This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Guest Post: Three Paths To Near-Term Human Extinction
Submitted by Guy McPherson of Nature Bats Last
Three Paths To Near-Term Human Extinction
About a decade ago I realized we were putting the finishing touches on our own extinction party, with the party probably over by 2030. During the intervening period I’ve seen nothing to sway this belief, and much evidence to reinforce it. Yet the protests, ridicule, and hate mail reach a fervent pitch when I speak or write about the potential for near-term extinction of Homo sapiens.
“We’re different.”
“We’re special.”
“We’re too intelligent.”
“We’ll find a way out. We always do.”
We’re humans, and therefore animals. Like all life, we’re special. Like all organisms, we’re susceptible to overshoot. Like all organisms, we will experience population decline after overshoot.
Let’s take stock of our current predicaments, beginning with one of several ongoing processes likely to cause our extinction. Then I’ll point out the good not quite so bad news.
We’re headed for extinction via global climate change
It’s hotter than it used to be, but not as hot as it’s going to be. The political response to this now-obvious information is to suspend the scientist bearing the bad news. Which, of course, is no surprise at all: As Australian climate scientist Gideon Polya points out, the United States must cease production of greenhouse gases within 3.1 years if we are to avoid catastrophic runaway greenhouse. I think Polya is optimistic, and I don’t think Obama’s on-board with the attendant collapse of the U.S. industrial economy.
Apparently — too little, too late — a couple people have noticed a few facts about Obama. This “awakening” might explain why his political support is headed south at a rapid clip.
But back to climate change, one of three likely extinction events. Well, three I know about: I’m certain there are others, and any number can play. With four months remaining in the year, the U.S. has already tied its yearly record for the most billion-dollar weather disasters. Russia is headed directly for loss of 30% of its permafrost by 2050. Tundra fires could accelerate planetary warming. This year, the Northeast Passage was open as of 27 July. This is a massively dire situation for the Arctic. In fact, we have passed a de facto tipping point with respect to Arctic ice. This latter outcome is stunning, but only to those who follow the horrifically conservative and increasingly irrelevant Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Nature is responding with hybrid bears, suggesting the near-term loss of all polar bears. Indeed, all Earth’s systems are rapidly declining. Many organisms can’t keep up as they try to stay ahead of an overheating planet.
As the living planet decays, we keep piling on. Examples abound. Here’s one tiny example among thousands, from that pesky BP well at Deepwater Horizon. It’s out of the news cycle, but it’s not done destroying life in the Gulf of Mexico. But perhaps this tidbit belongs beneath the heading of …
We’re headed for extinction via environmental collapse
Nature is bankrupt, just like Wall Street and the USA. Thanks for playing, but you lose. The banksters on Wall Street “win.” But only in the short term. In the long run, we’re all dead (as first stated by John Maynard Keynes).
Among the consequences of taking down more than 200 species each day: at some point, the species we take into the abyss is Homo sapiens (the wise ape). The vanishing point draws nearer every day. Our response, in the industrialized world: Bring on the toys. Burn all fossil fuels. Harvest the rain forests and strip-mine the soil. Pollute the water, eat the seed bank.
And, most importantly, figure out how we can make a few bucks as the world burns.
We have our hand in a monkey trap, and we can’t let go.
We’re headed for extinction via nuclear meltdown
Safely shuttering a nuclear power plant requires a decade or two of careful planning. Far sooner, we’ll complete the ongoing collapse of the industrial economy. This is a source of my nuclear nightmares.
When the world’s 442 nuclear power plants melt down catastrophically, we’ve entered an extinction event. Think clusterfukushima, times 400. Ionizing radiation could, and probably will, destroy every terrestrial organism and, therefore, every marine and freshwater organism. That, by the way, includes the most unique, special, intelligent animal on Earth.
Ready for some good news?
Meanwhile, back on Wall Street
The Securities and Exchange Commission is busily covering up Wall Street crimes, just as they did during the last presidential administration. And, as it turns out, they’ve been performing this trick for two decades. Finally, though, the S&P is taking the U.S. to the woodshed.
