful effects of nature is to ignore millennia of history. Really. You might as well ask “how will they breathe up there?”
Recall that the Apollo astronauts exited the VABs and went to the moon without lead to protect them. Of course, they were wrapped up tight like a trio of papooses, but that was also almost a half-century ago now. The likelihood of the improvement of that tech a la Moore’s Law is almost certain. [And that’s without even attaching a high priority to it, as we would in this instance.]
Then there is the possibility of having these colonies in the low Earth orbit zone where they would be protected by the VABs. [This creates its own set of problems — as all solutions do — but I include it as an example of just another option.]
I’m clearly not an expert in the area of theoretical orbital space colonies, but I know enough about it. It is something that we humans can clearly accomplish if we wanted to. The tech is there (or will be soon, if we applied ourselves). We have the manpower and the manufacturing capabilities. The start-up capital could be realized once it became apparent the advantages of such a venture would be conducive to making oodles of money. And so on.
LikeLike
Despite having superior technology, the Russians never attempted ‘the Moon thing’. We know the first Moon mission photos were faked, and that if subsequent mission were genuine, the whole idea of humans travelling through space was abandoned in the 1970s. Except in the minds of politicians and ‘children’. George Bush’s ‘manned mission to Mars by 2015’ being the last of a long saga of failures.
Self-deception is one of mankind’s worst features.
LikeLike
“We know the first Moon mission photos were faked, and that if subsequent mission were genuine, the whole idea of humans travelling through space was abandoned in the 1970s.”
And that marks the moment where this dialog ends. Thanks for your time. 🙂
LikeLike
Faked? Really? I know of the theory of conspiracy surrounding the moon landing(s), but I don’t know of any consensus that they were faked. This usually falls into the category of things I feel no need to decide. And although I realize opinions differ on various conspiracies (HAARP, chemtrails, 9-11, JFK, etc.), particularly between you and xraymike on 9-11, I’d be curious to know how the first moon landing is demonstrably a fake beyond the familiar (if questionable) analysis of the photographs.
LikeLike
LikeLike
I deleted the TV last century. Indeed, all those team sports turn boys into prefabricated units. I look at the Russians in the Ukraine who imagine that they will not suffer the fate of those Ukrainians whom their grandparents replaced, after the Holomor, even though they presently set themselves up for it. This is one response http://rebuildingcivilization.com/content/land-navigation-comprehensive-guide-0 but it imagines that we need civilisation. in order to survive. Another response is to see that we are befuddled by False Loss Syndrome, that is, refusal to abandon a sinking ship. Sometimes, it is necessary to look with peripheral vision, in order to see what is going on. Sometimes, it is simply enough to stand still.
LikeLike
http://www.desdemonadespair.net/2014/04/first-ever-deep-ocean-mine-to-destroy.html
First-ever deep ocean mine to destroy seabed for ore – ‘It’s a resilient system and studies show that life will recover in 5-10 years’
Plans to open the world’s first mine in the deep ocean have moved significantly closer to becoming reality.
A Canadian mining company has finalised an agreement with Papua New Guinea to start digging up an area of seabed.
The controversial project aims to extract ores of copper, gold and other valuable metals from a depth of 1,500m.
However, environmental campaigners say mining the ocean floor will prove devastating, causing lasting damage to marine life.
The company, Nautilus Minerals, has been eyeing the seabed minerals off Papua New Guinea (PNG) since the 1990s but then became locked in a lengthy dispute with the PNG government over the terms of the operation.
Under the agreement just reached, PNG will take a 15% stake in the mine by contributing $120m towards the costs of the operation.
Mike Johnston, chief executive of Nautilus Minerals, told BBC News: “It’s a taken a long time but everybody is very happy.”
“There’s always been a lot of support for this project and it’s very appealing that it will generate a significant amount of revenue in a region that wouldn’t ordinarily expect that to happen.”
[further down]
The mine, known as Solwara-1, will be excavated by a fleet of robotic machines steered from a ship at the surface.
The construction of the largest machine, a Bulk Cutter weighing 310 tonnes, has just been completed by an underwater specialist manufacturer, Soil Machine Dynamics (SMD), based in Newcastle, UK.
The plan is to break up the top layer of the seabed so that the ore can be pumped up as a slurry.
The agreement with PNG now clears the way for Nautilus to order a specialist vessel to manage the operation. Mining itself could start within five years.
[read the rest]
Fortunately, (I think) in five years we’ll be in the thick of the bottleneck and there won’t be any such activity.
____________
Well written post, though I think it’s too late for any human activity to “solve” our predicament since the feed-backs are already kicked in (and growing in number yearly). We’re going to pay the ultimate price for blowing our one chance to “get it right.” Human hubris and the mis-use of our big brains (for “profit” and phony wealth)has done enough to render any further human activity moot. i’m all for fighting on, but it’s over no matter what we do or don’t do.
LikeLike
I believe the fellow’s name is Paul Kingsnorth that you’re referring to in the article.
http://atthewaterline.com/2014/04/25/environmentalists-see-coming-collapse-push-uncivilisation-in-an-age-of-ecocide/
Environmentalists See Coming Collapse, Push ‘Uncivilisation’ in an ‘Age of Ecocide’
[second paragraph]
I brought The New York Times Magazine from Sunday’s paper to read during the fuel-intensive flight. It contained an article about the English environmental activist and author Paul Kingsnorth and his conclusion, six years ago, that the environmental movement had failed and societal collapse had become inevitable. That led to a thoughtful manifesto written by Kingsnorth and Dougald Hine, “Uncivilisation,” which became the starting point for a network of writers and artists called The Dark Mountain Project. Its name comes from the last line of American poet Robinson Jeffers’ “Rearmament.”
What middle class? We’re all in the “working poor” group now.
http://www.dailyfinance.com/2014/04/25/so-long-america-middle-class/
So Long to America’s Middle Class
Being middle class isn’t what it used to be. That isn’t so surprising, of course. Everything changes.
A century ago, you were considered middle class if you made $577 a year, according to TheCostofLiving.com. Today, many people make that much in a week. At least, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the median weekly earnings of full-time workers for the first quarter of 2014 were $796.
But just what is middle class today? There seems to be a lot of evidence out there that the status of middle class is almost the new poor. [read the rest]
LikeLike
The so-called powers that be are still busy investing in extraction strategies and industries no matter what us plebes think or do, while the law is on their side and our once-famous “watchdog” agencies that regulated them have been rendered toothless.
http://www.republicreport.org/2014/accce-climate-change/
VIDEO: Chief Coal Industry Lobbyist Won’t Say If Coal Causes Climate Change
Does burning coal, one of the most carbon-intensive fuel sources on the planet, contribute to climate change? That simple question stumped the industry’s most prominent advocate, Robert “Mike” Duncan, at a Colorado mining conference last week. Asked twice by Republic Report, Duncan first said that a “lot of people believe” that coal causes climate change, before replying, “I’m not answering your question.”
[read the rest, hear the video]
LikeLike
“When the still sea conspires an armor
And her sullen and aborted
Currents breed tiny monsters
True sailing is dead”
Horse Latitudes
Jim Morrison
for Westerners to rediscover that the cosmos is indeed one huge interconnected web will take some doing. our current mode of thought slices and dices the universe into manageable units.
what the author seems to be suggesting is the sacralization of life, something for which our consumptive throwaway society seems to have lost the aptitude.
LikeLike
“…we must first find a way to step outside of everything our
culture has programmed us to believe.”
I suggest that we find a few of us who are awakening to the realities of our situation, and come together as small groups dedicated to re-education and personal transformation. We can use some of the material online and in print to trigger our sharings, and initiate newcomers into viewpoints they are unfamiliar with. This offers a way out of the impasse many of us feel when isolated from others open to our unique growth process.
I have been part of groups working in this direction for many years now, and we have come up with some methods for facilitating our interactions to keep them lively, interesting, and open, in order to maximize the growth dynamic in all participants and aid the evolution of the group purpose and effectiveness.
If any of you monitoring or participating in this blog are interested in pursuing this option or learning more about it let me know at this address: annsiudmak@windstream.net My name is Mike Kavanaugh.
We need a way to awaken many more people to the critical realities our human world is now experiencing. This cellular approach to spreading knowledge has historical precedents that are very encouraging. Let’s give this awakening process which has tended to be limited to isolated individuals enough group structure to make it effective for much larger numbers, without succumbing to the obvious potential downsides of any group effort.
LikeLike
http://english.pravda.ru/science/earth/01-04-2014/127224-earth_apocalypse-0/
UN: Earth working on Apocalypse for mankind
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change acting under the auspices of the UN decided to put an end to the dispute about global warming. Climatologists stated (and experts interviewed by Pravda.Ru agreed with them) that the Earth’s temperature was really rising. The trouble is that it will lead to the unbalance of the entire system of the planet. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change acting under the auspices of the UN published an alarming report that warned of the consequences of inaction on the issue of global warming. According to the experts of the panel, it has increasingly more noticeable effect on the situation on the land and in the oceans. In case of further inaction the warming will have serious consequences, up to the complete destruction of civilization at the turn of the 22nd century.
This intergovernmental panel was established in 1988 by two UN agencies, the World Meteorological Organization and the United Nations Environment Program. The group is considered one of the world’s most authoritative in the field of climatology and has made an invaluable contribution to science.
The concerns of the UN experts are understandable. There are no doubts that because of the global warming processes ice caps at the poles are slowly (so far) melting, the ice in the Arctic is crumbling (polar seafarers can see it with their own eyes), the supplies of fresh water are dwindling, periods of abnormally high air temperatures are becoming more frequent, and some coral reefs are quietly dying. The sea level is rising, and the water is becoming more acidic because of the dissolved carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere as part of automotive and industrial emissions. As a result, some marine organisms experience slowed growth, while others simply die. The list of all the consequences of global warming is very long.
According to the overwhelming majority of climate scientists, this is only the beginning of very serious consequences for the entire planet. But what about the sensational Kyoto Protocol under which the signatory countries (the most technically advanced ones) undertook to reduce emissions? ”The Kyoto Protocol is no longer a popular discussion topic. 2012 was the last year it was in force, and now there are talks about its results or lack thereof. Overall, let bygones be bygones,” Alexander Ginzburg, doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Deputy Director of the Institute of Atmospheric Physics named after Obukhov of RAS told Pravda.Ru. “Late last year an assessment report of the International Expert Group was published listing all the results, and now I do not fully understand whether this story will continue.
In the first 10-12 years of the 21st century methods of adaptation to global warming have been established. This is understandable as we must be prepared for the fact that the number of all sorts of extreme events is increasing, and this is a direct consequence of global warming, and this not even disputed. The warming of the climate in the late 20th – early 21st century is obvious. More frequent extreme events are a consequence of global warming. The flooding on the Amur River last year, for example, was a direct consequence of global warming. While such events are impossible to predict, we must be prepared for them.
How can the consequences of global warming be avoided? They are unavoidable. At the very least, we need to not interfere with nature. We must behave humanly, not burn fuel more than necessary, engage in energy conservation. This is good for the economy, preservation of natural resources, and climate. That is, if we behave humanly, thinking about what we will leave for the next generation, it will be easier.
Sergey Markov, a member of the Public Chamber of Russia told Pravda.Ru the following about the climate threat and the Kyoto Protocol:
“It is rather simple. The protocol was signed by the countries with insignificant industry, and not signed by those with significant industry. Because it is precisely the industry that is the biggest source of pollution, it is the industry that requires powerful additional investments, major industrial countries have refused to sign it. The Kyoto Protocol has to do directly with greenhouse gas emissions, however, strictly speaking, is has not been exactly proven that it is these gases that cause the warming.
Many believe that this is just a cyclical warming, that it is a development cycle of the bio-geological sphere of the Earth. But, on the other hand, the Kyoto Protocol is exactly positive in another sense – it is not only against warming, it is against pollution, and we have to fight this pollution in any case.”
“Global climate changes are accompanied by growth in the number and strength of various climatic and weather anomalies,” said in an interview with Pravda.Ru an associate Member of RAS, Director of the Institute of Water Issues of the Russian Academy of Sciences Viktor Danilov-Danil’yan. “It’s been known for a long time, I even wrote about it in 2001, that global climate change is a consequence of imbalance of the Earth’s climate system. Therefore, these changes will be accompanied not only by increasing temperature, but the deepening of temperature fluctuations, which is what is happening now in the United States. Everything is happening according to the theory there.
I am always surprised by some commentators and journalists who start talking about non-existence of the global warming after any local cold weather spell. Such carelessness is difficult to explain. Global warming is not uniform or monotonous, there are pauses, even some reversals, and of course, in different territories, it manifests itself in different ways. In some areas it is faster (at high latitudes), in other areas it is slower (primarily in the equatorial zone). Judging about the global warming based on stand-alone cases is wrong.”
Those who drafted the Kyoto Protocol in 1997 were well aware that the measures provided were not sufficient to have a significant impact on the global climate change, said Viktor Danilov-Danil’yan. Everyone understood that this was only an attempt to organize the international community to implement the necessary measures. Generally, if climate change follows the worst-case scenario, the humanity will suffer greatly.
LikeLike
http://desmogblog.com/2014/04/23/vice-president-joe-biden-promotes-u-s-fracking-missionary-force-during-ukraine-trip
Vice President Joe Biden Promotes U.S. as Fracking Missionary Force On Ukraine Trip
During his two-day visit this week to Kiev, Ukraine, Vice President Joe Biden unfurled President Barack Obama’s “U.S. Crisis Support Package for Ukraine.”
A key part of the package involves promoting the deployment of hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) in Ukraine. Dean Neu, professor of accounting at York University in Toronto, describes this phenomenon in his book “Doing Missionary Work.” And in this case, it involves the U.S. acting as a modern-day missionary to spread the gospel of fracking to further its own interests.
