Tags
6th Mass Extinction, Abrupt Climate Change, Anthropogenic Climate Disruption (ACD), California Drought, Capitalism, Cold Fusion, Dr. Erik Pianka, Extinction of Man, Fracking Chemicals Contaminating Groundwater, Global Famine, Greenhouse Gases, Materialism, Oscar Wilde, Techno-Utopians
The following video message is from Dr. Erik Pianka, an esteemed American biologist, one of the world’s most accomplished field ecologists, and author of the classic 1983 book Evolutionary Ecology. This video was made roughly four years ago. Not much has changed in the interim other than everything getting progressively worse —more people, more cars, more garbage landfills, more greenhouse gas emissions, more ocean acidification, more extinctions, etc…
To save the habitability of the Earth, many enlightened environmentalists and thinkers have proposed a radical but simple solution which calls for a reconfiguration of modern society into a much lower energy-intensive way of life with food production localized and resources socialized —just the opposite of what is now happening in our no-holds-barred global capitalist system. However, the time for a transition was decades ago before we had gone so far into overshoot that world powers are now scrambling to lay claim to the melting Arctic, carving up Africa for its land and water while unleashing a pandemic, and contaminating the dwindling aquifers with fracking waste. Our so-called leaders are too busy constructing an omnipresent spying Panopticon to bother noticing the gathering storm of climatic hellfire and brimstone. When harsh reality finally assert itself, such human folly will have created unfathomable catastrophes.
Not many have given much thought to how America will feed itself after the collapse of California’s agriculture industry is complete:
Farming is never going to go back, regardless of how much rain we get next year, to the way it was in the ’70s and ’80s. It’s a long-term era of scarcity.
California is much bigger than it was when these reservoirs were built, 40 or 50 years ago. There’s more water going to cities and the environment now. That boom era of California farming, I think everyone recognizes, is just a thing of the past.
They used to flood-irrigate everything here. When I was a kid, growing up, you’d walk outside in the middle of summer, six or seven months since the last rain, and it would be humid outside because there’d be so much irrigation going on. You hardly ever see anything flood-irrigated anymore. That time, that’s just not coming back.
The solution is not the techno-utopian fantasy of cold fusion. Even if cold fusion was a realistic possibility, the creation of unlimited amounts of ultra-cheap energy wielded in the hands of techno-capitalist man would surely spell disaster for any last vestiges of life that might have survived the omnicide of capitalist industrial civilization and the age of fossil fuels. A good steward of the Earth’s resources and web of life would never have perpetuated the 6th mass extinction and defiled the planet that gave birth to his kind while arrogantly naming himself Homo sapiens (Latin: “Wise man”).
Capitalist carbon man acted like a bull in a china shop, throwing his weight around and blindly destroying everything in his path. Now he wants to invent even more disruptive tools with which to save himself from the very techno-nightmare that he has already created? He treated the biosphere like a buyosphere, and money was his God. His epitaph was inscribed long ago by Oscar Wilde who perceptively said, “They know the price of everything and the value of nothing.”
Tragically, humans had their chance in a magnificent paradise and they blew it in spades.
Well said.
LikeLike
On the surface Dr. Pianka seems to get it, only towards the end he slips as he starts rambling about Green Industry and solar and wind.
Again, it’s hitting the wall of cognitive dissonance, not matter how bright a person is, and being unable to garner the courage to face the reality that what he suggests doing would only have us kick the can further down the road.
What is it with people who think they have a brain. Can’t this guy sit still for a moment and think really deeply about this illusion of “Green Industry.” Industry is industry. Imagine an industry that makes a product so well made that it lasts hundreds of years, therefore insuring that sales would not grow forever, but would actually start to decline. That would have been a great scenario, but not one a capitalist would have embraced.
How many of those water bottles, coffee cups and bicycles would we need? Only if most bikers today stopped for a moment they’d realize those nice flat roads, built for cars, they are riding over are made of fossil fuels.
As a long distance biker myself I’m aghast at how many people ride the roads without a helmet, and actually are listening to their gadgets. Horrifying. Putting yourself at risk is your business, but putting everyone around you in harm’s way that’s pretty much making a statement.
LikeLike
I didn’t have a problem with what he said about ‘green’ energy because he understands its limitations and explained that it would not be able to replace fossil fuels and that we need to learn to live on much less.
I have a mountain bike and I don’t need asphalt roads, just solid ground. 🙂
He gets it.
Of course most of what we talk about here would never be accomplished under the current capitalist system.
LikeLike
You can forget bikes, even mountain bikes, if industrial civilization crashes.
LikeLike
The problem with many people is that they think in absolutes with no shades of grey.
LikeLike
“He gets it.”
That’s your opinion, what you want/need to believe.Not what you “know” or what he really means to communicate.
As far as I’m concerned without further clarification from his he couldn’t/doesn’t get it and say what he did about “green business.”
We must be “listening” and coming to different conclusions regarding what we’re hearing.
Oh! And what will be used to build all those mountain bikes? What factories will need to be build to make the steel, aluminum, chrome, etc. etc?
Come on man, you should know better than to make such a statement about your road bike, implying it’s a “solution.” Shame on you.
How are we getting all those bikes to you? Oh, of course we’ll just build a small factory in each community. Hey, we’ve got a ways to go before come close to matching China in the use of concrete.
We’re at the hump or over the edge of Peak Oil on the downward slope, yet the price of it just keeps dropping. Behavior that would be classified as suicidal. Try to bring up the topic of Peak Oil now with gas prices dropping.
“We” certainly won’t have to worry about new customers according to this, Population controls ‘will not solve environment issues.
