NASA Study: "Collapse Is Very Difficult To Avoid"

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by Simon Black of Sovereign Man blog,

As any long-time reader of this column knows, we routinely draw from historical lessons to highlight that this time is not different.

Throughout the 18th century, for example, France was the greatest superpower in Europe, if not the world.

But they became complacent, believing that they had some sort of ‘divine right’ to reign supreme, and that they could be as fiscally irresponsible as they liked.

The French government spent money like drunken sailors; they had substantial welfare programs, free hospitals, and grand monuments.

They held vast territories overseas, engaged in constant warfare, and even had their own intrusive intelligence service that spied on King and subject alike.

Of course, they couldn’t pay for any of this.

French budget deficits were out of control, and they resorted to going heavily into debt and rapidly debasing their currency.

Stop me when this sounds familiar.

The French economy ultimately failed, bringing with it a 26-year period of hyperinflation, civil war, military conquest, and genocide.

History is full of examples, from ancient Mesopotamia to the Soviet Union, which show that whenever societies reach unsustainable levels of resource consumption and allocation, they collapse.

I’ve been writing about this for years, and the idea is now hitting mainstream.

A recent research paper funded by NASA highlights this same premise.

According to the authors:

    “Collapses of even advanced civilizations have occurred many times in the past five thousand years, and they were frequently followed by centuries of population and cultural decline and economic regression.”

The results of their experiments show that some of the very clear trends which exist today– unsustainable resource consumption, and economic stratification that favors the elite– can very easily result in collapse.

In fact, they write that “collapse is very difficult to avoid and requires major policy changes.”

This isn’t exactly good news.

But here’s the thing– between massive debts, deficits, money printing, war, resource depletion, etc., our modern society seems riddled with these risks.

And history certainly shows that dominant powers are always changing.

Empires rise and fall. The global monetary system is always changing. The prevailing social contract is always changing.

But there is one FAR greater trend across history that supercedes all of the rest… and that trend is the RISE of humanity.

Human beings are fundamentally tool creators. We take problems and turn them into opportunities. We find solutions. We adapt and overcome.

The world is not coming to an end. It’s going to reset. There’s a huge difference between the two.

Think about the system that we’re living under.

A tiny elite has total control of the money supply. They wield intrusive spy networks and weapons of mass destruction. The can confiscate the wealth of others in their sole discretion. They can indebt unborn generations.

Curiously, these are the same people who are so incompetent they can’t put a website together.

It’s not working. And just about everyone knows it.

We’re taught growing up that ‘We the People’ have the power to affect radical change in the voting booth. But this is another fairy tale.

Voting only changes the players. It doesn’t change the game.

Technology is one major game changer. The technology exists today to completely revolutionize the way we live and govern ourselves.

Today’s system is just a 19th century model applied to a 21st century society. I mean– a room full of men making decisions about how much money to print? It’s so antiquated it’s almost comical.

But given that the majority of Western governments borrow money just to pay interest on money they’ve already borrowed, it’s obvious the current game is almost finished.

When it ends, there will be a reset… potentially a tumultuous one.

This is why you want to have a plan B, and why you don’t want to have all of your eggs in one basket.

After all, why bother working so hard if everything you’ve ever achieved or provided for your children is tied up in a country with dismal fundamentals?

If you agree with me, then feel free to share this article with your friends below so they also can get a plan B in place. They’ll be glad they did.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Real Estate Geek's picture

NASA?  WTF?  Why aren't they focusing . . . outwards?

Indian_Goldsmith's picture

Budget Cuts. Money that was to be spent focusing outwards, is better spent providing condoms to sluts, according to the crony intellectuals #DoYouGotInsurance !

I am more equal than others's picture



A classic case of 'proof texting.'  Finding non sequiturs to make a predetermined point.  

Their suck-ass motivation is obvious and serves their glowbull warming masters.



Indian_Goldsmith's picture

 $700 million  were spend on the ad campaign for Obamacare, and all they could come up with was pajama boy sissy drinking hot chocolate and being all mushy.

maskone909's picture

What does MASA -the mexican nasa, have to say about this?

We are in the truman show friends!

^^^ forest gump horror movie recut

bonderøven-farm ass's picture

Wasn't NASA demoted to Muslim Outreach duties?

Mister Kitty's picture

The world's been collapsing forever and a day.  You act like this is something new.  Bitches.