With the ongoing Russian occupation of Crimea serving as the backdrop for the trip, Biden made Vladimir Putin’s Russia and its dominance of the global gas market one of the centerpieces of a key speech he gave while in Kiev.
“And as you attempt to pursue energy security, there’s no reason why you cannot be energy secure. I mean there isn’t. It will take time. It takes some difficult decisions, but it’s collectively within your power and the power of Europe and the United States,” Biden said.
“And we stand ready to assist you in reaching that. Imagine where you’d be today if you were able to tell Russia: Keep your gas. It would be a very different world you’d be facing today.”
The U.S. oil and gas industry has long lobbied to “weaponize” its fracking prowess to fend off Russian global gas market dominance. It’s done so primarily in two ways.
One way: by transforming the U.S. State Department into a global promoter of fracking via its Unconventional Gas Technical Engagement Program (formerly the Global Shale Gas Initiative), which is a key, albeit less talked about, part of President Obama’s “Climate Action Plan.”
The other way: by exporting U.S. fracked gas to the global market, namely EU countries currently heavily dependent on Russia’s gas spigot.
In this sense, the crisis in Ukraine — as Naomi Klein pointed out in a recent article — has merely served as a “shock doctrine” excuse to push through plans that were already long in the making. In other words, it’s “old wine in a new bottle.”
[read the rest]
LikeLike
http://kunstler.com/clusterfuck-nation/piketty-dikitty-rikitty/
April 28, 2014
Piketty Dikitty Rikitty
[quote]
Piketty and his fans assume that the industrial orgy will continue one way or another, in other words that some mysterious “they” will “come up with innovative new technologies” to obviate the need for fossil fuels and that the volume of wealth generated will more or less continue to increase. This notion is childish, idiotic, and wrong. Energy and technology are not substitutable with each other. If you run out of the former, you can’t replace it with the latter (and by “run out” I mean get it at a return of energy investment that makes sense). The techno-narcissist Jeremy Rifkins and Ray Kurzweils among us propound magical something-for-nothing workarounds for our predicament, but they are just blowing smoke up the collective fundament of a credulous ruling plutocracy. In fact, we’re faced with an unprecedented contraction of wealth, and a shocking loss of ability to produce new wealth. That‘s the real “game-changer,” not the delusions about shale oil and the robotic “industrial renaissance” and all the related fantasies circulating among a leadership that checked its brains at the Microsoft window.
LikeLike
“Move the population of California to Poland because California doesn’t look like it’s going to be habitable for humans for much longer.”
Why go all that way, or even into outer space? Just move ‘em all underground. Plenty of caves already there, and more could be built. Doomer cities for God’s sake! When it gets really nasty up topside, they can all just cool it down below, sipping tom collins and smoking electric cigarettes….
LikeLike
Because the idea of moving humanity to orbital space — besides the negating of our species by way of extinction, of course — is to allow Mother Nature a chance to heal Earth. That is why we’d have to allow for us to be up there for a few hundred millennia or so.
But besides that, another compelling reason is that it is probably way past time for us to leave the nest, metaphorically speaking. We can stay here and try to continue to live in our own filth; we can clean it up and try to live in an increasingly hyper-regulated super-civilization; or we can spread our wings and reach for the stars. Why shouldn’t we try to spread out and expand the range of our species?
Neil deGrasse Tyson made a very good argument towards that end in an editorial a few years back, but I am having difficulty trying to find it. But one of his more interesting points was that by staying here on Earth and Earth alone, we are limiting ourselves to a very small number of possible outcomes. And none of them are particularly attractive. Stephen Hawking also made news a while back by saying essentially the same thing.
LikeLike
Edward – You may have misunderstood my facetious remarks. There is no way that any techno fixes are going to avoid the disastrous planetary karma we have coming. That we are “destined to go into space” to solve the mess we have created is just a bizarre form of ego inflation or hubris that affects hyper intellectual
scientist types like Tyson, Kaku, and Hawking. These ivory tower fantasists are unable to see the grim facts right in front of them. Even if the tech miracles they dream of were real, their ideas about living out in space are insane. People in my everyday life are crazy enough and more for me. You could not pay me any amount to be cooped up in a space ship with those whacko’s. Their non-solutions are music to the ears of the corporate sponsors of their elaborate TV shows, who are eager to generate enormous profits pandering to the selfish dreams of those they hope to con with visions of happiness in space. The civilizational MO of trash it and move on takes on a cosmic role in their idiotic dreams…
LikeLike
“There is no way that any techno fixes are going to avoid the disastrous planetary karma we have coming.”
I agree. Nor did I say it would. The planet — in the geologic short term period — is doomed. Of that I am virtually certain. What I was addressing was the extinction of our species. And that can be prevented. But — and stop me if you’ve heard this one before — only if we act soon.
“That we are “destined to go into space” to solve the mess we have created is just a bizarre form of ego inflation or hubris that affects hyper intellectual
scientist types like Tyson, Kaku, and Hawking.”
Again, I doubt we can use technology to save humanity if we choose to stay on the Earth. I am not advocating going into space to solve the problem. I’m advocating going into space to escape it. [And its somewhat sad to see you mocking scientists who are among the smartest individuals alive today. If there is anyone that will help us get out of this mess, its the cats with the big brains.]
“Even if the tech miracles they dream of were real, their ideas about living out in space are insane. […] You could not pay me any amount to be cooped up in a space ship with those whacko’s.”
Given the alternative — again, extinction — there are many who would be glad to pay. If just to avoid their own deaths.
“The civilizational MO of trash it and move on takes on a cosmic role in their idiotic dreams…”
It could just be that the metaphor is the Earth as an egg, and humanity is a bird that has just recently hatched not more than a few thousand years ago; a blink of the eye in terms of the universe. Now we are ready to leave the debris behind. Its kind of sad to put it that way, but that may be what we are looking at (if we are lucky).
LikeLike
Why should we put humans in space, so that we can preserve the cancerous HeLa cells and then reinject them into the earth’s ecosystem so they can rampage again? Why don’t we send some porpoises into space and reintroduce them at a future date? Or, as some have been led to do, let’s freeze a goodly population of vertebrates and hope that future technology will come along that will allow us to thaw them into a recovered environment, then they can try again to convert it into as many hits of dopamine as possible. Knowing the cancer ape as I do, I’m sure the hunt for the fountain of youth would commence immediately or at least a trillion tons of CO2 worth of life prolonging medical technologies would be developed, and that’s for only a single generation of human life.
From my headquarters here in Kentucky I’m working on a solution to be marketed globally, it’s called “snake dancin with the stars” and is certain to reduce worldwide population by many millions and be wildly entertaining too. Remember, if the big judge in the sky loves you and the snake doesn’t bite, you live, but if you piss off the snake, you die. Doesn’t have to be a rattlesnake, a Gabon Viper, Cobra or other garden of Eden purveyor of intelligence will work nicely. Just remember, if the snake bite doesn’t kill ya, the cost of the anti-venom will.
LikeLike
Well, yes, my entire line here is presumptive upon the idea that our species is something that is actually worth going through the effort of saving. That is a different topic altogether.
But, as far as we know, we are the only intelligent life forms in the universe, and if that is true then, in us, the universe has become self-aware. That alone makes me think the effort is worth it.
LikeLike
Edward, why? Look at what our “self-awareness” has wrought. It’s maladaptive. Why would you want to propagate it?
What it boils down to is that You think You are Worth Saving. Folks just think up fancy intellectual fol-de-rol to mask this very low basic impulse.
LikeLike
The idea that we should save our species — that we should not allow ourselves to expire like a carton of bad milk — is presumed in all of my writings here. Indeed, I don’t think I’m alone in mourning our coming extinction, and many of us — call us weird — consider it a “bad thing” that we are all going to die horribly and that our deaths are imminent.
Beyond that, I can also understand such misanthropy without embracing it. There are plenty of people out there that piss me off too. But that doesn’t mean we should just kill everyone off because of a few bad apples. That implies a species-oriented bigotry that is simply unpalatable to me.
I think that *we* are worth saving. And it is not a natural, basic impulse at all. I actually happen to think — with all due modesty — that it is a rather highly evolved concept; the idea that we should be concerned about (and do everything we can to avert) the extinction of our species. Again, call me weird.
LikeLike
Agreed. I don’t understand this idea that we should just give up.
LikeLike
Limited self-awareness equals fear of death and wanting to save every human life for as long as possible, as long as the resources hold out. Add in technology and procreative zeal and you have a cancer that will consume the system from which it emerged, thereby destroying itself. Humans are neither rational nor of sound judgment and are therefore disqualified from the intelligence category. Human self-awareness is like a molecule in a cell in a massive organism awaking to find that they are completely insignificant within the operation of their bodily universe. As humans contemplate the expansion of the sun or heat death of the universe, a molecule in your body, if aware, would contemplate the distant time when the body, a seemingly ageless being, would die and its form disintegrate. We are insignificant, stuck in the entropic flow of energy of this universe, bounded by gravity, and should have more humility. Instead, floating here on this dust mote in space we perhaps destroy the single greatest point of complexity in the universe in order to put a dopamine grin on a murderous ape. The only intelligent species in the universe?
LikeLike
“Limited self-awareness equals fear of death and wanting to save every human life for as long as possible, as long as the resources hold out.”
OTOH, the idea of “unlimited self-awareness” sounds like an ambition to ascend to god-hood. While I have no problems with humanity reaching that kind of evolution someday (and indeed, think it is likely, within loose definitions of what a god is), it appears you have already reached that lofty plateau. Congratulations.
As stated above, our solar system has, for all intents and purposes in the short term, unlimited resources, and it is only up to us to harvest them. These are apples ripe for the picking, and much of it is relatively low hanging fruit as well.
And how can you honestly think that “wanting to save every human” is a negative quality?
“Add in technology and procreative zeal and you have a cancer that will consume the system from which it emerged, thereby destroying itself.”
Its not a cancer so much as it is a mutation. [Although cancers are mutations, not all mutations are cancerous.] As an intelligent individual, you are no doubt aware that mutations are required for evolution. The single “organism” that humanity has become — the vast interconnected network of disparate civilizations that dominated the surface of the Earth today — is one that is not only evolving (into an ‘animal’ that possesses unbelievable power), but is also exhibiting all the signs of emergence. It is probable that (if we survive) we are on the threshold of becoming something very special and highly unique in the billion year history of the universe.
“Humans are neither rational nor of sound judgment and are therefore disqualified from the intelligence category.”
Present company excepted, of course. By most of the general definitions available, any species that can control fire fits the definition of an intelligent species. I make that point because, while even the smell of smoke scares the shit out of every other animal that exists (and ever has existed), it gives us humans a warm fuzzy feeling inside; one of of hearth and home. Positive feelings about that scent is likely encoded in our DNA at this point. But fire — more accurately, the ashes of fire — is also what is choking the planet (and ourselves) to death.
“Human self-awareness is like a molecule in a cell in a massive organism awaking to find that they are completely insignificant within the operation of their bodily universe.”
Sorry, but that’s Industrial Age thinking. “We’re all just cogs in a machine; we’re numbers, not human beings”. The development of increasingly more robust and more inter-connected communication technologies (first the telegraph, then the telephone, now the Internet, and who knows what’s next) is doing wonders towards making all of our voices heard. No one is insignificant anymore. [If anything, a huge problem today is that *everyone* is now significant. Too many chefs, etc.]
“As humans contemplate the expansion of the sun or heat death of the universe, a molecule in your body, if aware, would contemplate the distant time when the body, a seemingly ageless being, would die and its form disintegrate. We are insignificant, stuck in the entropic flow of energy of this universe, bounded by gravity, and should have more humility. Instead, floating here on this dust mote in space we perhaps destroy the single greatest point of complexity in the universe in order to put a dopamine grin on a murderous ape.”
Very poetic. And well-written. But a bit of a downer. Which reminds me of the Woody Allen quote: “Mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly.”
“The only intelligent species in the universe?”
By the definition I included above, do you know of another? It may just be that, in this universe, any intelligent species that arises and ever has arisen on countless planets through billions of years is simply fated to kill itself off by overuse of its greatest and old technology: the control of fire.
LikeLike
People have used the term ‘a plague of greedy apes’ to describe the human species, and there is a degree of truth in it.
Bill Mollison summed it up succinctly when he said: “We would not be welcome anywhere in the universe.” We being that portion of humanity that would want to conquer other planets.
However, what I constantly emphasise is that societies tend to be hijacked by the greedy and ruthless. And the present economic-political-social system, based on looting and polluting at the maximum possible rate, is an extraordinary aberration in the grand scheme of things and goes against most basic human instincts.
People living in western societies, and especially those living in large cities, are undoubtedly enduring some of the grossest, most dysfunctional arrangements ever endured by large numbers of humans. And the profound sickness of most members of ‘civilised’ societies is now abundantly clear, with the US being the sickest society on this planet. I believe Max Keiser recently quoted Americans as consuming 50% of the pharmaceuticals produced on Earth (and having the worst health of any ‘advanced’ nation).
LikeLike
“People have used the term ‘a plague of greedy apes’ to describe the human species, and there is a degree of truth in it.”
All species are greedy (for lack of a better word). It is only us humans that are evolved enough — or intelligent enough — to recognize it as a moral weakness. And that is because we are the apex predator of this geologic epoch. Greed, in the wild, is basically gluttony. Give any animal plenty of food, plenty of suitable mates, and an absence of predators, and they would simply get fat and do the animal equivalent of eating bonbons and watching soap operas all day. Greed/gluttony is a byproduct of evolution. With it/them, the mechanism of natural selection probably wouldn’t work.
“Bill Mollison summed it up succinctly when he said: “We would not be welcome anywhere in the universe.” We being that portion of humanity that would want to conquer other planets.”
A) There is no proof that there would be any species out there intelligent enough to withdraw the welcome mat. While it is likely that there is *something* out there with enough smarts to produce an extraterrestrial version of the Kardashians, until we actually come across definitive evidence, we must assume that we are *it*.