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-29788754
LikeLike
Read the other fucking coments by him in this thread and then you’ll get it. People just like to spout off without a clue. As I said earlier, people think in absolutes and no shades of grey!
LikeLike
Economic growth is a terrible pathology of the Earth. Industrial civilization is at its end, but this is a luck.
LikeLike
I agree he might be suffering from some cognitive dissonance, but it is part of our evolutionary make up, so I can’t agree that he suffers from lack of courage. It’s the willfully ignorant ones who refuse to even question their belief system when experiencing cognitive dissonance in the face of great evidence, that are the true cowards. White men are most guilty of this with Americans, especially conservatives, leading the pack (Often wrong but never uncertain). It’s just my opinion, but most of the non-whites from other countries that I have met seem much more open minded and willing to listen to others opinions. xraymike, you have spent time in south America, what say you?
LikeLike
Cause and effect. We are the cause, the effect will mostly be felt by someone else in the future. Too bad we can’t have a painful electric shock every time we burn some fossil fuels. But isn’t this the way humans are, more than willing to grab the reward now and place the electrodes firmly on someone else in the future? What they don’t realize is that the “someone” is not a stranger in the future but rather themselves reconstituted. And so many believe they’re going to leave a trashed planet and go to heaven to live in paradise, an idea that grabs hold in their selfish minds but is absolutely baseless. Humans evolved to make tools and manipulate information, but they still behave as stupid jackasses. Maybe its good that they won’t be reconstituted in the future, they’re unfit to survive.
LikeLike
After reading that Slate story mike posted, combined with everything else we know about the California and other current droughts, I’d have to say the future is already here; with more future to come.
LikeLike
From Simon Bisley’s interpretation of Paradise Lost…
LikeLike
Pingback from http://www.blckdgrd.com:
LikeLike
Watch what the typical American diet does to a lab rat…
LikeLike
LikeLike
Chimpanzees in Uganda’s Kigali National Park have been getting up to some unusual business at night. These daytime foragers with poor night vision have been leaving the safety of the forest, crossing a bridge over a large ditch meant to keep elephants out of neighboring crop areas, and raiding corn fields.
And they aren’t the only ones. Chimps in other areas are raiding farmers’ fields, as well.
Why is this noteworthy?
Well, according to a study out in PLOS ONE, this is the first recorded evidence that day-dwelling chimpanzees have significantly altered their behavior to include night-time feeding parties. Unlike some forest animals, chimpanzees’ eyes are not particularly suited for low-light vision, yet they are entering fields after sunset, and often during the darkness of a new moon.
Another development is that the raiders carry their food away with them, rather than eating it on the spot as usual. In doing so, they’ve overcome their own evolutionary wiring to eat during the day and avoid traditional nocturnal predators, like the jaguar, which has all but died out in these regions.
With habitat loss turning once-dense forests into mosaics of cultivated acreage and trees, and a reduction in the fruits usually eaten by the endangered chimps, the maize growing in nearby fields must seem like a decent alternative, if snares and farmer’s weapons can be avoided.
One can’t help but admire the chimpanzees’ audacity and creativity in the face of necessity, and their unwillingness to simply starve…
http://champagnewhisky.com/2014/10/27/heedless-ways/
LikeLike
Love it! Children of the corn.
LikeLike
Australia will be burning again this summer…

LikeLike
Have to say, more than most countries, they deserve it.
LikeLike
Lol. I was thinking the same thing, but did not want to say it given my fellow citizens happily elected a climate denying humanoid robo economist.
LikeLike
Published today by Greenman3610…
LikeLike
Two years ago, Camille Parmesan, a professor at Plymouth University and the University of Texas at Austin, became so “professionally depressed” that she questioned abandoning her research in climate change entirely.
Parmesan has a pretty serious stake in the field. In 2007, she shared a Nobel Peace Prize with Al Gore for her work as a lead author of the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). In 2009, The Atlantic named her one of 27 “Brave Thinkers” for her work on the impacts of climate change on species around the globe.
…
Parmesan certainly isn’t the first to experience some sort of climate-change blues. From depression to substance abuse to suicide and post-traumatic stress disorder, growing bodies of research in the relatively new field of psychology of global warming suggest that climate change will take a pretty heavy toll on the human psyche as storms become more destructive and droughts more prolonged. For your everyday environmentalist, the emotional stress suffered by a rapidly changing Earth can result in some pretty substantial anxieties.
For scientists like Parmesan on the front lines of trying to save the planet, the stakes can be that much higher. The ability to process and understand dense climatic data doesn’t necessarily translate to coping with that data’s emotional ramifications. Turns out scientists are people, too.
http://grist.org/climate-energy/climate-depression-is-for-real-just-ask-a-scientist/
LikeLike
Here is a companion piece.
Sandy’s mental health impact looms large
http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20141029/news/141028083/
LikeLike
Reblogged this on Damn the Matrix and commented:
well worth a look…
LikeLike
When I use the term “carbon man’, it literally means what it infers:
“50% of the protein and 80% of the nitrogen in our bodies can be directly linked to the CH4 from the Haber-Bosch process in natural gas, whereas 100-200 years ago people were essentialy made from sunlight.” ~ Nate Hagens
LikeLike
pingback to nate’s video here: http://goo.gl/mBcDkH but go to minute 39 to paul chefurka’s graph of how mono the world has become….only humans and their cattle! mike your blog is a great read will keep sharing the link to your site. have you read extinction dialogs yet? can borrow the book here in europe to readers via snail mail. also searching for collapse heads and tandem riders here in central europe for weekend trips…
LikeLike
No, have not read it, but will look for it at the local library.
LikeLike
This looks like a really dark movie, perhaps an allegorical tale on our “success at any cost” culture….