Supernova Born's picture

WTF is with these spammers?

...and it's GOLD, bitchez, not some blog.

Blano's picture

Mister Kitty is also National Blessing.  Yeah WTF I have a blog now too but I don't spam it on here.  Plus who gives a shit what he has for dinner every freaking post.

Pinto Currency's picture

NASA - crashes just happen. 

Nothing to do with centrally planned money system based on debt where the banks are shareholders of the central bank that sets the interest rate that creates the debt that finances the bubbles.

Oh and watch out for humanity's CO2 driving global warming.

We need to tax that global warming out of existence.

old naughty's picture

"they were frequently followed by centuries of population and cultural decline..."

That is it !

NoDebt's picture

Simon Black is a genius.  Up until this article my view of this subject was very basic.  Went something like this: "On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everything drops to zero."  How uneducated and foolish I was.

I'm so glad he condescended to show me the reasons and nuances of the highly complex process called death.  And the NASA stuff is a nice touch.  Since they know how to send rockets into space (even though they no longer do), obviously, they must be experts on societal devolution.  The two subjects are almost the same, as anyone can plainly see.

I think NASA has either been infected by liberal/statists recently or they're about ready to finally admit to contact with alien life.

Angus McHugepenis's picture

NoDebt: Always love reading your posts. Don't worry about the .gov bullshit or NASA crap. When people start to realize they have but a mere 30 productive years to enjoy this world they will stop worrying about taxes, spying, montiored communications, etc. They will start to shed their slavery and start to tell the .gov to fuck off.

We are the only species on this planet that has to pay rent to the Red Shield. Time to visit the RottenChilds where they live and eliminate them and their banking ponzi once and for all.

But I digress...

NoDebt's picture

Thanks, Angus.  But that short 30 year productive timeframe (of which, I'm 24 years in with 24 more to go before I can finally go face-first into the keyboard at my desk from a stroke) is probably more of a reason why average people will NEVER rebel against this crap.  No matter how bad it gets, it does so by degrees.  Revolutions are messy and everyone knows it.  So we sit in the pot like a frog slowly brought to a boil.

Other members on here have said something along the lines of "until supply lines break in earnest, nothing changes."  I agree with those comments, in general.  Until confidence is lost utterly, people will keep drinking the desert sand, being told it's actually water.

Gief Gold Plox's picture

Simon's a sack of shit as far as I can tell. His writing gives the term "utter drivel" a bad name. In this particular article he's emphasizing NASA even though they've repeatedly stated they had nothing to do with the research paper in question. And for what? To grow his e-pen and appear smarter, and to get a few more clicks. A click whore, desperate for attention.

weburke's picture

specially since nasa is such an untrustable source.

fockewulf190's picture

Why fly to Mars when you know your eventually going to be reduced to defending an enclave with some of the last gas on earth, being screamed at by the Lord Humungus?

BLOTTO's picture

NASA is an occult organization.


And if your head explodes with dark forebodings too

I'll see you on the dark side of the moon.

- Pink Floyd, 'Brain Damage'

NoDebt's picture

You just quoted one of my favorite bands.  Doesn't matter if I disagree with your comment, you get an upvote regardless.

chumbawamba's picture

Blotto is a smart guy.  You might want to heed what he's saying.

I am Chumabwamba.

jbvtme's picture

long meteors and biblical floods

knukles's picture


Don't leave home without them.

economics9698's picture

The tribe fucks up another country.

GeorgeHayduke's picture

I'll take locusts and plagues over bankers any day.

Raging Debate's picture

Indian Goldsmith - Way to net out. I like to look at nature to understand ourselves at times. There is a lot to observe regarding the cycles of Blue Jays which are predtors and Cardinals. The lesson summary is the cycle of the robber and those that mostly learn the hard way about predation. I have observed 1/3 of the Cardinals dissapearing in a cycle and then no more Blue Jays for awhile. We're at the end of the Blue Jay cycle but sadly it is likely such will make 1/3 of us disappear.

I am only pleased realizing we are at the end of our human evolution, of Blue Jays and Cardinals.

Raging Debate's picture

Indian Goldsmith - Way to net out. I like to look at nature to understand ourselves at times. There is a lot to observe regarding the cycles of Blue Jays which are predtors and Cardinals. The lesson summary is the cycle of the robber and those that mostly learn the hard way about predation. I have observed 1/3 of the Cardinals dissapearing in a cycle and then no more Blue Jays for awhile. We're at the end of the Blue Jay cycle but sadly it is likely such will make 1/3 of us disappear.