B) I would say, however, that if there is intelligent life out there, it is probably composed in a manner to us at the fundamental level; genetics, and all that stuff. And if genetics are involved, then so is evolution. And if evolution is involved, then they are just as greedy and gluttonous as we are; perhaps more so, because there is no guarantee that they have the same moral limiters we do. [Although, if they got to the point where they have any civilizations that are above the level of the Taliban, then they probably did evolve these ethics and morals. And that’s simply based on the idea that they are survival mechanisms.]
C) One does not simply “conquer planets”. Unless there is an intelligent species there to subjugate (or eradicate), there is no conquering involved. Instead, what is likely to happen under a best case scenario is a colonization of a planet with an advanced ecosystem. At that point, it is hoped that we humans will be a little more careful with the next garden paradise we are presented with.
“However, what I constantly emphasise is that societies tend to be hijacked by the greedy and ruthless. And the present economic-political-social system, based on looting and polluting at the maximum possible rate, is an extraordinary aberration in the grand scheme of things and goes against most basic human instincts.”
The first sentence is historically true, although there is nothing carved in granite that says that is the way it must be. Also note that, as time goes on, we become more and more suspicious of the greedy and ruthless. That is why, for example, democracies have become the dominant system of governance in the world, replacing monarchical dictators. The world would be in a mess if we were still run by the kings and emperors of days past.
The second sentence I only partially agree with: while better than before, its still pretty bad. However, it is not an aberration at all. It is business as usual, actually. The rich have always screwed everyone else, and the poor have always taken it up the ass. The difference now is that we have a large group of people in the middle. The middle class. And that helps to create some degree of balance between the two, historically oppositional classes. [But the middle class is vanishing rather quickly, so there’s that.]
“People living in western societies, and especially those living in large cities, are undoubtedly enduring some of the grossest, most dysfunctional arrangements ever endured by large numbers of humans.”
Urban living used to be a lot worse than it is now. A hell of a lot worse. Things have gotten better and, in fact, our future may be made at least tolerable by the existence of cities.
“And the profound sickness of most members of ‘civilised’ societies is now abundantly clear, with the US being the sickest society on this planet. I believe Max Keiser recently quoted Americans as consuming 50% of the pharmaceuticals produced on Earth (and having the worst health of any ‘advanced’ nation).”
No disagreements there!
LikeLike
“Because the idea of moving humanity to orbital space — besides the negating of our species by way of extinction, of course — is to allow Mother Nature a chance to heal Earth. That is why we’d have to allow for us to be up there for a few hundred millennia or so.”
righty right then, just move 8 billion people to space, no problemo. 8 billion people.
i don’t post a lot here, and i try to never be confrontational, but there is a difference between having dreams, and being stark raving mad. 8 billion people, drop in the bucket.
i’ve read Asimov’s fantasies, he’s a great writer, good for fights of fancy. it takes us years to build a battleship, so what? going to pop down to Home Depot and snatch up an Erector Set to the stars? not going to happen.
and once we have these swell new spaceships with .3 square feet for every inhabitant of Earth, what about all that shit? compost it for soil? not bad, not bad.
and disease? when one inmate carries Ebola? or are we going to pick and choose the desirable and undesirable?
and speaking of dirt, going to haul that all up there to Elysium? for use in your snap cracking new greenhouses? because that’s what’s going to happen to any glass or composites up there, a speck of dust at 15,000 mph, let alone a pebble, or a piece of titanium left over from all the junk we’ve left up there, going to do a number on metal hulls, much worse on anything thin enough to admit light.
dream on my brother, dream on, i guess it’s better than nightmares.
sounds more like an “elitist fantasy” to me, more of the sort of thinking that got us into this mess.
LikeLike
I didn’t say it would be easy, or cheap, or something that could done overnight.
But just remember what the US did in WW2; from early 1942 to the end of the war some 3-1/2 years later. When it started, we had the world’s 8th strongest military. By its end, we were cranking out material at a rate that still boggles the mind. [In 1943, we were building *three* Liberty Ships a day and sending them across the oceans loaded with shit. We were literally making them faster than the German U-boats could sink them.]
Today, it is similar, except the situation is much more dire. But, to our advantage, we have far more people and far greater resources (to the tune of several orders of magnitude on each) that we can utilize to combat the problem.
The important thing for us to understand is that this current situation is not like a war; it *is* a war. And it is Mother Nature that has declared war on us. [Not that anyone could blame her: look at how we’ve abused her all these years.] And this is an enemy unlike any that any civilization has ever had to deal with. Compared to her, Hitler and Genghis Khan were mere teletubbies. So we need to start treating it as a war, and we need to fully mobilize towards that end. Each day that we fail to do so brings us one day closer to defeat.
“i don’t post a lot here, and i try to never be confrontational, but there is a difference between having dreams, and being stark raving mad. 8 billion people, drop in the bucket.”
To be clear, it is likely that half that number of people will be dead before we even get started. We could have a billion people dead before this even gets the green light to go ahead. But my point (above) is that once you start cranking out material on a mega-industrial scale (like the Liberty ships), there really isn’t much difference between 500,000 widgets and 1,000,000 widgets. And that goes for Sherman tanks as well as orbiting space colonies.
[Assume, for argument’s sake, that the wedges of a Stanford Torus-type space colony are virtually identical, and also assume that we are talking about, say, 5 pieces for each degree of the torus. That would make 1800 wedges per colony. For 100,000 colonies, that would be around 180,000,000 of these units. The Chinese alone can knock that out in a few days. 😉 ]
“i’ve read Asimov’s fantasies, he’s a great writer, good for fights of fancy. it takes us years to build a battleship, so what? going to pop down to Home Depot and snatch up an Erector Set to the stars? not going to happen.”
I don’t think a battleship has been built in at least 75 years (or something like that).
“..and speaking of dirt, going to haul that all up there to Elysium? for use in your snap cracking new greenhouses? because that’s what’s going to happen to any glass or composites up there, a speck of dust at 15,000 mph, let alone a pebble, or a piece of titanium left over from all the junk we’ve left up there, going to do a number on metal hulls, much worse on anything thin enough to admit light.”
I addressed both of these previously. We will likely be hauling millions of tons of material up there by way of numerous space elevators. [Not to mention the asteroid harvesting. Again.] We can deal with micro-meteors with sophisticated monitors, bots and space drones; we should, with little difficulty, be able capture any space junk that makes its way into our LOS.
“dream on my brother, dream on, i guess it’s better than nightmares.”
Well, that alone may make it worth the cost. Anything that gives people hope — even if its false hope, which this certainly isn’t — is better than the despair, gloom and doom I see (and have personally felt) upon becoming aware of what the facts are regarding our near future prospects for survival.
“sounds more like an “elitist fantasy” to me, more of the sort of thinking that got us into this mess.”
On more than one occasion, the elites have demonstrated quite ably that they actually knew what the fuck they were talking about.
LikeLike
I haven’t bothered to argue with Edward Kirby. He is a troll of the more benign variety (no name calling or vitriol thus far). But I’ll add a few things at this point.
The notion that setting up permanent habitation (humans and others) in space is a mere engineering problem on the cusp of being solved is just dumb. Although we can imagine the tech (space elevators and such) to get us there, we’re obviously nowhere close. Further, all life on Planet Earth is evolved and adapted to life under conditions of gravity, atmospheric or marine pressure, and abundance of water. Except for pressure, those are not conditions possible to synthesize in orbit as yet despite the ubiquitous image in science fiction films of rotating habitats using centrifugal force as a substitute. We already know that humans lose considerable muscle tone and bone density after prolonged space flight. It’s not difficult to foresee how plants and microbes could easily become confused in a non-Earth environment and fail to thrive. Goodbye to food.
Edward Kirby sez: The important thing for us to understand is that this current situation is not like a war; it *is* a war. And it is Mother Nature that has declared war on us. [Not that anyone could blame her: look at how we’ve abused her all these years.] And this is an enemy unlike any that any civilization has ever had to deal with. Compared to her, Hitler and Genghis Khan were mere teletubbies. So we need to start treating it as a war, and we need to fully mobilize towards that end. Each day that we fail to do so brings us one day closer to defeat.
This perspective (war against nature) is an artifact of the emerging scientific mind of the late Enlightenment, where some believed that humans must subdue nature and wrest from her all secrets. It’s clearly a maniacal and paranoid perspective (that is, wrong) and a far cry from animism, where we used to believe ourselves participants in nature’s cycles and processes (which is correct). Additionally, Mr. Kirby has invoked Godwin’s Law and thus conceded all claims to credibility. You’re quite safe to ignore him going forward.
LikeLike
“I haven’t bothered to argue with Edward Kirby. He is a troll of the more benign variety (no name calling or vitriol thus far). But I’ll add a few things at this point.”
Why thank you Brutus! You’re so kind. Please let me return the favor by pointing out that your mother isn’t the ugliest woman I have refused to have sex with. 😉
However, just to be clear about something, I would love to know how you define my comments as trolling. The definition that Wikipedia has is the one that I am most familiar with: “…a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community… with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.” Does that not fit your definition as well? Or is there some other “more benign” sub-definition that I am unaware of? If so, please illuminate me, and thanks in advance.
Otherwise, please advise as to who it is I am upsetting, and what conversations I am disrupting. I would like to remedy any misconceptions I may have given regarding my intentions.
Of course, there is always the possibility that you are lobbing a particularly weak ad hominem attack at me in advance of an even weaker main argument.
Let’s see, shall we…?
“The notion that setting up permanent habitation (humans and others) in space is a mere engineering problem on the cusp of being solved is just dumb.”
If that’s the case, then I will have to be content to take the short, yellow bus to school with my fellow dummies Stephen Hawking, Neil deGrasse Tyson, and Freeman Dyson. Among many others. But, to be fair here, its not a matter of being “on the cusp of being solved” so much as it is the last best chance we have at survival. We need to go forward with the idea that, whatever obstacles lie in the critical path, we can remove them and keep the project moving forward. Failure, as the saying goes, is not an option here.
“Although we can imagine the tech (space elevators and such) to get us there, we’re obviously nowhere close.”
I never said we were. There is a lot of work to be done.
“Further, all life on Planet Earth is evolved and adapted to life under conditions of gravity, atmospheric or marine pressure, and abundance of water. Except for pressure, those are not conditions possible to synthesize in orbit as yet despite the ubiquitous image in science fiction films of rotating habitats using centrifugal force as a substitute. We already know that humans lose considerable muscle tone and bone density after prolonged space flight. It’s not difficult to foresee how plants and microbes could easily become confused in a non-Earth environment and fail to thrive. Goodbye to food.”
Good points, both of them. But I don’t see either as insurmountable obstacles that can’t be overcome. Especially since extinction is knocking on the front door and impatiently looking at its watch.
“This perspective (war against nature) is an artifact of the emerging scientific mind of the late Enlightenment, where some believed that humans must subdue nature and wrest from her all secrets. It’s clearly a maniacal and paranoid perspective (that is, wrong) and a far cry from animism, where we used to believe ourselves participants in nature’s cycles and processes (which is correct).”
You misunderstand me, despite my best intentions to avoid just that. [And I just *knew* that someone would misread that, too.] It is not our war on Mother Nature that I write of here, but rather *her* war on *us* that is of concern. The perspective you speak of is wrong because you are looking through the other end of the telescope at the problem. She is going to war against us, and what’s more, she is going to kick our asses.
“Additionally, Mr. Kirby has invoked Godwin’s Law and thus conceded all claims to credibility.”
Your understanding of Godwin is almost as bad as your understanding of what constitutes trolling. This is not hyperbole. The comparison is apt because of the numbers of the dead being discussed. If you don’t think that climate change will kill more people than both of those maniacs combined (and multiplied by fifty), then we have a different disagreement altogether.
“You’re quite safe to ignore him going forward.”
They’re all safe anyway. What am I going to do, force my opinion on them?
LikeLike
I had concluded it was not worth wasting any more time on your ridiculous narratives before I read Brutus’ comment. It is a characteristic of trolls to ignore al science-based argument and carry on annoying everyone with their drivel until everyone ignores them. Even then. some trolls won’t give up. NBL suffered from that phenomenon, and it eventually wrecked the site.
This site is about the real world, and your longwinded fantasies are cluttering it up.
By the way, since you have apparently not noticed, US oil extraction peaked in 1970, and that peaking roughly corresponded with the peaking of US capacity to do much on a grand scale, other than print money into existence..
.
LikeLike
“It is a characteristic of trolls to ignore al science-based argument and carry on annoying everyone with their drivel until everyone ignores them.”
I’m sorry, but anyone who thinks the moon landings were a hoax has no foundation with which to lecture anyone else on anything related to science.
This is like when creationist Mike Huckabee told CNN that life begins in the womb “because its been proven by science”. If you are a creationist, you are simply not qualified to speak *anything* related to science, and should be ignored in that respect.
And that goes double when it comes to speaking about climatology.
Sorry for the harshness of the tone, but that just happens to be something I strongly believe in.
LikeLike
“No one that believes the Moon landing claims should be allowed to call themselves a scientist.”
See below.
LikeLike
No, but thank you.
LikeLike
Still quite safe to ignore. I thought I might rise just once to your trollbait but have already had a good giggle over what you write, so I’m satisfied.
LikeLike
So not even a peep about the definition of trolling? I thought that maybe you’d at least be willing to defend that one.
But OK…
LikeLike
LikeLike
I’ve been away from my computer for a few days and am woefully behind responding to this post and the comments thread on the previous post. Please excuse me if I combine a few things.
td0s sez: Changing our minds, changing how we think, is physically speaking one of the easiest things we can do. However, when our egos and our identities are wholly interwoven with an idea or an ideology, changing our way of thinking and discarding the old ideas, can be the hardest thing we are asked to undertake.