I’ll be watching this on opening night with my daughter.
http://www.nightcrawlerfilm.com/
LikeLike
LikeLike
Exploding Wealth Inequality in the United States
Posted on October 28, 2014 by Yves Smith
Yves here. This is a particularly important post on the state of inequality since Emanuel Saez, working with Thomas Piketty, was for over a decade tracking the rise in inequality in the US, particularly the way that the top 1% and 0.1% were pulling away from the rest of the population. Gabriel Zucman has made a recent important contribution to the analysis of wealth disparity by sizing the impact on global figures of the funds stashed in tax havens. A full 6% goes unrecorded, which by his estimates is enough to make the US less of a net debtor, Europe a net creditor, and of course, the rich in those regions even richer.
Saez and Zucman are particularly concerned that this level of wealth inequality is on its way to becoming entrenched.
…
How can we explain the growing disparity in American wealth? The answer is that the combination of higher income inequality alongside a growing disparity in the ability to save for most Americans is fuelling the explosion in wealth inequality. For the bottom 90% of families, real wage gains (after factoring in inflation) were very limited over the past three decades, but for their counterparts in the top 1% real wages grew fast. In addition, the saving rate of middle-class and lower-class families collapsed over the same period while it remained substantial at the top. Today, the top 1% families save about 35% of their income, while the bottom 90% families save about zero (Saez and Zucman 2014).
The Implications of Rising Wealth Inequality and Possible Remedies
If income inequality stays high and if the saving rate of the bottom 90% of families remains low then wealth disparity will keep increasing. Ten or 20 years from now, all the gains in wealth democratisation achieved during the New Deal and the post-war decades could be lost. While the rich would be extremely rich, ordinary families would own next to nothing, with debts almost as high as their assets. Paris School of Economics professor Thomas Piketty warns that inherited wealth could become the defining line between the haves and the have-nots in the 21st century (Piketty 2014). This provocative prediction hit a nerve in the US this year when Piketty’s book Capital in the 21st Century became a national best seller because it outlined a direct threat to the cherished American ideals of meritocracy and opportunity.
…
LikeLike
LikeLike
Professor Pianka still ‘blogs’. He sent me a link to an essay he wrote on human behavior. I just skimmed through it, but will sit down and read it more intently.
Here are a few excerpts:
…The continuing existence of all the denizens of this poor beleaguered planet, including ourselves, will ultimately depend more on our ecological understanding and wisdom than it will on irrational mysticism or future technological “advances.” We cannot rely on technological solutions. Technology is what got us to this precarious situation in the first place. Rather, we must obey natural laws of nature such as the laws of thermodynamics, reorganize society, and change our own lifestyles. Unless everybody plays his/her part, humanity is doomed.
Burning fossil fuels of any sort, and using energy in any way even via nuclear reactors only adds insult to injury because such activities produce waste heat that cannot be dissipated (Hansen et al, 2005). Hence we are actually speeding up the rate of global warming by all our efforts to find and use more energy, fracking included. Our voracious appetite for energy and our steadfast refusal to live by the rules of thermodynamics is rapidly shortening the time left for all life on planet Earth…
…Like all animals, humans have instincts, hard-wired behaviors that enhance our ability to cope with vital environmental contingencies. Our innate fear of snakes is an example. Two other powerful instincts, greed and the urge to procreate, now threaten our very existence. Any attempt to control human behavior is bound to meet with resistance and disapproval. Unless we can change our behavior, humans are facing the end of civilization. Our problem has several elements.
(1) We have invented social and economic systems that encourage greedy behavior, and we have actually institutionalized runaway greed.
(2) We are in a state of complete denial about the growth of human populations.
(3) Earth’s finite resources simply cannot support 7+ billion of us in the style to which we’d like to live.
(4) We must make a choice between quantity and quality of human life.
(5) To head off the inevitable collapse, we can no longer wait and merely react but we must become proactive. We must find ways to control dangerous human instincts, especially our greed and our urge to procreate.
…
Greed is another natural human instinct — we are all selfish and greedy at heart, and for sound evolutionary reasons. In times of scarcity, a stingy cave man was more likely to survive and reproduce than a generous one who shared his limited resources with the less fortunate. In short, we have been programmed to be selfish. Humans have institutionalized greed — we allow, even encourage, runaway greed. Our political and economic systems facilitate greed. Greed is the underlying driving force for both capitalism and entrepreneurship. Our banking and insurance companies, coupled with the formation of limited liability corporations and the stock market have allowed greed to explode.
Corporations have no conscience, but exist solely for whatever profits they can make. The stock market allows all of us to get a piece of the action. Corporate executives are paid obscene salaries and are not personally liable for activities they oversee. Corporations control politicians, who pass legislation that allows tax evasion and assures obscene corporate profits. The Supreme Court’s absurd ruling that corporations are “people” gave them unlimited power to buy politicians. Runaway human greed now threatens our very future and must somehow be controlled. Any attempt to control greed will be strenuously opposed by the wealthy. Indeed, it may prove to be impossible to overcome human instinctive behaviors…
LikeLike
Thanks for another polished essay xraymike, especially the effects of all this information on the otherwise “normal” psyche of we who are immersed in it, as it’s ringing true with me currently.
LikeLike
Desdemona Despair’s blog has some hard-hitting articles today. Among them is this one:
http://www.desdemonadespair.net/2014/10/graph-of-day-distribution-of-plastic.html
Graph of the Day: Distribution of plastic pollution in the Pacific, Atlantic, and Indian oceans
[we’ve turned the oceans into a sewer]
LikeLike
Emails on 10-29-2014…
Thanks Mike,
I am convinced that if we cannot find the collective will to control our dangerous instincts, humans are toast.