I am only pleased realizing we are at the end of our human evolution, of Blue Jays and Cardinals.

knukles's picture

I read a synopses/review/Cliff Notes thingamajiggie to the NASA study.  It's core thesis was that Income Inequality and Global Warming were the prime determinants of the decline and fall of civilization.

The original article was hyping the need for Agenda 21, higher taxes, kumbayah, happy happy joy joy, etc.

A Lunatic's picture

Something NASA conveniently left out in it's assessment of reasons for the decline and fall of Empires is the very high cost of unbridled conquest......

EscapeKey's picture

Joseph Tainter said it best: societies collapse, because there no longer is an economic reason for them to exist.

get his book, "collapse of complex societies" for a seriously good read

SgtShaftoe's picture

It's a good book. All the more reason to start building parallel systems.  The systems we build from scratch now, will be the only system when this shitstorm finally hits fever pitch. 

NotApplicable's picture

Well, parallel systems emerge naturally in any competitive environment.

Welcome to the Dark Ages 2.0.

Thought Processor's picture



An even better book is called "Overshoot".


Best summed up by a commenter on Amazon:

"I own some eight thousand books and if my house caught fire this is the only book I would risk my life to save. Read it and it will change the way you view the human race. Probably one of the most important books ever written."


And yes, it's that good.

A Lunatic's picture

This is the most complex society to date. The collapse should be quite memorable; if anyone survives to remember. Thanks for the reference, I'll be adding it to my Library.

GeorgeHayduke's picture

Good point, although conquest and decimation of other cultures are so well ingrained into the 'Mercan mindset that few even think about or consider this concept.

As proof just look at the reaction the majority of 'Mercans anytime anyone mentions cutting the military industry's budget. The mainstream morons go crazy and throw out idiotic slogans like" we have to fight them over there so we don't have to fight them here." This, even though the military consumes half the total US gov't budget and nearly spends more than the rest of the world combined. Then it treats its vets like shit once they are done with them. Just one more expendable war tool in their eyes it seems. It's amazing.

A Lunatic's picture

We could cut the defense budget by 90% and still be able to provide for the defense of the nation as defined by the United States Constitution. We haven't been invaded since 1812, meanwhile we have practically conquered the known world. Alexander the Great would be proud, the rest of us, not so much......

SAT 800's picture

Which, however, was noticed by every student of the subject that had their brain turned on and wasn't paid by Boy oh Boy. "you can believe NASA; they scientists"; huh-huh.

disabledvet's picture

it's all uphill from here.
we are all doomed.


the only thing worse than "teleprompter man" is "doomer teleprompter man."
besides...i'm a Northern Yankee...i'm picky about claims that my eternal soul is doomed as well.

EscapeKey's picture

 ”…. the Elites eventually consume too much, resulting in a famine among Commoners that eventually causes the collapse of society. It is important to note that this Type-L collapse is due to an inequality-induced famine that causes a loss of workers, rather than a collapse of Nature.”


knukles's picture

Lemme see here.
The fallacy of their statement.

Of all the people on the planet earth (using income as a ruler of well being Which It Is Not, but the data is available) $25,000 gross income (Gross!) places an individual in the 1%.
Seems that our 1% globally do a pretty fine job of consumption, including gang-bangers in Detroit, Appalachian bums, Leeches upon the federal survival system, etc. 
Now, seems to me that 1%'s consumption is not the problem, but the absolute magnitude of the consumption of the 99% plus the 1%, or the 100% is what just might be taxing the ecosystems to death.
Plain Goddamned Too Many Fucking People, Period.

Income Inequality has fuck all to do with it.

Plus, I'm sure those who preceded the Egyptians and actually built the pyramids who the disappeared from the face of the earth, was not due to income inequality, FFS.

I get so bloody angry at Horseshit like this, pure political gobbldiegook, Propaganda and PC Think.
This Crap along with Overpopulation (at this juncture) and Central Fiat Banking are the Reasons for the Decline and Fall of Empire.