Many who write about collapse insist that we must think anew in order to establish some sort of right-think and then evolve an approach that fits our needs in concert with what few effective and meaningful courses of action remain. Comments in the previous thread pointed out (rather harshly) that Naomi Klein ministers to the few among the liberal class absorbed by knowledge of collapse by seeking new mental models. Others, such as Edward Kirby (above) suggest a new thought paradigm pointed toward developing refugia in orbital space. B9K9 recommended we relax and watch it all unfold because our fate is already sealed. Frankly, some recommendations are risible, others place faith in futile resistance, and yet others go to resigned fatalism. A one-size-fits-all response is impossible, of course, but I would suggest that simple physical constraints are far more predictive than any imagined paradigms about to burst forth. Thus, I find each form of right-think full of flaws (not bothering to argue details here) but am nonetheless faced with choosing what to do — either action or inaction as was pointed out to me earlier. As always, practical, ethical, and moral considerations collide.
I think of myself as a doomer not because I relish the prospect but because I see that it’s flatly unavoidable despite all the information at our disposal and imaginative solutions brainstormed. I also believe that preparations are, as a result, pointless and wasteful because timing and details are impossible to predict with enough accuracy to plan effectively. Yet my instinct is to prepare and resist, probably in some small, symbolic measure (e.g., psychologically) that will certainly be swept away by history’s riptides. So I’ve not yet given up or stared down the gun barrel. But the constant harangues are wearing me down as much as the pointless thought experiments.
It occurs to me, too, that strategically, wild imbalances of capital resources and various knowing misdirections as theorists (bloggers, journalists, social critics) minster to their constituencies might not be so bad for two reasons: (1) more equitable distribution of capital would likely lead to even greater or faster resource depletion (think Jevon’s Paradox) and (2) the public would go positively apeshit if the someone had the power to make stick the truth about our collective predicament and then did so. In a strange, backwards logic sort of way, we’re already mitigating an even worse immediate potential, though the end results remain unaltered. So be careful what you wish for, I guess, as nothing is so direct in its effects that we know which approach is most salutary.
LikeLike
Brutus, please don’t take this as a criticism – it’s not. It seems to me you are working really hard to assure yourself that there is no way out or meaningful course of action in the situation we are in as you see it. I suppose there is a kind of relief in giving up the search for solutions, a resting in the assumed futility of such efforts. But as many times as I find myself seeming to dwell in that oasis of throwing off all concern for the world and it’s fate, inevitably something rises up within me that still hopes against hope for a sliver of possibility. It’s crazy I know, but that’s how it is for me….
I just can’t finally throw in the towel on humanity.
LikeLike
I’m not biased toward anything so much as the truth (best as I can ascertain). If there were a few modest steps forward for the hundreds of steps backward, maybe I could entertain some hope against hope. (I like that phrase and have used it myself.) However, the hits just keep piling up without respite, and everything we learn and figure out regarding human institutions and frailties point to no way out until the final exit.
So it comes down to which I prize more: unstinting truth or illusions I know to be false. But don’t get me wrong. I’ll still throw in with futile resistance and bringing meaning out of oblivion. Like Kevin Moore, I think there are still things worth doing even though they lead nowhere.
LikeLike
I’ve been posting much, much less in recent days. I read and hear what comes out of people and just roll my eyes (either figuratively or actually).
I hear it all and the responses are so predictable especially if you are a reader of wide array of genres. I’m not equating reading with any sense of my being brighter or better than others. I’ve gone through most if not all possibilities over the last 40 years. I’ve been like a salmon swimming against the stream or better yet against all the other salmon going in the right direction to breed while I’m heading away and getting caught in the swarm.
As a former member of the L-5 society I long ago had to accept we’re not going into space in any kind of John W. Campbell (editor of Astounding) way.
I sat in on 12-step meetings for years. My experience is that most of those in the rooms are exchanging one form of addiction for another (maybe less destructive or maybe not in the end).
I waited for years (after 2008) while going to DA meeting for someone to share about the financial system and what it was. In all the years there I was the only one and people stayed away from me as if I had the plague. Denial is not just a river in Egypt (and with an Egyptian judge sentencing over 700 people to death a mass trial I think more than denial is working in Egypt).
There’s a DA meeting in NYC that focuses on Visions and attracts about 60 -80 people each week. It’s packed. As they go around the room having people state what they are seeing in their future all I hear is money, money, money (almost like a choruses of Joel Grey’s from Cabaret) or big house, big house, huge house, land, land, land, rolling brook with fish in it, success, success, success. Other than myself I’ve never heard anyone say I vision a future where we stop murdering over 200 other species a day. So much for what is called “recovery.”
Maybe Alice Miller had something. Wonder if she had lived longer whether she’d have the courage to face the truth of what we have done because most of us sure don’t. Just look at the final chapter of Elizabeth Colbert’s book The Sixth Extinction. “I have to hope,” she writes. Was she pressured to write that ending or is this what she really believes. Coming from parents who survived the Holocaust looking at hope is a two sided coin. She may believed it was hope that got her parents through the dark days. Only on the other hand how much help was hope in the first place in stopping the madness before it escalated to such a orgy of death.
Finally got around to watching the Dan Miller presentation on Climate Change. What an experience. It seems to date back to around 2010. It’s stunning. If you focus on the first part of the talk and weed through the capitalistic solutions of the second part the conclusion what you are hearing is mind blowing. Here Guy McPherson is taking so much abuse for talking about NTE by 2030. Yet, four years ago Dan Miller was saying pretty much the same message. No one seems to be attacking this guy with all his BAU “solutions” that continues to keep us on the same track we’ve been traveling on for centuries. That Dan, must have been one heck of a CEO for Ask.com.
It’s what Miller says that needs to be attended to. If we didn’t change from BAU (and we haven’t, have we? correct me if I’m wrong) we could expect to see a 6C rise by end of 21st century and the game would be over for humans. Dan acknowledges that information is coming in faster and faster over time and that what is occurring is happening quicker and quicker. Much sooner than the scientists had originally stated. With this in mind, and the fact that this presentation is four years ago why is the conclusion that Guy has come to so outrageous?
Three weeks ago the woman we farm with took me to task for bringing up the CA drought. She said she sees no evidence at the supermarket. Flash forward a few weeks. A co-worker of a friend of mine says she couldn’t find blueberries in the grocery store. It’s just like with tipping points and positive feedback loops, you have to have the courage to act before they get triggered because once they do believing there will be some sort of negative reaction to correct the situation in time to prevent massive or compete destruction is a pathology of the illness named HOPE. I believe you can find this diagnosis in the latest version of the DSM (Oh wait I’m wrong, HOPE is one of the protocols offered as a way to mental health).
Just the thought of a human being thinking we are worth saving and sending us out into space to inflict this all over prompts me to want to heave. There is no mention that we are all to some extent complicit in this destruction. Where is the moral and ethical outrage instead of the cool rational unemotional assumption that we murders (and probably those more responsible for the mess than others) that we should be allowed to escape without being punished for our crimes.
It’s so similar to what occurred after WWII. How many Nazi’s were not punished or let go after a short time in prision? How many were absorbed in the US like Von Braun? How many US companies that were in Germany earning huge profits while people died paid a price for their actions?
LikeLike
I don’t think there’s any one-size-fits-all answer on how to respond to the mess a subset of our species have gotten us into, other than to recognize it as a mess and try to understand how it happened. Trying to survive no matter what, whether by defending a survivalist farm with guns or enabling a few people to repeat the whole mistake somewhere in outer space, seems selfish, elitist, and hubristic to me — understandable and “natural,” but, I think, an early-in-the-process reaction to fear and despair (plus the predominantly male instinct to try to “fix”).
Though my children and grandchildren are unutterably special to me, I don’t think anyone, ultimately, is more special than anyone else. We should all “go down” together, sharing what’s left of what preserves life as equitably as possible, including with other species. Who knows? Maybe, even doing it this way, a few will survive.
What I’m trying to do (and hope to be given the grace to continue doing) is draw on my spiritual resources to act as much as possible according to my beliefs. This includes acting out of love rather than fear as much as possible…for life, of which death, even of a species, is a natural part. To this I would add not wasting time and energy judging, criticizing, arguing with, or fighting others, except in self-defense.
P.S. I’ve found the regular but judicious consumption of some forms of mass entertainment, “escapism,” or whatever you want to call it to be essential to whatever’s left of my sanity. I’ll be glad when these are no longer available, because then we’ll have to band together, but I’ll enjoy them as a substitute in the meanwhile. They don’t corrupt my mind, because I remain conscious throughout.
LikeLike
‘we are hopelessly lost in a declining spiral vortex of debt and corruption that will only change with war and civil unrest.’
Having campaigned on a platform of bring back honesty and accountability to local government and the need to establish sustainable practices, New Plymouth mayor Andrew Judd has quickly morphed into a shill for the oil and gas sector, and their loot-and-pollute agenda which will bring forward the time when the planet becomes uninhabitable for humans. Apparently very happy to see his children’s lives ruined, he has back-flipped on practically everything he was saying less than a year ago.
Yesterday’s news:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/taranaki-daily-news/news/9983387/Judd-looking-for-energy-sister-cities
After campaigning against sister city relationships New Plymouth Mayor Andrew Judd is now actively looking to establish an international network of energy sister cities.
Judd told Chinese media this month that New Plymouth needed to build intensive business relationships, especially in China.
“An initiative from that could be forming a sort of sister city connection where oil districts together can combine our connections,” Judd told the Chinese state press agency Xinhua.
Judd told the Taranaki Daily News that he wanted to see cities linked on a basis of mutual economic interests rather than on ceremonial ties such as gardens.
“Let’s find sister cities that really have things in common with us, because we are the oil and gas centre for New Zealand.”
Other areas Judd mentioned where connections could be found were the dairy industry, tourism, education and engineering.
His new stance is in stark contrast to a letter Judd wrote to the Daily News in June 2013, when the then-councillor blasted former mayor Harry Duynhoven over $90,000 spent on a New Plymouth garden in Kunming.
Judd challenged Duynhoven to “produce one enduring economic benefit New Plymouth District has received as a result of either sister city since their inception”.
New Plymouth-based NZ-China communications company Wonder Street welcomed Judd’s initiative.
“I think [Mayor Judd] is heading in the right direction,” co-manager Estella McDonald, a Beijing native, said.
McDonald said China had been expanding its oil and gas National Strategic Reserve, and given New Plymouth’s oil and gas industry, there were “large possibilities for profitable prospects [of] benefit to both sides”.
“It’s more realistic [in terms of business] to introduce New Plymouth to the world as an energy and tourism hub, because both are very attractive to the Chinese people.”
McDonald hoped the new sister city policy would “give China the full picture of what New Plymouth has to offer”.
Judd has already back-flipped on the existing relationships with Mishima in Japan and Kunming in China and admitted they have merit.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-04-28/crash-inevitable-spiral-vortex-debt-and-corruption
What you have to realize is that this trend is inevitable – YES. Why? Because there can be no change without pain. It is unrealistic to expect government to simply say OMG, you are right – let’s reform! Gee, here is the power we stole unconstitutionally – sorry! My bad! Political change does not take place without pain. This is what revolution is all about. Government has NEVER even once in recorded history simply said it was wrong and handed back power without anything causing such a change. This is just the way things function. This is Jefferson’s Tree of Liberty that must be fed with the blood of tyrants and patriots.
LikeLike
We can at least dance to the gloom and doom, right?
LikeLike
Well said Brutus. I also believe there are still things worth doing, but I think they do lead somewhere. My own understanding of our multidimensional problems is that one strand is our excessive and sometimes exclusive reliance on and identification with rationality and a scientific definition of reality. Intuition and the vast realm of the unknown get short shrift when we live in a world that seldom refers to them and indeed seeks to discredit them at every turn. The contempt of those only comfortable in their daylight world of the known and provable cuts them off from the rich possibilities of dimensions beyond the obvious.
Maybe the thrust of life to evolve higher possibilities will fail soon here on Earth. But I can imagine an inner dimension of meaning, value, and purpose that transcends our local situation and feeds on what of truth and love and beauty has been realized here, and is accessible anywhere in the evolving universe where beings have developed the means for tapping into that storehouse and using it to guide and further their growth. Even our mistakes may be valuable in that sense. The emissaries of the left brain worldview may be quick to scoff at such possibilities, but even their own cosmologists acknowledge the probability of subtle dimensions enfolded within our seemingly prosaic reality. Our little planet may be only a single cell in the vast bodymind of an evolving cosmic being….
LikeLike
I believe we are witnessing the final battle between good and evil. I am not referring to some mysterious being who lives ‘up there’ doing battle with his adversary who lives ‘down there’ (very Egyptian); I am referring to the wisdom acquired over 200,000 years of hunter-gatherer existence and basic instincts which provided the ground rules for human societies that worked for extended time frames without tearing themselves to pieces (as current ‘advanced’ societies are doing).
This is the final battle because if the corporations and money-lenders win over the coming few years, the final decades of life on this planet will be extraordinarily awful for most of the inhabitants. And as we have discussed many times, there is no second chance for the biosphere.
I believe the correspondence between biblical ‘end times’ and what we are witnessing is simply due to the fact that people living 3,000 years ago knew what works and what does not, and so it becomes inevitable that if men (and women) become lovers of themselves and become acquisitive and greedy society will collapse.
As we here know, corporations have fostered the very behaviours (acquisitiveness and greed) that cause societies to collapse. So, how much longer are the slaves going to adhere to the rules of the slave-masters, bearing in mind that the conditions for most slaves are deteriorating rapidly?
LikeLike
“I believe we are witnessing the final battle between good and evil.”
This is a central reality necessary to cognize if one is to understand our world and it’s fundamental dynamics. For a variety of reasons most people refuse to see this or consider it’s implications. One way they do this is to assign some archaic and nonsensical meanings to the terms of this equation, thus rendering it a priori invalid. Some fanciful borrowed ideas about “God” or “Satan” serve well to discard any ideas about a cosmic struggle of powerful forces.