And that’s tragic because we could have been almost god-like stewards of planet Earth and kept it habitable for many millennia to come. If only people would live up to their full human potential . . .
Our voracious appetite for energy (and sex) is doing us in, along with all other Earthlings. Have you watched my “domino effects” video?
http://www.zo.utexas.edu/courses/THOC/Domino_Effects_Narrated.mov
Best wishes
Eric
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Professor Pianka,
That’s an excellent summary of what’s happening in an overpopulated planet whose “apex” species is overexploiting fossil fuels. However, I think there is one error in the video. The China highway may be a fake. See here…
http://www.bricoleurbanism.org/whimsicality/when-photoshop-is-so-good-its-bad/
Nonetheless, there are highways nearly as wide. I believe the Katy Freeway in Houston is the widest at 26 lanes:
And then there’s the 401 in Canada…
Many humans still think we will be Gods with our future technological innovations, but there is no technology that can put back all the melted ice!
Best Regards,
Mike
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hi again Mike
Thanks for the horrendous images of our incredible love of automobiles!
It would be exceedingly difficult for me to change that fradulent image
(and it won’t be the first time I’ve been deceived!)
Have you watched the NASA videos?
http://www.zo.utexas.edu/courses/THOC/Temps1880-2012-Fast.mov
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Yes, I’ve seen that. Amazing that our “leaders” can be aware of this and still push for economic growth. Here’s a video I made to illustrate their cognitive dissonance:
https://collapseofindustrialcivilization.com/2013/01/17/the-cognitive-dissonance-of-the-corporate-state-on-climate-change/
The ice will all go…
(http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/)
Best Regards,
Mike
LikeLike
As Professor Pianka says, “Arrogant ignorance cannot be beaten!”…
LikeLike
LikeLike
…
The real drivers of Ebola in West Africa – poverty and oil palm
The global health community has declared it a crisis of international importance, which has led the host nations to implement draconian preventions strategies, tantamount in some places to martial law in terms of surveillance, quarantine, border controls and other logistical aspects of control. But this is too little, too late.
There are several mechanisms through which the virus may have emerged, and it is unlikely that this latest outbreak was spontaneous.
It is poverty that drives villagers to encroach further into the forest, where they become infected with the virus when hunting and butchering wildlife, or through contact with body fluids from bats – this has been seen with Nipah, another dangerous virus associated with bats.
The likelihood of infection in this manner is compounded by inadequate rural health facilities and poor village infrastructure, compounded by the disorganised urban sprawl at the fringes of cities.
The virus then spreads in a wave of fear and panic, ill-conceived intervention and logistical failures – including even insufficient food or beds for the severely ill.
Take for example the global palm oil industry, where a similar trend of deep-cutting into forests for agricultural development has breached natural barriers to the evolution and spread of specific pathogens.
The effects of land grabs and the focus on certain fruit crop species leads to an Allee effect, where sudden changes in one ecological element causes the mechanisms for keeping populations – bats in this case – and viruses in equilibrium to shift, increasing the probability of spill over to alternative hosts.
Palm oil’s relentless march at the expense of forests and health
This is not unheard of; the introduction of fruit tree crops in cleared forests and agricultural expansion in Malaysia was associated with the emergence of Nipah virus. Bats feeding on fruit trees infected pigs in pens, which provided a vector for the virus to humans.
Another example is with vector-borne diseases such as the Japanese Encephalitis, a virus carried by wild birds which expanded its range due to growing rice and pig farming.
Chikungunya and Dengue Fever viruses exploited deforestation for secondary epidemiological cycles, which increased at the forest edge until the virus was able to adapt to secondary hosts and expand globally.
Certainly the complexity of the agro-ecological changes in West Africa warrant scrutiny. Guinea’s new agriculture is in an early stage of development, identified by the World Bank as the highest investment potential for industrial agriculture.
As global markets shift – and tariffs and taxes on multinational companies are removed, farmers with small land holdings are faced with a choice: either sell off or scale up to meet the competition. Forests are one of the first casualties.
A breakdown of traditional governance
Alongside this subtle effect is the dismantling of traditional governance, violence under colonial, neo-colonial and more recent kleptocratic governments and the economic movements of people towards urbanisation.
Such turbulence, poverty, the influx of refugees from neighbouring wars and crumbling health systems have all created an ecosystem in which the natural friction that prevents Ebola from gathering pathogenic momentum has been all but eroded.
Any international response can do little to remedy these contributing factors. In fact the response has been little more than a recognition of the complete failure of neo-liberal development strategies to contain the virus.
The ‘success’ of the Ebola virus is fundamentally based on the sociological factors and population biology of those it infects. But the data required to test the hypothesis – detailed records about what people eat, where they go and how they interact – is presently unavailable.
Instead research has focused on virus hunting, and with little success: more than 40,000 samples have not yet conclusively determined where the natural reservoir of Ebola lies.
All the while, the socio-ecological factors that are critical to the spread of any disease are ignored.
Richard Kock is Professor of Wildlife Health and Emerging Diseases at the Royal Veterinary College. He received funding from DFID to explore gaps and opportunities in the treatment or prevention of zoonoses in emerging livestock systems. Funding is current from EU through BBSRC on an emerging livestock viral disease in Africa – specifically PPR virus in wildlife populations.