The people's predecessors who wrote this shit should have been crucified along the Apian Way

Seer's picture

Yeah, I don't think that this is correct either.  BUT, there's an angle/component of it that carries truth and that's per-person consumption, and, without a doubt, this IS higher when one gets above the extreme poverty (the majority of humans on the planet live on something like $3/day or less).  It is NOT the cause all by iteself, as if there were ONLY 1 million people on the planet and they all lived like Bill Gates it would be highly unlikely that there could be any resource shortages for a very, very, very, very long time.

It's cummulative.  Everyone is part of the issue/concern: I'll refrain from referring to people as the "problem" because we're pretty much just doing what we were programmed to do (genetics), what every other life form is programmed to do.

It's unequivical that we cannot have perpetual growth on a finite planet.  So, yes, there is such a thing as overpopulation; the ONLY question is what is the threshold for determing it- it's highly likely to be a rear-view-mirror thing.

Ghordius's picture

correct. knukles is again at that old thing about consumption, the finite planet and so on. a fine point wielded like a club

consumption is relative. and overconsumption is... cultural. have a look here at those meat consumption statistics

the average American consumes  31 kg of pork,    49 kg of chicken and   45 kg of beef in one year   (total: 125 kg)

the average   Briton    consumes  25 kg of pork,    28 kg of chicken and      19 kg of beef in one year     (total:  72 kg)

the average  German   consumes 58 kg of pork,  15 kg of chicken and      15 kg of beef in one year     (total:  88 kg)

and this goes down, down, down to countries where people live a healthy life, have good food, and yet their total meat consumption per year is... around 10 kg

and then even further down

now if you know how much food is necessary to produce meat instead of other edible things, and how different the types of meat are in this calculation... you start to realize that it's a problem due to a mix of a quantity, quality and culture. and this using something as mundane as meat as an indicator, then when it comes to oil... oh, boy

SAT 800's picture

Oh, I see; 1% of the people eat all the food in the world causing famine. Yeah, that sounds very logical. Whew; boy; they really are whack jobs.

SAT 800's picture

Really, ?. Global Warming ? Holy Crap. That's really crazy. global temperatures do vary a small amount around the average, of course; but the warmer periods in history correspond to longer growing periods for food crops; higher standards of living, (more food), higher population and more advances in technology and civilization. It's the cold periods, the years without a summer, that cause the shit to hit the fan; people tend to get irrational and cranky with the neighbors when they're starving. I had no idea NASA was such a propaganda puppet. What a shame.

Seer's picture

"but the warmer periods in history correspond to longer growing periods for food crops"

In general one could make this argument.  But, one doesn't just shift over crop production over night.  And given our huge Ag systems that are totally pinned down in the way they operate and are not all the mobile, well, feel lucky?

BTW - There WILL be another glacial period.  It's earth's way of re-tilling the planet (after the loss of topsoil, which happens naturally but can be sped up by other processes [human activity being one]).

"higher population and more advances in technology and civilization."

"Technology" is a PROCESS.  If the inputs to a process -natural resources- do not exist then all that that technology represents is a good-sounding recipe.  And then there's Jevons Paradox.

general ambivalent's picture

Global warming contributes to longer growing periods? Sorry, but the kneejerk responses to climate change are a bit like the FED theatre. A longer growing season doesn't matter a whole lot if you get 200 mm of rain during the week before harvest. And if the soil goes to hell, well...

Not to mention the municipal waste they're dumping on the crops, and all the extra chemicals repatriating into the soil and bioaccumulating. Natural fluctuations in global temperature are not the same as climate change and geoengineering. It should be called geoclimate because it is fictitious, just completely opposite to what denialists say.

zionhead's picture

Knules, ... really not a mention about ZIONIST KLEPTOCRACY, ... not even in the tiny shit at the bottom of the 10,000 page paper.

Fuck read Carrol Quigley the official CIA historian, he felt it too important not to tell the truth to future CIA leaders.

Quigley felt it was OK, to have 90% of the universitys teach historical BULLSHIT, but he felt that the ANGLO-SAXON takeover of the world was so important that the spawn of ZIO needed to know how it was done, so they could keep it forever.


stant's picture

nasa is just the post office with rockets. or untill they took them away.thats why the us af went its own way .thier shuttle is unmaned and stays up for months. nasa version got canned because it had a per unit failure rate of 40%. truth hurts

weburke's picture

because nasa never did do anything "outwards". except as theater

Deathrips's picture

Maybe if they quit focusing outwards...we could start looking for solutions here? Just maybe?