But what if we take the proposition we are considering into the dimension of physics? What if we use the terms increasing entropy and counter entropic dynamics of life processes? Irwin Schrodinger in his little book “What is Life?” invites us to consider how unlikely and seemingly fragile the emergence of life is in a universe seemingly ruled by the iron second law of thermodynamics, aka increasing entropy or disorder. Some thinkers like Paul Chefurka – who I greatly respect – seem to imply that we are helpless in the face of the universal forces of Death. Sorry if I have grossly simplified or mangled your viewpoint Paul – all for the sake of making my point.
Poetic interlude:
My candle burns at both ends;
It will not last the night;
But ah, my foes, and oh, my friends—
It gives a lovely light!
Edna Saint Vincent Milay
Of course Death may seem to “win” in the “end”. But the “battle” referred to above, may be more fruitfully seen as a dance, and one of great beauty and eternal value at that. So let’s take our turns and swirls with as deep an appreciation and devotion as we can, in service to the vast cosmic drama of which we are a part, and snatch the enticing fruit of life as we dance for our few moments on the edge of eternity….
LikeLike
“You don’t see something until you have the right metaphor to let you perceive it”
Thomas Kuhn
The Battle…Good vs Evil…Light vs Dark
perhaps the oldest and most basic metaphor
LikeLike
Great post. Enjoyed all of it. Thanks.
LikeLike
Found it! a quote from a book first printed in 1991. “Even as you read these words, our world is dying. It has been systematically desacralized & exploited by modern society to the point where huge areas are already wastelands, & the effect is spreading. It is essential that we do something now to reverse the process.” ~John Matthews, the Celtic Shaman, a handbook. That was written a quarter century ago. Step aside, & leave the lemmings to their downfall, or cull the recalcitrant? I prefer the former.
LikeLike
PA – the fracking state with a bankrupt capitol – now shines with this wonderful judicial ruling:
brought to you by As The Vice Turns, the reality behind the news
http://jonathanturley.org/2014/04/29/pennsylvania-judge-orders-widows-house-sold-for-failure-to-pay-6-30-in-unpaid-interest/
Pennsylvania Judge Orders Widow’s House Sold For Failure To Pay $6.30 In Unpaid Interest
Beaver County Common Pleas Judge Gus Kwidis is under file this week after he ordered the home of a widow, Eileen Battisti sold for failure to pay $6.30 in unpaid interest to the county. Kwidis ruled that Battisti had ample notice and only has herself to blame for losing her home. Others see the blame lying elsewhere in a decision that elevated a de minimus violation above simple justice.
Battisti’s husband took care of these bills but passed away. She says that she never noticed the remaining $6.30 due on interest. However, Kwidis held that the county tax claim bureau complied with notification requirements in state law before the auction and “[t]here is no doubt that (she) had actual receipt of the notification of the tax upset sale on July 7, 2011, and Aug. 16, 2011. Moreover, on Aug. 12, 2011, a notice of sale was sent by first class mail and was not returned.”
However, there remains that little question of justice — and the notion of discretion. If there is no role for a court to play in such matters, we could handle these cases by computer.
The couple had previously owed other taxes, but at the time of the sale owed just $235, including other interest and fees. They sold the house from under her for $116,000. Such sales usually generate low prices as distress sales.
Joe Askar, Beaver County’s chief solicitor, insisted that the country and the judge were right in forcing the sale, but then added “It’s bad – she had some hard times, I guess her husband kind of took care of a lot of that stuff. It seemed that she was having a hard time coping with the loss of her husband – that just made it set in a little more.” It is remarkable that Askar would acknowledge such mitigating circumstances over less than seven bucks and yet believe that this was an appropriate and justifiable act. It cost more for the prosecutors and court to meet to issue the order. It cost more to actually put the property up for sale. Yet, even with the mitigating factor of her husband’s death, this was not viewed as sufficient reason for a modicum of mercy.
LikeLike
The primary challenge artists face in dealing with contemporary society is the seeming inability to stop focusing on abstract issues when times require alternative measures. While it appears to be important to understand core underlying drivers, the dopamine delivery system that drives all human activity really tweaks the ego in its never ending quest for answers, even when they are clearly evident.
Consider, for a moment, the multi-year debates regarding the proper, just & moral role of society, economy & politics during the decades after WWI. The, in a flash, the world was confronted with the reality of a militarized corporate state actually acting out its stated objectives. What does the artist do at that point? Continue to discuss, consider and contemplate, or get off the fucking pot?
The latest attempt at regime change in Russia is our 9/1/39 moment – only, this time, we’re the corporate militarized state. Regardless of who’s the instigator, the motivations driving these policy decisions are really quite simple: everything discussed on this blog and elsewhere on the interwebs is true. Unfortunately, while we thought we had plenty of time in which to complain, bitch & moan, reality is beginning to prepare its last call.
Not only are there not going to be any space colonies, there isn’t going to be any kind of open, free discourse about the various problems, alternatives & solutions we face either. Rather, we’re nearing the point where the sheep are going to be made aware of the issues at hand, not out of some kind of benevolent outreach program, but rather, as a means of getting complete buy-in to the actions being planned.
There is no way we are going to avoid price controls, rationing and an overreaching management of everyday life as the health of the state relishes its final moment of glory commanding all available resources towards one grand play at the brass ring.
You guys can continue dwelling, but I really do suggest you look up and recognize what you’ve been predicting all along has actually arrived.
LikeLike
What makes you think that us guys (many of us here) have not realized this for a long time?
LikeLike
He needs to constantly remind us that we don’t “get it” so he can maintain his superiority narrative.
LikeLike
Price controls? Nixon proved that was a fool’s errand. In an inflationary money-printing to infinity environment, I’d give it about 6-8 weeks until the subsidies to keep the prices in place consume all the next 50 years fiscal income. I’m sure such a program will quickly descend into starvation and the obliteration of functional society.
LikeLike
Edward – Your comments make clear that you do not believe industrial society will collapse in the near future. Why is that?
LikeLike
I have no idea why that is the impression you are getting from me. It couldn’t be more wrong.
To be clear:
I think there is a 20% chance that, by 2030, we will be in the throes of a total societal meltdown and we will be irreversibly on the road towards the eventual extinction of our species (and far down it, too). I also believe that by 2100, that chance jumps up to 80%.
I think the next El Nino event could trash the summer ice in the Arctic Ocean, thus ending our current 2.58 million year-old ice age. [Ironically, the same ice age whose beginning brought the apes down from the trees from whence Australopithecus evolved. Our time on this Earth is essentially being bookended by this geologic event.]
I think that capitalism is, for all intents and purposes, dead. It died in the previous decade and its corpse — like the “Weekend at Bernie’s” host — is mainly moving around on momentum alone (or being shuttled around, like Bernie’s “friends”). What we have now is not capitalism; its a dead cat bounce. [Communism, of course, died during the ’80s.] What is required is something completely different than what the political left and right are offering us. But instead of new ideas, we get retrenching and new lipstick on the same old pigs.
I think the political parties have devolved into the standard elites vs. elites battles (to maintain their share of a shrinking pie) that is a mainstay of the final days of great civilizations. These fallen empires have all seemed to have gone through these kinds of internal struggles, where the leadership cadres completely ignoring — to their ultimate folly — the discontent of the poor that seemed to be everywhere. One of the typical symptoms is massive debt accumulation by the central government (usually due to poorly considered and ill-advised foreign entanglements), resulting in a failing national economy. Another symptom (as the tipping point is reached) is a sudden and dramatic spike in food prices. Failing to remedy that spike is a key indicator that the total collapse is inevitable as well as imminent. When the mothers are out in the street along with the students and intellectuals, that is the time to man the barricades.
So yeah, I think societal collapse is coming, and could be here by the end of this decade. The next presidential election could very well be the last.
LikeLike
Edward, the reason I got the impression you did not understand what industrial civ’s collapse would entail is that your fantastic space adventures are totally dependent on a massive functioning industrial base with unreal amounts of energy at it’s disposal. That just ain’t going to be there post collapse.
LikeLike
I know.
But I believe that the boost to the global economy that such a ‘war’ mobilization would provide — even if for a short time — would be enough to do trick. Remember that the Soviet Union lasted half a century with a wartime economy before it sputtered to a halt. The US — and the rest of the world, for that matter; after all, we’re all in this together — could last on adrenaline as such for at least a decade or two.
Barring total environmental collapse — highly likely within that kind of time frame, IMHO — and total economic failure (averted with ‘war’ spending, one would hope), we might just be able to pull this off. [Even with total environmental collapse, we might still be able to pull this off. But that would depend on the Form of the Destroyer.]
But a huge question — one that no one here has addressed yet — is “what other alternatives do we have?” Until we get that one answered, I’d say “space colonies, it is”.
And for all the posts in this rather lengthy thread, that unanswered question is the 800 pound gorilla in the room.
LikeLike
Edward….I would say be/create a substantial social example(s) of large 150 to 300 people, mostly self sufficient communes…..got to be a heck of a lot easier than space colonies…..probably could almost be completely set up in the southern USA for around 3 million. http://thecommunalsolution.info/ no need to respond here (there’s no interest on this site)……call me on the phone if your interested.
LikeLike
The surface of the Earth will be ravaged by roving gangs of young men. These predators will take out anything that looks like it may provide food, including other humans. The 1%ers will have their gated-communities-on-steroids to protect them, and that will work for a while; but eventually, they too will run out of vital supplies. The Earth will be no place to try sustainable living in 100 years, and maybe less.
In addition, a key point is for humanity to leave the Earth so as to allow Mother Nature a chance to heal herself.
LikeLike
Like this? http://www.afterearth.com/site/
LikeLike
More like this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Road
[Note Monbiot’s comments a little more than halfway down the page.]
LikeLike
“What other alternatives do we have?”
Um…, War, famine, pestilence, and death.
Folks, I can’t speak for everyone, but it has been my experience that the best way to deal with the Edward Kirby’s of the world is to just smile and nod. You are never going to change his world view, nor will he change yours, so what’s the point of arguing about it?
LikeLike
So let me get this straight: you seem to be saying that having our affairs handled by the Four Horsemen is preferable to even trying to survive the coming onslaught. I can’t buy that. If you and your friends all want to simply give up, that’s fine by me. I’d just not be dragged down by the weight of all your corpses.
BTW, calling Hawking, deGrasse-Tyson, Dyson, et al, the “Edward Kirby’s of the world” is flattering (thank you), but it is an honorific that I clearly don’t deserve.
LikeLike
Eric: I don’t think anyone here is “giving up” just yet (that is we’re doing what we can yet not expecting it to last long), but being realistic doesn’t mean accepting every pie-in-the-sky “solution” that comes down the pike as viable. Most of us don’t see any way out while entertaining any and all reasonable mitigations as doable if possible. We’ve been over this terrain for years now and if there was a way we’d be on it like white on snow.
You should probably try the Doomstead Diner where they’re all about survival via various schemes like the Sun project. Read up on it and decide for yourself. Other folk, like some over on NBL, are moving to South America to begin homesteading there to last as long as possible. You’d be welcome.
LikeLike
Sorry, it’s Edward (and very early here).
LikeLike
“I don’t think anyone here is “giving up” just yet (that is we’re doing what we can yet not expecting it to last long), but being realistic doesn’t mean accepting every pie-in-the-sky “solution” that comes down the pike as viable.”
For a goodly part of the past half-century, space travel was seen as not just being possible, but inevitable. In fact, it is a staple of a great deal of our science-fiction, which itself is a crucial part of this (and the previous two) generation’s zeitgeist. Calling it “pie in the sky” without offering much in the way of a counter-argument — as just about everyone here is doing — is, IMHO, simply giving up. “Kill me now”, many here seem to be saying.
Jesus Christ, take your meds, people!
“Most of us don’t see any way out while entertaining any and all reasonable mitigations as doable if possible.”
When it comes to mitigations, I think I’ve made it pretty clear to all that I agree with most of you here that its simply too late to save the planet itself. But my focus here (on this thread) involves saving our species. And I still think *that* is doable.
I might have bought into the “abandon all hope” line before I had this conversation here on this thread (for the past day or two), but no longer. What am I writing here?! In fact, I did buy into it! Two and a half years ago, I was at Occupy Wall Street in lower Manhattan, screaming at anyone who would listen that we humans were *toast*, and that any attempt to stop the coming climate apocalypse was pointless. [A position I still hold, BTW.] But there is simply a dense atmosphere of doom and gloom from the tomb here that goes far beyond even that. This mood is combined with some serious misanthropy and more than a touch of tin-foiled-colander-wearing behavior; all of which makes me think its time to reconsider my initial post-OWS assessments.
“We’ve been over this terrain for years now and if there was a way we’d be on it like white on snow.”
Not from what I’ve seen here. Beyond a few smirks and some name-calling, not one valid counter regarding the feasibility of my suggestion has been offered. Not one! [The claim that “the powers-that-be will not want to pay for it” — while probably true — is not what I had in mind.]
“You should probably try the Doomstead Diner where they’re all about survival via various schemes like the Sun project.”
I’m not really interested in survivalism. That is simply staving off the inevitable. But thanks anyway.
LikeLike
DREAMER
LikeLike
More like this:
LikeLike
http://robinwestenra.blogspot.co.nz/2014/04/banking-deaths.html
Tuesday, 29 April 2014
Banking deaths
Suspicious Deaths of Bankers Are Now Classified as “Trade Secrets”
It doesn’t get any more Orwellian than this…
LikeLike
It is not entirely beyond the realms of possibility that capital could survive…It could do so, for example, by a capitalist oligarchic elite supervising the mass genocidal elimination of much of the world’s surplus and disposable population while enslaving the rest and building vast artificial gated environments to protect against the ravages of an external nature run toxic, barren and ruinously wild. Dystopian tales abound depicting a grand variety of such worlds and it would be wrong to rule them out as impossible blueprints for the future of a less-than-human humanity…Clearly, any such social order could only exist on the basis of fascistic mind control and the continuous exercise of daily police surveillance and violence accompanied by periodic militarised repressions. Anyone who does not see elements of such a dystopian world already in place around us is deceiving herself or himself most cruelly.