LikeLike
Of course overpopulation is always an unspoken underlying factor…
LikeLike
Well done.Your point about fusion is correct.I also liked James’s phrasing about how we are not reluctant to place the electrodes firmly on future generations.A neat twist to ‘discounting the future’
LikeLike
Look fashionable in the China smog…
…China’s top models donned masks ranging from the traditional mouth-to-nose piece to a futuristic full-face, welding mask-like design to the always sexy and ultra-protective head-bag known as the facekini. Peng’s designs are versatile, light-weight, and (naturally) breathable…
LikeLike
You have to wonder about people who turn to hedge fund managers and other Wall Street types to get an accurate and forthright outlook on the future. It’s sort of like turning to the the wolf who’s guarding the hen house. What a perverted world we live in.
LikeLike
Interesting insight in the comments section of Scribbler’s site from a scientist who actually works on the fusion technology that Lockheed put out a press release on:
I appreciate the changes in the article. I still think you’re misreading the kilowatt of power. This is not a good thing. That kilowatt is what’s going to heat the plasma. That’s why I say that their temperatures are so minuscule that they can’t even breakthrough the radiation barrier. In my lab we put in 200 times that power and get temperatures of 30 million degrees.
When I first got into this field I thought we would have fusion power plants by now. I wanted a safe clean source of energy that could lift the world out of poverty. What a lot of us didn’t realize then is how difficult the physics is.
A few years ago I started to learn about climate. It’s why I read your blog where I’ve learned a great deal from you. Back in The early part of the year I tried to write up how I thought fusion would be instrumental in dealing with the climate crisis. I started out very optimistic. By the time I was done I changed my mind. Fusion is becoming irrelevant. If you want, you can read my writ-up here.
https://sites.google.com/site/opportunityforfusion/
I would appreciate your critical assessment. The article will explain my statement that fusion won’t impact the electrical grid until 2080. Much to my considerable anguish.
LikeLike
“For many centuries, civilization has been traveling in the direction of artificiality, control, and domination. Primitivism tells us that there is an inherent limit to our continued movement in that direction, and that at some point we must begin to choose to readapt ourselves to nature. The point of a primitivist critique of civilization is not necessarily to insist on an absolute rejection of every aspect of modern life, but to assist in clarifying issues so that we can better understand the tradeoffs we are making now, deepen the process of renegotiating our personal bargains with nature, and thereby contribute to the reframing of our society’s collective covenants.”
~ Richard Heinberg at The Primtivist. The Primitivist Critique of Civilization
LikeLike
Sea Level Fluctuation Ceased Globally 6k Years Ago, Resumed Rising 100 to 150 Years Ago…
Sea level and global ice volumes from the Last Glacial Maximum to the Holocene
Also…
New study shows three abrupt pulses of CO2 during last Deglaciation
This study is significant because it puts into context the current rate of CO2 rise and deglaciation. “What we are witnessing today really is extraordinary.”
LikeLike
Email(10-30-2014) from Professor Pianka…
Attached please find Kurt Vonnegut’s REQUIEM — it does a nice job of summing up our failure to appreciate this Our One and Only Spaceship. It was pretty durable but we broke into the life support systems’ control room and busted the atmosphere and the oceans.
I can’t understand why scientists of all people ignore the second law of thermodynamics. This is perilous because using energy produces waste heat which can’t be dissipated. People naively think that the “solution” to the energy “problem” is more energy. Humans are clever, so clever that we have actually figured out how to turn matter into energy by exploiting fission and fusion. Many people think that an unlimited supply of energy is therefore available. Nuclear energy may be virtually limitless, but it carries serious environmental hazards (particularly thermal pollution and radioactive waste). Some engineers see infinite energy prospects in beaming more solar energy from outer space to the planet’s surface. A Japanese company is actually proposing to capture solar energy on the moon and transmit it to Earth. People just don’t get it! Access to unlimited energy would lead to our downfall. We need to get by on LESS energy, not more. Producing excess waste heat by any means only speeds up global warming and shortens our already limited time on Spaceship Earth.
I also quite like the attached surrealistic painting from the END:CIV webpage. Together, Vonnegut’s REQUIEM with this neat painting make a pretty powerful visual statement.
Eric
LikeLike
A brilliant and incisive review by someone on tumblr…
Excerpt:
…Gyllenhaal plays Lou Bloom, a skeletal loner roaming the streets of Los Angeles at night, scratching a living by selling off purloined lengths of chain link fence and manhole covers for scrap. He’s cast adrift in a post-recession environment, living off his wits and looking for any opportunity to stake his claim to the big bucks.
One night, he stumbles upon a swarm of eager-eyed televison cameramen rubber-necking a burning car on the highway, and within no time he’s buying equipment, setting himself up in business and racing round LA in the midnight hours to film all the gory footage he can get close to before anyone else. He hires a homeless man, Rick (a suitably jittery performance by Riz Ahmed) as his intern, navigator and assistant, and develops a profitable working relationship with a local TV news station director (a mendacious Rene Russo). The film moves to another level of slick, nail-biting intensity when Lou gets to a crime scene before the police and sets off a chain of events that concludes in bloodthirsty amorality.
‘Nightcrawler’ is both a devastating indictment of warped news values in a brutal moral vacuum and a sharply witty discourse on the fine line between emotional disconnection and rampaging desire in the corporate jungle. It also offers a critique of how television screens tend to distance and desensitise humans to the most appalling atrocities. Who are the bad guys here? The answer is everyone is culpable as the other, from the television ratings wars demanding the ‘money shots’ to satiate the stations’ audiences to the fall-out of the American Capitalist dream and Lou’s wholesale embracing of the repugnant norms and values of his sick society.
http://thin-whiteduke1.tumblr.com/post/101200631551/nightcrawler
http://collapseofindustrialcivilization.tumblr.com/post/101345625897/a-brilliant-and-incisive-review
LikeLike
Interview: ‘Nightcrawler’ Director Dan Gilroy Talks Jake Gyllenhaal, Robert Elswit & Sociopaths
…What I love about Lou is that he feels like if you shoved the Great Gatsby under a rock and just fed him self-help books and other forms of bullshit for 50 years, and then saw what crawled out. Where did that whole “achiever” element of Lou’s personality come from?