David Harvey – The Revolt of Human Nature from “17 Contradictions And The End of Capitalism”
LikeLike
Excellent quote. 😈
LikeLike
I got one response so far expressing interest in starting face to face groups to nourish and spread the truth telling enquiry that happens on this blog and others. Let me know if you would like something of this nature in your area. Mike K at annsiudmak@windstream.net
LikeLike
On the farm beef prices have doubled and tripled in the past few months. Milk is up about 60-70%.
LikeLike
While there are notable exceptions, most revolutions are driven by food prices. Usually, the subject nation has a high degree of both corrupt governance and entrenched poverty. A food spike pushes everything over the tipping point. As in the French Revolution, the Russian Revolution and, as in the Arab Spring:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/climate-change-and-rising-food-prices-heightened-arab-spring/
The Arab world is one of the most poverty-drenched regions on Earth. All the economic indicators look really bad there. So it was no surprise when things took off as they did.
[FWIW, #2 on that list of the poorest regions on Earth was not sub-Saharan Africa or Asia; I thought it was either of those. Nope. It was Latin America. So hold onto your hats, California.]
LikeLike
Brutus.
It is now something of a distraction and is largely irrelevant, but for your information:
1. Although the Russians were well ahead of the Americans in rocketry and space technology, they did not attempt to go beyond the Van Allen belts, believing to do so would prove fatal.
2. It was such a shock to the American culture of superiority when the Russians put up Sputnik and then put a man into orbit there was panic in high places: the US government and military had to demonstrate to the US public and to the world that they were ‘number one’, even if they had to fake it.
3. Photos supposedly taken on the Moon show strong shadows from two different directions -clearly impossible with a unidirectional light source (the Sun) but quite likely in a film set.
4. Film and audio supposedly taken during the landing of the lunar module have clear speech but NO sound of rocket engines, no vibration, no instability.
5. Film supposedly of the lunar module taking off from the Moon has all the characteristics of a ‘Thuderbirds (1960’s puppet show) model, including no significant blast from the rocket engine or disturbance of Moon dust, which supposedly covered the location. However, there are some sparks, rather like what one sees with firework displays. The lack of gradual acceleration is almost laughable. One can imagine someone pulling a fine thread attached to a model.
6. There are technical reasons for believing the lunar module did not have the stability required to make a soft landing on the Moon. All attempts to get such devices to fly a matter of a few metres above the Earth around that time had resulted in the things flipping over and crashing.
7. The supposed film of astronauts walking on the Moon is particularly unconvincing since gravity on the Moon is 1/6th that on Earth and the unaccustomed human muscles would be expected to result in humungous leaps off the surface; movements correspond exactly with that of a person walking on Earth with the film slowed down to approximately half speed.
8. Even more condemning, the lunar rover fails to throw Moon dust as would be expected with just 1/6 gravity; once again the supposed film footage corresponds exactly with the movement ofuch a vehicle on Earth, with the film slowed down to about half speed.
9. There is the matter of the American flag fluttering in the wind, when the Moon has no atmosphere.
10. There is the famous sequence through the window of the module in which some peculiar object comes between the module and the image of the Earth, momentarily blocking out a large portion of the Earth; this has been interpreted as the hand of a technician at the film studio making an adjustment and not realising he was ‘on camera;.
All I know is, governments lie about practically everything, so why not the Moon missions?
I liken the Moon landings, especially the first one, to 9/11: the official narrative makes no sense, and the very limited ‘evidence’ presented to substantiate the claims does not stand up to scrutiny.
Fortunately for governments, the vast majority of people are scientifically illiterate and will believe whatever they are told to believe.
;
LikeLike
Now that we have gone down that track I suppose we must see it to its conclusion.
LikeLike
Mike…Thank you for the Sunstein references. I love the image of “crippled epistemology”…
“In my view the idea of crippled epistemology is full of implications. All of have, at least to some degree, a crippled epistemology, in the sense that there is a lot that we don’t know, and we have to rely on people we trust. We lack direct or personal evidence for most of what we think, especially about politics and government. We are confident in what we believe, but we don’t have reason to be. Much of what we know can turn out to be badly wrong.”
And there’s this…
LikeLike
Sorry…this was meant to be placed lower.
LikeLike
The P&T skit is typical of the uniformed responses we get from people with a vested interest in BAU and empire. Nobody says the Saturn V rockets didn’t lift off and put astronauts into high orbit and that they splashed down some time later.
Technicians on the ground and congressmen. quoted as authorities who would have to be fooled in order for the ‘conspiracy theory’ to hold up would never know the difference between something out of sight in high orbit and something further away Earth. The number of people really ‘in the know need be fewer than 100, and having a huge vested interest in remaining silent, keeping them silent would be extremely easy.
Really, if a couple of magicians-come-entertainers are the best that anyone can come up with in support of the ridiculous assertion that men walked on he Moon and made it back, then America is in a sorrier state than we thought.
The real giveaway is in the after-flight interview, when the three could not come up with a coherent answer to the question posed by Patrick Moore, then eminent astronomer: “Could you see stars…..?”
Between them they could not come up with the correct answer and fidgeted and fudged along the lines of ‘I don’t recall seeing stars’. the classic line of a liar: I don’t recall…..
‘
LikeLike
Kevin, my main point was the Sunstein statement which is, indeed, full of implications…and truth. And has implications far beyond conspiracy theories.
I threw in the Penn & Teller bit – and it is just a bit – because I had seen it and it does pertain. As to the moon landing conspiracy…who th’fk knows? It really doesn’t interest me. I find it’s presence here odd. “something of a distraction and is largely irrelevant”
LikeLike
They faked the moon landing. The mother of all conspiracy theories. How many people had to be in on that one? Too many. Case closed. Of course members of the Flat Earth Society will surely raise objections, and offer proofs. The tens of thousands who claim to have been abducted by aliens in weird craft will be right behind them…
LikeLike
From the speed of your response you obviously did not watch the video which provides the conclusive evidence.
Thus, this forum turns into the typical boxing ring in which uninformed fools spout opinions based on ignorance.
Nothing new in that, of course. It is the way of the world.
.
LikeLike
I am surprised at the nastiness of your response. I have learned a lot from you, and expected better. Live and learn indeed. Sorry if I stepped on one of your corns. From the speed of your response, you probably did not take time to consider the massive and improbable conspiracy that would be necessary for this supposed hoax. Not to speak of the legions of astute and skeptical scientists to be deluded. I halfway thought you must be joking, or I would not have been as blunt as I was. But perhaps it is best that I did. I learned more that way. I wonder if the presence of the troll has roiled the waters on a mostly peaceful blog? I am not inviting debate on this one; what has transpired already is more than enough for me…
LikeLike
http://hereandnow.wbur.org/2014/04/02/sunstein-conspiracy-theories
http://books.google.com/books?id=fVBvAAAAQBAJ&pg=PT5&lpg=PT5&dq=%22intelligent+people+believe+conspiracy%22&source=bl&ots=VF1H52lbK8&sig=UheKX_WNlc2y6vqetlOgOikRaVc&hl=en&sa=X&ei=KFRgU-GgFKq98AHZ7oHABw&ved=0CEkQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=%22intelligent%20people%20believe%20conspiracy%22&f=false
LikeLike
In my experience there are two kinds or people, those who seek the truth and those who run from it.
I thought this site was dedicated to finding the truth behind the American hologram.
Refusing to watch a video smacks of my local council’s response to being presented with unpalatable truth.
LikeLike
If you watch the video you will have your points explained.
LikeLike
” I learned more that way. I wonder if the presence of the troll has roiled the waters on a mostly peaceful blog?”
The troll (meaning me, one presumes) has a request: please provide evidence of troll-like behavior on my part. Posing thoughtful options that offer a somewhat optimistic outcome to this current global dilemma may (gasp) interrupt this circle jerk of misery and woe, but it should not be considered trolling.
LikeLike
I’m all in with Kirby’s idea. We take all of the richest, most competitive bastards we can find and blast them into space. So long, soyonara suckers, enjoy the flight, bon voyage, hope you don’t develop any technical glitches. Your so lucky to be the only surviving members of the human species, ha, ha, ha. The rocket will be called “middle finger” and be fed by two lesser finger boosters on the sides. What a fitting symbolic farewell to humanity’s finest.
LikeLike
ROFL …upwards & on wards…I’d call it the garbage can.
LikeLike
Why we aren’t mining methane hydrates now. Or ever.
You don’t have to be a scientist to see how difficult the problem is:
Despite all the happy talk that says we can meet these challenges by 2025 with more funding, we’re out of time.
It’s highly unlikely that Methane Hydrates will ever fuel the diesel engines that do the actual work of civilization, who will all be screaming “Feed Me!” as oil declines in the future.
LikeLike
I think we need to get the bottom of this whole ‘conspiracy theory’ aspect.
1. A group of men (sometimes women) conspire to bring about a particular result. Needless to say, they do this in secret, with as few people as possible knowing, e.g. the meeting on Jekyll Island to establish a privately-owned US central bank.
2. They achieve whatever it is they desire to achieve and propagate a narrative that supports their conspiracy, e.g. Cubans attacked and sunk an American warship so it is necessary to invade Ciba.
3. The narrative associated with eh conspiracy become well established, e.g. if we don’t stop communism in Vietnam there will be domino effect and the communists will take over the entire world.
4. Anyone who challenges the well-established narrative gets labelled a conspiracy theorist and is ridiculed and marginalised, allowing the real conspirators (or their heirs) to continue to benefit from the original conspiracy.
Just which is the biggest conspiracy of all time is debatable, but the ridiculous notion that concrete and steel building designed to withstand multiple impacts could fall to the ground at free-fall speed after short-lived, low temperature fires must surely rank amongst the greatest.
Of course, there other conspiracies, such the one centred on the ridiculous notion that perpetual economic growth on a finite planet is both possible and desirable; then there is the ridiculous conspiracy theory that ‘debts and deficits don’t matter, along with ridiculous conspiracy theories centred on the notion that we can sequester carbon dioxide as fast as it is being desequestered by fossil fuel interests.
So it goes on.
And in every case, those who challenge the original conspiracy are labelled conspiracy theorists, anti-social, unpatriotic, extremists etc.
LikeLike
In contrast to the real conspiracies of governments and the psychopaths who run and ruin the world, there are the nutty ‘conspiracies’ that some people believe in, such as the idea that the US government is engaged in a mass extermination experiment via spraying chemicals onto the general populace from aircraft, mistaking the formation of ice crystals in vapour trails as evidence of solids being released from jet-engine planes, or the even nuttier notion that radar stations and the like can trigger movement of tectonic plates and cause earthquakes and tidal waves on the other side of the planet.
LikeLike
Hi Kevin
911 I’d be interested in more of your thoughts to help me.
1. Theory says 911 happened to give TPTB an excuse of a Pearl Harbour event to begin the war on terror with following invasions.
My believe is surely that’s not true ball faced lying would have been sufficient with the compliant U$ propaganda msm behind them as happened with Iraq. Further the airliners must have been drones then without pilots? Demolition charges were already in place? Again I find this hard to believe, surely they wouldn’t sacrifice 3000 of their own? I agree the free fall fits the demolition scenario.Unless they miscalculated and thought most though not all would get out safely from the jet impacts?
2. If the airliners were a real terrorist attack how does that fit in with free fall demolition?
3. Surely the truth of 911 must be the greatest mystery of our time. A third building was obviously demolished which was not hit with anything and no casualties inside.
4. I cannot believe any Americans would do that to their own and to buildings ( The Twin Towers I’ve been to the top of one in 76 )which symbolised a now dead and gone American dynamism, exuberance and optimism still remembered by older persons.
Question for you if an inside job what was the motivation? 911 is definitely a symbol of the COIC in our times.
LikeLike
A:off topic B: what about the other planes? C: Myopic, parochial stupid
LikeLike
I have studied the whole matter in considerable depth and have written about it extensively. Put it this way: the official narrative is mathematically and scientifically impossible on a large number of counts: temperatures too low and times too short for steel to soften, symmetrical collapse of buildings hit asymmetrically, titanium alloy engine ‘evaporating on impact’ with grass etc. Official narrative: bullshit, bullshit, bullshit, cover-up, cover-up, cover-up. Plus the mandatory deletion of testimony and refusal to hold a proper public enquiry. All the usual tricks we have come to associate with TPTB.
As far as ‘they wouldn’t do that to their own people’ goes, the people who died on 9/11 were not ‘their own people’; they were just ‘serfs’. It was important that many American serf died that day in order to stir the emotions of the nation. Empty building demolished -so what. 3,000 killed: national mourning (plus revenge). Note that numerous people were tipped off beforehand, and an Israel organisation broke its lease terms in order to vacate a month or so prior to the event.i .
There are many excellent videos that expose the whole official narrative as a pack of lies, those circulated by Architects for 9/11 Truth being among the best.
Quick synopsis.
Building riddled with asbestos, designated a health hazard after construction; cost of removal and loss of rental too high; take out insurance for the most unlikely (impossible) event ever, demolish buildings and blame ‘terrorists’ operating from a cave in Afghanistan; claim insurance; use ‘terrorism’ and a pretext to invade Afghanistan, where Taliban had said no to oil/gas pipelines and had ruined CIA run opium production; also use as a pretext to invade Iraq, which, although previously an ally of the US had started to move away from US petro-dollar hegemony, and had undeveloped oil fields. Also, plenty of quick profits made by insider information and prior knowledge of grounding relating to airline share values etc. Much more, but no time to detail it all; that would take a book.
Result: American people duped into supporting more overseas wars, duped into accepting loss of freedom at home, duped into accepting trashing of US Constitution etc. And those at the top of the US pyramid added to their already obscene wealth.
Quoting Carlin: You have to be asleep to believe it [the official narrative].
If you are going to tell a lie, make it a really big one, so outrageous people cannot accept the truth, and keep repeating it.
LikeLike
Kevin, i do not propose to give this air. But I will propose that if you are willing to accept the basis of this theory as true, then you might also accept that every opinion of this blog is under scrutiny,wherefore,one day each of us will be visited by any concerned parties, possibly to be eliminated. Much as those who enter into same-sex partnerships on a formal basis will also be eliminated. Why Not? More to the point,what do you propose to do about such a venomous conspiracy, besides have yourself noted as being of that opinion? {Scary enough for you?} I am not a resident or citizen of the USA, so I have my own fish to fry. Good luck!
LikeLike
I didn’t see this posted above:
Evidence of Acceleration of Anthropogenic Climate Disruption on All Fronts
http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/22999-evidence-of-acceleration-on-all-fronts-of-anthropogenic-climate-disruption
Evidence is mounting that we are in the midst of a great extinction of species. An “ecocide” is occurring, as the human race is in the process of destroying life on the planet. This sobering thought becomes clearer now as we take our monthly tour of significant global pollution and anthropogenic climate disruption (ACD) related events.
The slow motion train wreck continues apace. The engine has already imploded decades ago. The third class passenger cars in the front are crashing and burning as we speak. The first class passenger cars are only just starting to show some cracks and splinters.
Ever so slowly the train comes apart.
A tiny handful of people have looked out the window and seen the inevitable destruction that our deadly momentum even now condemns us to. But alas, the vast majority of our fellow travelers pay no heed. The few that bother to refute are only concerned with why we seem to be slowing down. “More speed!” they demand, “How can we prosper without more acceleration?!?”
Our only hope? Why, none other than the Edward Kirby’s of the world, frantically insisting that we can build another fully functional train from scratch. And fly it into space to boot!
I can hardly wait…
LikeLike
You say this as if I wasn’t aware of the train wreck. I am, and have been for some time now. There is nothing frantic about my demeanor. Nor am I insistent. In fact, I think the odds are highly stacked against the idea, and it is highly unlikely to occur.
FWIW, I thought the same thing about stopping carbon emissions around ten years ago; that it would be tough and expensive, but it was something that we had to do, because there wasn’t many other options. “I mean, after all, who wants to willfully march on towards certain extinction?”
So I have no delusions that this will be accomplished. There is no doubt that the situation is grim, and the odds are against our continued survival.
But we have to try to do *something*. Simply giving up is the worst thing to do. Which is why I recommend moving out into space as the best option at this point.
What is your recommendation?
LikeLike
Space it is, my good man!
[Smiling and nodding] Looking forward to it!
“What is your recommendation?”
There is nothing anyone can do in this life, about anything, except to follow ones own heart. If preaching the endless possibilities of space travel is your passion then, by all means, knock yourself out.
Personally, I have long since made my peace with the thermodynamic reality of our ongoing collapse and I have no desire whatsoever to change the world. Paul Kingsnorth probably said it best:
It’s the End of the World as We Know It . . . and He Feels Fine
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/20/magazine/its-the-end-of-the-world-as-we-know-it-and-he-feels-fine.html
Kingsnorth would agree with the need for grief but not with the idea that it must lead to change — at least not the kind of change that mainstream environmental groups pursue. “What do you do,” he asked, “when you accept that all of these changes are coming, things that you value are going to be lost, things that make you unhappy are going to happen, things that you wanted to achieve you can’t achieve, but you still have to live with it, and there’s still beauty, and there’s still meaning, and there are still things you can do to make the world less bad? And that’s not a series of questions that have any answers other than people’s personal answers to them. Selfishly it’s just a process I’m going through.” He laughed. “It’s extremely narcissistic of me. Rather than just having a personal crisis, I’ve said: ‘Hey! Come share my crisis with me!’ ”
LikeLike
“There is nothing anyone can do in this life, about anything, except to follow ones own heart.”
That may be the dumbest thing I’ve read this month. Congratulations on getting it in under the wire.
LikeLike
Thank you! By denigrating my world view as unworthy of your consideration you only cement your own exalted throne as the troll of the century.
How especially precious that your oblique reference to “under the wire” implies that you enjoy intimate status with the owner of this blog.
LikeLike
I’m sorry but it was, lol. Surely you don’t really believe that? That you can nothing — nothing! — about *anything* except cut hairy farts? Jesus fucking Christ, is that stupid.
[The “under the wire” reference was to the last day of the month (yesterday).]
That’s not trolling; that’s telling it like it is.
LikeLike
Yes, most of the passengers are too busy ripping the carriages to pieces to throw into the furnace [to keep the train crashing] to have time to look out the window. Many deliberately choose not to look because they know they will see something unpleasant.
Just pondering the present state of things, I wonder whether TPTB will celebrate the 100th anniversary of the start of WW1 by triggering WW3. August 2014. Hairstyle looking for a brain’ seems to be working on it.
LikeLike
Wiki has a lengthy article on the moon landing hoax. I was surprised to find a confirmation of my whimsical comment about The Flat Earth Society: “The Flat Earth Society was one of the first organizations to take up the cause and accuse NASA of faking the landings, arguing that they were staged by Hollywood with Walt Disney sponsorship, based on a script by Arthur C. Clarke and directed by Stanley Kubrick.”
I did not watch the video Kevin offered because my PC does not now do sound. On a serious note, the issue of finding and confirming the truth of anything is of crucial importance in an age of misinformation, delusions, and uncertainty. Paranoia and being seduced into disastrous courses of action, like those who sought refuge on the Hale Bopp comet (Heaven’s Gate) is a real danger. Those cultic victims were said to be all well educated and intelligent adults, which turned out to be no defense against their entertaining the most bizarre beliefs, and tragically acting on them.
The flying saucer cult, crop circles, widespread satanic abuse – I have had my innings with folks entranced by all of these and more. After all, living in a commune on Maui in the 60’s and doing acid, one comes into contact with a rich mixture of fantasized realities.
To gain and maintain a modicum of sanity in the world we now inhabit is a full time job. One lifetime is way too short to accomplish what we need to do in this respect. Some sort of triage of possibilities worth devoting time to is necessary. Indeed our nervous system is configured to facilitate that process, otherwise we would be drowned in too much information….
LikeLike
I did a post last year on the conspiracy theory theme:
https://collapseofindustrialcivilization.com/2013/10/08/the-conspiracy-is-systemic-and-legalized/
Let me be clear. This(COIC) is not a conspiracy theory website and it is not my intent to promote such crackpot ideas as the “controlled demolition of the twin towers”, the faking of the lunar landing, chemtrails, etc. To entertain such conspiracies would discredit this site and the considerable time and hard work we have spent authenticating real world problems like anthropogenic climate change, the ravages of capitalist industrial civilization, inverted totalitarianism, social inequality and the wealth gap, etc.
LikeLike
Thanks for reining us back in about conspiracy theories. Like others here, I step onto this slippery slope from time to time but usually step back again before losing my footing. I would like very much to have some of these issued decided clearly, but the nature of conspiracy (lack of expertise, lack of authority, active disinformation being sown, etc.) makes it nearly impossible to referee the debate. While some insist that evidence is incontrovertible one direction or the other, I continue to believe that no decision is really necessary on most accounts.
LikeLike
This looks like an excellent series…
“Featuring outspoken US publisher of Skeptic Magazine, Dr. Michael Shermer, who uses scientific methods to question if there is truth behind the theories with his “Baloney Detection Kit” and British psychologist Patrick Leman who explains the social needs for conspiracy theorists’ beliefs, Conspiracy Rising takes a hard, penetrating look at the psycho-social and philosophical roots of conspiracy theories, examining who tends to believe in them and why.”
http://www.cbc.ca/doczone/episodes/conspiracy-rising-1
Full show:
LikeLike
LOL.
LikeLike
Please Brutus, tell me again what a troll I am, and how I derailed the discussion with my scientifically implausible rantings about habitable space colonies. Your tepid treatment of moon landing conspiracy theories makes your opinion so much more valid in my eyes now.
I am ready to be judged.
I can’t wait for you to weigh in on Holocaust denialism, the Lincoln assassination, or how FDR knew Pearl Harbor was about to happen and did nothing.
LikeLike
Mike: refusal to seek the truth renders this site redundant.
Sorry mate, if you insist on sticking with lies promoted by TPTB and refuse to accept the truth I’m out of here.
LikeLike
Ah c’mon Kevin! Don’t stoop to that all or nothing mind-set. Just let it go – believe what you want about whatever incidents of history you want. As long as you believe it, to hell with everyone else! Geez man, we’re lookin’ at the end of history here – at least stick around for the end. I’d hate to see you leave as I always read your posts to find out what’s happening on the ground where you are.
You’ll notice I didn’t touch this topic. That’s because I have my own beliefs about
9-11, Sandy Hook and a bunch of other stuff (like UFO’s) – but I don’t bring them up. I’m still gathering information. Hell I finally put the JFK assassination to rest after almost 50 fucking years!
If you insist on leaving please ask xraymike for my e-mail information, because i’d like to stay in touch if possible (and if you want to bother).
LikeLike
Tom.
Yes, feel free to remain in contact: kevin_enviro@hotmail.com
LikeLike
I’m sorry to see a person of your intelligence fall prey to conspiratorial thinking, but it’s human nature.
If you must leave and join the ranks of InfoWars, then you are free to do so. There are plenty of 9-11 truther sites out there for you, but you’ll have to argue with them that climate change is actually from industrial civilization and not a New World Order conspiracy to destroy American prosperity.
LikeLike
The arrogance and stupidity of your response defies belief, Mike
LikeLike
Hi Kevin
Agreed. However we need not labour the issue but agree to differ and return to the far bigger issues such as climate change and the destructiveness of IC that concern us all! 🙂 The insouciance of the American people concerning the direction and looting of their own country defies believe. ( refer Paul Craig Roberts) an American who worked in the Reagan administration. Also managing a blog like this must be stressful at times for xraymike, we all must cut slack for one another at times! 🙂
LikeLike
Kevin,
I knew you had some odd views on 9/11, but I was not aware of how deep your conspiratorial thinking ran. I guess I’ll have to address this issue again in a future post, but this time I’ll be more blunt about it.
Lashing out at other commenters because they won’t agree with whatever conspiracy theory you religiously believe in is not conducive to winning support.
As I said, sorry to see you storm off like some petulant child who didn’t get his way, but that’s how the paranoid mind crumbles under pressure.
By the way, why did you stick around so long? I never entertained such convoluted conspiracies here.
LikeLike
The Perks of Paranoia
LikeLike
Some conspiracy fans make religious fundamentalists look soft. I have encountered them in groups I have attended. Their attitude is either buy my trip or I am out of here; and they may leave muttering “some people are just too stupid to get it!” I’m usually sorry to see them leave, and wish they had more tolerance for well intended criticisms. Engaging in an open search for truth with others demands openness to their divergent viewpoints. Dissensus is actually the life blood of creative sharing…
LikeLike
That come a bit rich from someone who refuses to examine the truth because his computer doesn’t function properly.
LikeLike
Troll attacks on the site in open display now. Beneath the faux exterior of rationality and niceness there lurks in every troll the urge to vent their anger and disrespect. The only defense against this is to sit tight and resist the urge to say anything to them. Their game is to bait you into waging a war of words and insults.
DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS. Go ahead and post your comments as usual – just ignore their presence.
LikeLike
Hi Mike K 🙂
I can assure you Kevin is not a troll but a 100 per center in his commitment to the issues of this blog. Have a nice day! 🙂
LikeLike
John – I recognize that Kevin is a very intelligent and sincere person. This does not prevent him from insulting me and acting like a troll. I do not affix a troll label on anyone for life. People show different faces in different situations. I had no idea that a simple statement of disbelief in the moon landing hoax would draw such a heated response from him. I did apologize for inadvertently
triggering his reaction. There was no conciliatory response from him. I am still open to shake hands and start fresh if he should choose to join with me in that.
LikeLike
Don’t worry about it. He’ll always be lurking in the shadows. He just tried to post another comment as a different user.
LikeLike
ahhh….no he didn’t.
Someone else did and you jumped on it.
Hey, it’s your site, and you can lay down ground rules. But the horizontal hostility is not something I like to see here.
I’ve just emailed Kevin suggesting he start his own blog if he wants to lay out his stuff, to go for it…
I concluded with this:
“Personally I won’t bother. The resistance needs me to be more active in analog groups: face to face stuff in my community and neighbourhood. If people don’t like what I say, I’d rather have the horizontal hostility face to face, on the spot…so I can choose to be real about it then and there.
Not that I believe for a second it’s going to make a big difference: “The dominant culture is insane and unreachable, as are most of it’s inhabitants.” Derrick Jensen
Unbelievably serious shit is hitting the fan, will continue to increase hitting the fan, probably exponentially, and we’ll all be facing it much sooner than later…
Keep your wits about you, your powder dry, and your anger/rage for those who really need it: the corporations/banksters/elites who are destroying us, our communities and the biosphere, at rates never seen before.”
Regards
Ted
LikeLike
Ahhh, yeah he did. See below here.
Also, the hostility and childishness is coming directly from Kevin Moore and no one else.