I had heard about the nightcrawling world, and I’m very aware that there are tens of millions of young people around the world who are facing bleak employment prospects. Italy has 45% unemployment under 30 —it’s insane. So [I was exploring] the idea of a desperate younger person looking for work.
I started to think about the character, and that he didn’t have to be classically heroic. He could be an anti-hero. I started to think of the anti-hero; I think you have to be careful and aware that you don’t want it to be a reductive study of psycho-babble. You are looking for something more. You want the audience to connect in a way that goes beyond just sort of a pathological study. The idea of a character who had an implied back story of abuse and abandonments; I pictured him alone as a child, and all he had was his computer and he was going on his computer a lot surfing —this is the back story. And in his desperate loneliness and probably raging insanity, the precepts of capitalism became a religion to him. If you only had [one] direction to climb, which is up, then to have a goal would give sanity. I imagine he started to scour the internet for self-help maxims and aphorisms, and Forbes 500 corporate-HR manual speak. I believe he’s an uber-capitalist, and capitalism is a religion, it’s a religion that gives him sanity and which ultimately drives him insane and pushes him over the edge. It’s a mindless pursuit of a goal that can never be achieved. That ultimately leaves only a hunger, which goes back to the coyote —this perpetual hunger that can never be satiated.
The whole Zen thing of that wanting is to suffer, which capitalism never seems to get, because all capitalism is wanting.
It’s the perpetual spirit of poverty. I don’t know another system other than capitalism, maybe some mixed socialism thing. I wouldn’t want to hazard what the better system was, but I think we’re entering into this period of hyper free-market [capitalism] that’s becoming very much like the jungle, in which it is acceptable that the weak perish at the hands of the strong, and that’s the way it’s supposed to be. And I feel like the world as I see it —and this is a personal film on a lot of levels— has been reduced to transactions, and that Lou thrives in that world because that’s the only thing that has any relevance to him. And we approach it as a success story of a guy who is looking for work at the beginning and is the owner of a successful business at the end, and the reason I approach it that way is because I didn’t want at the end for the audience to go, “oh, the problem is this psychopath!” I wanted the audience to go “maybe the problem is the world that created and rewards this character.” Maybe it’s a larger question.
I keep thinking of “Broadcast News.” There’s that quick line of “you can get fired for that!” and Hurt replies “I got promoted for that!” Everything that Lou does which he knows is wrong, he gets promoted for and gets more success from.
That context has to do with human manipulation, and manipulation in the news now is rewarded to some degree. Edward R. Murrow is doing pirouettes in his grave right now at the concept that journalism is now not only manipulating but being driven by that [kind of manipulation].
The phrase that I love that news people keep coming back to in the film to talk about the kind of stories they want to highlight is “urban crime creeping to the suburbs.” It’s so sanitized, it just suggests geographic creep, but that’s not what it is at all.
No. On a specific level, it’s bullshit jargon hiding something truly terrifying. It’s perpetuating the myth and the horror that minorities are dangerous. And if you live in a suburban area regardless of your race, you are in danger from these desperate unwashed people who are going to creep over your hedge and somehow harm you and steal your car. That’s the true tragedy of this narrative that’s being presented by the news, when people then go to sleep and wake up in the morning and get in their car, and they encounter “a minority,” or someone who would fall into the category of that narrative of the “urban person.” You don’t approach them in an open, friendly and harmonious way. You look at them as instantly threatening and dangerous.
And I don’t want to tie it into current top-level stories, but what happened in Ferguson and what’s happening in other cities, where a black person standing alone is perceived and treated as dangerous, and in New York City they are frisked in such outlandish statistical numbers: I feel that there’s a pervasive, fearful narrative that’s being projected on all of us to create negative consequence.
When capitalism becomes dog eat dog, the problem is a) who wants to be a dog? And b) who wants to eat one?
Right, you’re going to be one or the other. And Lou is someone who has made peace with it and understands it and has no emotional attachment to thwart him or to slow him down. I find much of my energy in a day is worrying about people I love or myself. I wake up at 3 o’clock in the morning and find myself worrying about myself and friends and stuff and people I’ve encountered. Lou is unencumbered by that, and it gives him great ability to focus in and hunt…
……And if you were wrong about the bottom line being the only thing that’s important, you wouldn’t be being rewarded.
I believe —and when I was writing this film, I firmly believed— that if you came back in 10 years, Lou would be running a multi-million dollar, multi-national corporation. Lou would do better in comparison between himself and a corporate head who broke the company apart and put 40,000 people out of work and then went off to build an 8,000-foot square home and wound up on the cover of BusinessWeek Magazine…
…For increasing shareholder value.
These attributes are celebrated, and I believe Lou is a small fish compared to other people. And I believe Lou will do well and thrive when the movie ends.
It’s the reverse of a canary in a coal mine: The better he does, the worse trouble we’re in.
Absolutely. I believe it’s only the stupid sociopaths that are caught, and I believe most sociopaths are insanely brilliant in deciphering what human cues need to be manipulated, and the sociopaths know people like lions know gazelles; they know every weakness, they know every smell, they know every element that can be manipulated … and Lou understands people and knows how to do that…
LikeLike
Imagine nearly 6,000 dairy cows doing what cows do, belching and being flatulent for a full year. That’s how much methane was emitted from one Ohio reservoir in 2012.