LikeLike
Well, this thread has become…
LikeLike
Food for the toroids… This interview reminded me of the “technological sublime.”
http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/04/the-man-who-would-make-eating-obsolete/361058/
LikeLike
Infant Formula for adults? Consider this http://cabinetmagazine.org/events/living_in_the_ruins.php
LikeLike
Paul W,
Anytime I read anything about canning or freezing,I think about the great results we’ve had from dehydrating.
http://www.rhibafarms.com/blogs/news/10573513-dehydrated-is-better
LikeLike
eminently easy to do, storable, & transportable
LikeLike
I’ve just appointed myself COQC( Chief Officer of Quality Control).
All comments that contain any facts or reason will be immediately deleted.
Only troll comments that contain abusive ad hominem attacks will be allowed.
See how much better a site can run with proper supervision.
rolf at myself
LikeLike
http://www.vice.com/read/americas-nuclear-plants-are-dry-heaving-and-waiting-to-barf-all-over-us?utm_source=vicefbus
[some quotes, please read the article]
Our Nuclear Infrastructure Is a Radioactive Time Bomb
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has had a busy few weeks. Last month, thanks to Freedom of Information Act queries filed by numerous organizations, the Commission was forced to disclose a dossier of emails showing the lengths it had gone to in the immediate aftermath of the Fukushima disaster to downplay the risk of a similar catastrophe happening in the US. The correspondence showed a startling lack of preparedness.
In one example, NRC public affairs officer David McIntyre offered his opinion on what Energy Secretary Steven Chu should have done when asked by CNN whether American nuclear plants could withstand a force 9.0 earthquake: “He should just say, ‘Yes, it can.’ Worry about being wrong when it doesn’t. Sorry if I sound cynical.”
The documents also show a background briefing for then NRC chairman Gregory Jaczko and other commissioners that split intelligence into “public answer” and “additional technical, non-public information.” In some cases the NRC withheld crucial details and misdirected the media.
One of the NRC’s guiltiest shortcomings is its torpid reaction to changing seismic hazards.
To its critics, the NRC is an industry patsy. Its predecessor, the Atomic Energy Commission, was dissolved in 1975 for its impotence. The same mistakes are being repeated. In 1987, a year after the Chernobyl meltdown, a congressional committee published a report rebuking the NRC’s cozy relationship with the industry it was tasked to regulate.
.
Only one of the body’s five commissioners is elected independently. The rest must be approved by the nuclear industry itself before being appointed by Congress. Former chair Gregory Jazcko was the first presidential appointee and became a lone gladfly in a biased regulator.
[ends with]
The NRC says it is taking adequate precautions to ensure the public’s safety; for the NRC’s critics, its historical partisanship means that whatever solution is reached for America’s decrepit reactors and growing mountain of nuclear waste is likely to favor the industry.
Lyman, for one, has little faith in future regulation unless something is done to claw influence back from those who stand to gain the most from the sale of nuclear energy. “Do you shut down a plant because it fails to meet new standards,” he asks, “or do you adapt the standards?”
LikeLike
“Our Nuclear Infrastructure Is a Radioactive Time Bomb”
my feelings exactly, i posted once or twice expressing this fear.
radioactive waste is the gift that keeps on giving.
and yes, i would move out onto a farm and dig in the dirt with my hands every day, even at my advancing age. anything to get away from the madness of the city.
LikeLike
There is conspiracy going on all over the place. Businesses conspire in their boardrooms to destroy the competition and take market share. Some events do not have to be planned, just step out of the way and let them happen so the shock doctrine can be implemented. Some people say the Holocaust was fake, but my uncle entered one of the camps as a soldier and I don’t think the bodies were artificial. Apes can do just about anything, but generally speaking they’re not smart enough to keep it quiet. LIBOR rigging seems to have been a massive conspiracy.
Had a couple of young hucksters came to the door yesterday, “Hi Sir, We’re communication students and we have to talk to fifty people, now you look friendly and non-violent…………………” I had been through the exact same, spiel, song and dance before. I looked at them squarely and said, “I am violent and non-friendly.” They were somewhat astounded and then walked away to the next house. I simply don’t take that kind of sh** any more. Why should I? The world is FULL of insanity and bullshit and humans are very deceptive and predatory. Some are nice, but others are out to ream you. Shields up.
But the big conspiracy is amongst seven billion humans that want to grow like a cancer, quaff as much dopamine a possible and then leave a sterile rock to their children. Shhhhhhhhhhh, no one’s supposed to know.
LikeLike
From all the groups I have been part of over the years I have learned that emotions are crucial dimensions of the search for truth. The most common reason for people leaving a group is strong emotional reactions. It’s not that we should avoid or squelch strong feelings that arise in participants; on the contrary we should encourage bringing these expressions out, with the proviso that the one feeling them should acknowledge them and be willing to process them with the group – in which case they can be important sources of fresh understanding and steps towards the ultimate goal of learning to live together in greater harmony and openness.
You will never be part of a group that lacks this important emotional dimension; how it is dealt with often determines if the group fulfills it’s aims or not.
LikeLike
“From all the groups I have been part of over the years I have learned that emotions are crucial dimensions of the search for truth.”
Ah, but see – I tried working with a large anti-fracking group for a few years and only came to learn that they were NOT stopping any fracking in appealing to politicians to get laws changed, but were instead tying up all this energy (trying to accomplish something for the good of the community) and wasting time with petitioning and meetings with state reps. i brought this up and was basically ignored (they don’t want the truth).
When I left I began seeing that others had discovered the same thing and now we see that fracking comes from the top tier in government (Biden just promised fracking technology to the Ukraine as part of the “deal”), further corroborating my observation and making it all but impossible to stop. The only thing slowing the industry down is that it isn’t very economically feasible for them any more – low EROEI.
meanwhile:
http://theextinctionprotocol.wordpress.com/2014/04/30/who-warns-antibiotic-resistance-is-now-a-bigger-crisis-than-the-aids-epidemic/
WHO warns: antibiotic resistance is now a bigger crisis than the AIDS epidemic
April 2014 – HEALTH – Antibiotic resistance is now a bigger crisis than the AIDS epidemic of the 1980s, a landmark report warned today. The spread of deadly superbugs that evade even the most powerful antibiotics is happening across the world, United Nations officials have confirmed. The effects will be devastating – meaning a simple scratch or urinary tract infection could kill. The WHO said in some countries, because of resistance, carbapenems now do not work in more than half of people with common hospital-acquired infections caused by a bacteria called K. pneumoniae, such as pneumonia, blood infections, and infections in newborn babies and intensive-care patients. Resistance to one of the most widely used antibiotics for treating urinary tract infections caused by E. coli -medicines called fluoroquinolones – is also very widespread, it said. In the 1980s, when these drugs were first introduced, resistance was virtually zero, according to the WHO report.
But now there are countries in many parts of the world where the drugs are ineffective in more than half of patients. The WHO said in some countries, because of resistance, carbapenems now do not work in more than half of people with common hospital-acquired infections caused by a bacteria called K. pneumoniae, such as pneumonia, blood infections, and infections in newborn babies and intensive-care patients. Resistance to one of the most widely used antibiotics for treating urinary tract infections caused by E. coli -medicines called fluoroquinolones – is also very widespread, it said. In the 1980s, when these drugs were first introduced, resistance was virtually zero, according to the WHO report. But now there are countries in many parts of the world where the drugs are ineffective in more than half of patients. –Daily Mail
[so stay away from hospitals!]
LikeLike
Hi Tom, You’ve touched on fracking several times in this thread…
“PA – the fracking state with a bankrupt capitol”
and now…
” I tried working with a large anti-fracking group for a few years”
Any chance you live in Fracksylvania?
One of the other shale play states?
Just curious
Thanks
LikeLike
Yessiree – “our elected guvaner” at work givin’ away the farm to his campaign backers (which used to be called bribery). You too?
LikeLike
Yep…8th generation Pennsylvanian. First 7 generations buried in Fayette County…surely restless above the shale. I’m in Bucks County…waiting to see what happens up north along the Delaware. And there’s the Utica. Gotta keep inflating the bubble.
Corbett is toast, but the Dem candidates are all fine with fracking. McGinty called it part of the “secret sauce” to create jobs.
Symptoms of the great disease.
Take care, man.
LikeLike
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Delhi_metallo-beta-lactamase
there was a PBS show about this, not good.
what scares me is when and if someone with one of these diseases gets a good dose of radiation and the disease mutates into something even worse. having zero/zilch/nada scientific background i don’t even know if this is plausible, but there it is. or here it comes?
LikeLike
Yeah – emergent diseases would be another great topic to post on (ahem) perhaps not setting off as many fireworks as this (on the surface, rather pedestrian) one.
There are too many recent examples to name in this little box, but from mersa to meningitis, things are lookin’ pretty bleak, where even the old “easy ones” like mumps and measles are now real threats.
LikeLike
Tom – “Ah, but see – I tried working with a large anti-fracking group for a few years…”
I understand your frustration, Tom. I should have made clear that I was not referring to large, single issue groups, but to small awakening circles, cells, dedicated to facing the truth of our global historic crisis This initial awakening to just how really bad our unfolding situation is on all levels is the missing first step for so many among us. Any possible solutions or ameliorations depend on grasping the reality and severity of the world problem. Small groups are ideally suited to address this need. Properly conducted such groups can help people through the sometimes difficult path of disillusionment required for becoming open to the truth. Books authored by those already awakening provide useful material and guidance for beginners on this path. Such groups need one or two well along the way to help raise and begin to answer the questions such a process generates towards its overall goal of awakening…
LikeLike
By the way, I have not yet blocked Kevin from commenting here. If he chooses to come to his senses and exam the flaws of what most know are convoluted conspiracy theories, then he’s open to return, but I’m not going to allow this site to be degraded to another Alex Jones paranoia platform that looks at every event as a government conspiracy.
I have nearly 3 years of work that would be rendered worthless by allowing wild and speculative theories to be accepted here.
Does Dave Cohen of ‘Decline of the Empire’ accept such notions at his site? If so, post the links.
Does George Mobus of ‘Question Everything’ allow such notions at his site? If so, post the links.
Does Chris Floyd of ‘Empire Burlesque’ allow such notions at his site? If so, post the links.
Does Ian Welsh at his site allow such notions at his site? If so, post the links.
LikeLike
The worlds of every sort of “Truther” are a morass…they verge on the religious…full of True Believers. The word truth loses all meaning.
I see an image of Ignus Fatuus.
One of Timothy Olyphant’s characters…either Seth Bullock or Raylan Givens, I forget which…was invited to discuss something of the above sort. He said…
“I don’t swim in that shit”
Thanks Mike, for not swimming in that shit.
LikeLike
LikeLike
oh man.
With clearly the greatest calamity humanity has ever faced and agreed on by all here (some with more reservations than others, of course) coming right at us, can’t we all just agree to disagree on contentious issues? We’re too few here in the “awareness” camp – and like the Occupy co-option/destruction – it’d be more effective if we’d hang together on the big stuff (the collapse and loss of habitat in all its dimensions ) and let the vagaries of the past be judged individually.
We can’t be afraid to look at evidence, but in the end the truth may take awhile to become common knowledge. Nor should we be averse to changing our view when said evidence sways us one way or the other. These changes may rock back and forth until some consensus is reached.
Just keep going with your comments everyone – I appreciate and read them all and try to keep the judgements of ideas down to the scientifically or realistically challenged ones imho. I don’t have the answers but together we can at least examine all sides – and decide for ourselves without ridicule, anger or disbelief. Like religion – the psychology behind our decisions regarding acceptance of what’s true is key.
Know thyself and learn.
LikeLike
Amen.
LikeLike
From thirteen years ago in the LA Times, already what feels like a long time ago:
http://www.forthefuture.org/assets/articles/col_grief.htm
The money quote is right at the beginning:
We witness periodic eruptions and flameouts as we continue to deal with our grief. At some point it becomes simply not worth it anymore to press against ignorance, incomprehension, and denial. Maybe it’s worse when fundamental agreements are already in place with kindred souls. I dunno. Let me add my support to Tom’s recommendation that agree to disagree on the most contentious, irresolvable issues.
LikeLike
Thanks Brutus, I needed to hear that. I tend to cut others (and myself) a lot more slack when I remember the truth of that quote.
LikeLike
What the gaining of [NTE / Radical Climate Change] knowledge should mean, to those who acquire it is that this is knowledge that needs to be acted upon.
This conclusion is so obvious that one should not need to state it. Ironically, however, it is seemingly the case that most of those involved in generating such knowledge themselves don’t seem to “get” this! If they did, they would realize that the point is not to continue with their research but to recognize its implications for their own lives—the fact that such knowledge represents a threat to their future existence—so that from a self-interest standpoint they would abandon their research efforts and begin planning what to do to survive, and then act on those plans…
If climate scientists don’t have the sense to act meaningfully on the findings of their research, why should it be surprising that those who are aware of their findings fail to do so as well?…
What should be clear to intelligent, educated people today is that the society they live in is likely to collapse within a few years, and that if they are to have any hope of surviving that calamity, they need to start engaging in pre-adaptive activities—and ASAP.
-Alton Thompson
http://dissidentvoice.org/2014/05/so-what/
LikeLike
I’m of the opinion that large-scale coordinated action is needed to have any meaningful results on planetary-scale problems such as climate change and ocean acidification. Although individual action may make people feel good about themselves, it won’t change any of the problems created by industrial civilization which nearly the entire globe is reliant upon and supports to some degree or another.
I suggest we simply live day by day, enjoy and appreciate being alive, spend time with those closest to us, and let the trivial problems and stresses of modern living fall from our shoulders. I see no worth in continuing to dwell on what could have been or what will be. A bi-monthly or monthly essay is all that I will be writing from this point onward. I have to get on with living.
The latest on ocean acidification and the unraveling of the food chain:
“…OAA-led research team has found the first evidence that acidity of continental shelf waters off the West Coast is dissolving the shells of tiny free-swimming marine snails, called pteropods, which provide food for pink salmon, mackerel and herring, according to a new paper published in Proceedings of the Royal Society B….”
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/04/140430101914.htm
LikeLike
LikeLike