Reservoirs and hydropower are often thought of as climate friendly because they don’t burn fossil fuels to produce electricity. But what if reservoirs that store water and produce electricity were among some of the world’s largest contributors of greenhouse gas emissions?
Scientists are searching for answers to that question, as they study how much methane is emitted into the atmosphere from man-made reservoirs built for hydropower and other purposes. Until recently, it was believed that about 20 percent of all man-made methane emissions come from the surface of reservoirs.
New research suggests that figure may be much higher than 20 percent, but it’s unclear how much higher because too little data is available to estimate. Methane is about 35 times as potent a greenhouse gas as carbon dioxide over the span of a century…
…In 2012 study, researchers in Singapore found that greenhouse gas emissions from hydropower reservoirs globally are likely greater than previously estimated, warning that “rapid hydropower development and increasing carbon emissions from hydroelectric reservoirs to the atmosphere should not be downplayed.”
Those researchers suggest all large reservoirs globally could emit up to 104 teragrams of methane annually. By comparison, NASA estimates that global methane emissions associated with burning fossil fuels totals between 80 and 120 teragrams annually.
But how much reservoirs contribute to global greenhouse gas emissions is “still a big question mark,” because the issue remains relatively unstudied and emission rates are highly uncertain, said John Harrison, an associate professor in the School of the Environment at the Washington State University-Vancouver whose research focuses on how reservoirs can be managed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
“So I don’t think we really know what the relative greenhouse gas effect of reservoirs is compared to other sources of energy in the U.S.,” he said.
LikeLike
Ethan Nagler on America2.0 says…
I am just realizing the consequences of what LeBlanc talks about in CONSTANT BATTLES: natural selection bred us to live the complete opposite of sustainable, both from a group standpoint and from an individual standpoint. It’s not just that our nature is pro-war and pro ecological destruction: our nature is also anti-peace and anti ecological balance. There’s a difference I think. These are of course generalities, averages, etc.
Using this framework, you’d predict that “farsighted, ecological geniuses” will be both ostracized in the group and an extremely difficult mindset to get into as an individual. My hypothesis is that part of you knows innately that the ecological mindset is bad for your progeny and your group.
“Telling people to live sustainably is like telling teenage girls to dress uglier.” – Our predicament in a nutshell: we have been bred to live unsustainably.
CONSTANT BATTLES: Why we Fight, Steven A. LeBlanc,St.Martin, 2004; <http://www.amazon.com/Constant-Battles-Why-We-Fight/dp/0312310900;
[pp. 73-75] Not only are human societies never alone, but regardless of how well they control their own population or act ecologically, they cannot control their neighbors’ behavior. Each society must confront the real possibility that its neighbors will not live in ecological balance but will grow its numbers and attempt to take the resources from nearby groups. Not only have societies always lived in a changing environment, but they always have neighbors. The best way to survive in such a milieu is not to live in ecological balance with slow growth, but to grow rapidly and be able to fend off competitors as well as take resources from others.
To see how this most human dynamic works, imagine an extremely simple world with only two societies and no unoccupied land. Under normal conditions, neither group would have much motivation to take resources from the other. People may be somewhat hungry, but not hungry enough to risk getting killed in order to eat a little better. A few members of either group may die indirectly from food shortages—via disease or infant mortality, for example—but from an individual’s perspective, he or she is much more likely to be killed trying to take food from the neighbors than from the usual provisioning shortfalls. Such a constant world would never last for long. Populations would grow and human activity would degrade the land or resources, reducing their abundance. Even if, by sheer luck, all things remained equal, it must be remembered that the climate would never be constant: Times of food stress occur because of changes in the weather, especially over the course of several generations. When a very bad year or series of years occurs, the willingness to risk a fight increases because the likelihood of starving goes up.
If one group is much bigger, better organized, or has better fighters among its members and the group faces starvation, the motivation to take over the territory of its neighbor is high, because it is very likely to succeed. Since human groups are never identical, there will always be some groups for whom warfare as a solution is a rational choice in any food crisis, because they are likely to succeed in getting more resources by warring on their neighbors.
Now comes the most important part of this overly simplified story: The group with the larger population always has an advantage in any competition over resources, whatever those resources may be. Over the course of human history, one side rarely has better weapons or tactics for any length of time, and most such warfare between smaller societies is attritional. With equal skills and weapons, each side would be expected to kill an equal number of its opponents. Over time, the larger group will finally overwhelm the smaller one. This advantage of size is well recognized by humans all over the world, and they go to great lengths to keep their numbers comparable to their potential enemies. This is observed anthropologically by the universal desire to have many allies, and the common tactic of smaller groups inviting other societies to join them, even in times of food stress.
Assume for a moment that by some miracle one of our two groups is full of farsighted, ecological geniuses. They are able to keep their population in check and, moreover, keep it far enough below the carrying capacity that minor changes in the weather, or even longer-term changes in the climate, do not result in food stress. If they need to consume only half of what is available each year, even if there is a terrible year, this group will probably come through the hardship just fine. More important, when a few good years come along, these masterfully ecological people will/not/grow rapidly, because to do so would mean that they would have trouble when the good times end. Think of them as the ecological equivalent of the industrious ants.
The second group, on the other hand, is just the opposite—it consists of ecological dimwits. They have no wonderful processes available to control their population. They are forever on the edge of the carrying capacity, they reproduce with abandon, and they frequently suffer food shortages and the inevitable consequences. Think of this bunch as the ecological equivalent of the carefree grasshoppers. When the good years come, they have more children and grow their population rapidly. Twenty years later, they have doubled their numbers and quickly run out of food at the first minor change in the weather. Of course, had this been a group of “noble savages” who eschewed warfare, they would have starved to death and only a much smaller and more sustainable group survived. This is not a bunch of noble savages; these are ecological dimwits and they attack their good neighbors in order to save their own skins. Since they now outnumber their good neighbors two to one, the dimwits prevail after heavy attrition on both sides. The “good” ants turn out to be dead ants, and the “bad” grasshoppers inherit the earth. The moral of this table is that if any group can get itself into ecological balance and stabilize its population even in the face of environmental change, it will be tremendously disadvantaged against societies that do not behave that way. The long-term successful society, in a world with many different societies, will be the one that grows when it can and fights when it runs out of resources. It is useless to live an ecologically sustainable existence in the “Garden of Eden” unless the neighbors do so as well. Only one nonconservationist society in an entire region can begin a process of conflict and expansion by the “grasshoppers” at the expense of the Eden-dwelling “ants.” This smacks of a Darwinian competition—survival of the fittest—between societies. Note that the “fittest” of our two groups was not the more ecological, it was the one that grew faster. The idea of such Darwinian competition is unpalatable to many, especially when the “bad” folks appear to be the winners.
LikeLike
That relates to one of Professor Pianka posts about stupid, uncaring people and/or the truly ignorant, out breeding everyone else. Only the leaders have to be bad as long as the majority are stupid and easily manipulated; like most have become. It’s not that hard to manipulate most people. All it takes is some one with average intelligence, no qualms and an understanding of Edward Bernays teachings and your well on your way. It explains why psychopaths run the world. If it wasn’t for industrial civilization we could have kept cycling empires indefinitely.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on Gaia will prevail.
LikeLike
Lower taxes and de-regulation Ronald Regan’s real legacy? Yet how many cities, in whole or in part, funded stadiums for the NFL (Most profitable sports league in the world) NBA, MLB, NHL in the last 30 years? Solid and dependable infrastructure ranks higher than low tax rates for business as well as local education levels. I think you will see companies bail before residents. There isn’t the money for repairs let alone necessary replacement. I think we will see/continue to see cities and parts of large cities abandoned. Some places might still be able to offer bonds, but it’s just another band-aide. Climate change will make it that much worse. I think another north east vortex is coming this weekend.
As Infrastructure Crumbles, Trillions Of Gallons Of Water Lost
http://www.npr.org/2014/10/29/359875321/as-infrastructure-crumbles-trillions-of-gallons-of-water-lost
LikeLike
It’s Halloween, people! Go have some mischief.
😜
LikeLike
Climate change clearly could cause “catastrophic civilization collapse.” Confoundingly, capitalism’s carbon-based consumption cannot change course, constantly chanting (cursing?) “consume, consume, consume.” Callous, craven, criminal “conservatives” consume carbon-rich coal, covertly calculating changed climatic conditions can create cash. Concurrently, certain cowardly climatologists, chiefly co-opted careerists, continually confuse citizens, claiming climate change cannot cause catastrophe, confirming capitalists’ careless carbon control, consequently conceivably crashing civilization.
LikeLike
In response to Paul Kingsnorth’s piece on climate change, I’d like to make three points (LRB, 23 October). First, China, India and other newly industrialising countries (NICs) don’t dispute the threat of global warming but they have concluded that the benefits of economic growth far outweigh it. As they don’t accept any of the catastrophe scenarios, this isn’t an irrational position, but rather the conclusion cost-benefit analysis has led them to. Even if one disagrees with them, or even if their position were irrational, what would it matter? China’s emissions alone make global emission reductions impossible.
There is nothing in the 1992 Framework Convention to alter the will of the NICs to put growth before emissions. It isn’t, despite what Kingsnorth says, that the Convention isn’t binding. It is. But far from containing an agreement on global emissions reduction, it gives explicit permission to developing countries, including China, India and other NICs, to prioritise growth. These countries would never have signed the Convention otherwise. All subsequent climate change negotiations have been predicated on this, which is why they have gone nowhere and why no agreement of any value will be reached in Paris in 2015. China and India have been utterly consistent in their diplomatic stance, the last display of this being their refusal to send their heads of government to the UN’s Climate Summit in New York on 23 September, despite the strongest requests having been made to them to do so. Narendra Modi of India was actually in New York on the day of the summit, but had other business.
The choice for those who acknowledge the threat of global warming is not between mitigation (prevention is no longer thought possible) or doing nothing. It is between mitigation or adaptation. The Stern Review concluded that mitigation was by far the cheaper course of action, but it did so with very little thought being given to the question of whether the institutions necessary for mitigation could be created. Naomi Klein’s fantasies of world government notwithstanding, the position of China, India and other NICs has always meant that such institutions can’t be created, making mitigation impossible.
The trillions which the developed countries have spent and plan to spend on mitigation have been and will be wasted, as there have been no global emissions reductions and there never will be. The failure of the collective brain of environmentalism to look this in the face will erode the goodwill which is its principal resource when its role in causing the immense waste becomes indisputable. This will be another very regrettable result of international climate change policy.
David Campbell
Bishop Auckland, Durham
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n21/letters
LikeLike
“as there have been no global emissions reductions and there never will be.”
He is correct. They go up every year along with deforestation, ocean acidification, sea level rise, species extinction, dozens of feedback’s, and a host of other nasty things. Don’t lose hope or act negative, because people don’t like it and they won’t want you around.
LikeLike
http://witsendnj.blogspot.co.at/2014/11/misprision.html gail zawacki presents dark ecology thoughts from Claire Colebrook wih link to the ebook: Death of the PostHuman: Essays on Extinction…
LikeLike
Some pointed art [All Artwork by William Banzai]
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/
LikeLike
sorry, the above link is too general – try this instead:
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/11/ebola-art.html
LikeLike