The S&P knows what the media and politicians know: U.S. national debt isn’t really $14 trillion and change, as we’ve been led to believe. In fact, it exceeds $200 trillion. And, back when it was a mere $10.5 trillion, it exceeded the value of all circulating currencies as well as all the gold ever mined. It cannot be paid off, ever. The response will be default. With luck, it’ll happen quickly and completely, thus sending us directly to the new dark age (with the post-industrial Stone Age soon to follow).
The ongoing crash of the stock markets differs from prior events because, for one thing, the Fed is about out of ammunition. At this juncture, there are no easy solutions. In fact, there are no solutions at all. We have just about used up all our “rabbits in the hat” as far as fiscal and monetary policy are concerned. Economics pundit Graham Summers agrees: The Fed is about to find itself completely powerless as 2008 redux appears.
Think of 2008 as an economic teddy bear, and 2011 as a grizzly. And I think I mentioned this one already: The hunters are out of bullets.
The all-too-expected political response from the final remaining superpower: ratchet up covert wars. Maybe, while we’re at it, launch another World War.
The bottom line
You’ve been warned repeatedly in this space, and the Guardian finally joins the party: The industrial economic system is about to blow. This burst of hope, our remaining chance at salvation, will undoubtedly be greeted with the usual assortment of protests, ridicule, and hate mail I’ve come to expect from planetary consumers who want to keep consuming the planet.
The underlying predicament — reduction in available energy — is described graphically by Gail Tverberg in this essay. She then tacks on fine analysis in this subsequent essay. Jared Diamond adds a dose of complexity, as described by Erik Curren at Transition Voice.
But these warning shots are only the most recent in a rich history dating back to Marcus Aurelius (and probably further). For materials only slightly older than me that focus on our energy predicament, take a peek at M. King Hubbert’s 1956 paper and the text of Admiral Hyman G. Rickover’s 1957 speech.
And then, let go.
»
- 43106 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Sure it has, Flaky. <sarcasm> . Unfortunately for the Warmists like yourself, Climategate put the stake into AGW. It was proof positive that the scientists involved were pursuing a political agenda, that their data sets were doctored, that they were thwarting and suppressing opposing views. Instead of pursuing truth, they were attacking and undermining legitimate scientists in the name of their grants, social position and political paymasters. They are a signal example of what happens when scientists pursue agendas instead of truth. They are a disgrace to science, and epitomize what is wrong with AGW. They have permanently tainted the reputation of climate scientists, everywhere.
Oh, perhaps you care to refute Climategate, line by line? Didn't think so.
I don't have to refute for you. It already has been done. Look it up. Hell, I even provided some links for you to start you on your way....
If you are too intellectually lazy, I'm sorry...
I'm also sorry that your worldview has been shattered and you are grasping at straws...
As for your MBA, I went to Wall St. and showed the MBAs at the firm the problems with their modelling of ABS, CDOs etc....Took me a few months to realize they were all whores.. Hell I spotted some bogus shit in TRIAXX CDOs that were being peddled and got our end of the deal killed. I think AIG ended up eating that shit sandwich....
Dear Flakmeister,
Please link to the 20 plus peer reviewed papers you claimed to have authored. I enclose a copy of your CV for reference.
Thank You
Russki
PS CCX is dead. Sucks to be you.
Flakmeister
Vote up! 0
Vote down! 0
M. Sc. in Theoretical Physics, Ph.D. Experimental Physics,
Post Doctroral Experience: U. of Chicago, U. Michigan, Visiting scientist U. of Manchester,
Staff Scientist at Brookhaven National Lab
Primary author of ~20 peer reviewed research papers....
Referee for the Physical Review
Internationally known: Invited seminars and colloquia in 7 countries, 3 continents.... ~20 of the top 100 research universities in US, places like Stanford, CalTech. Featured speaker at 2 international conferences....
Over 20 years experience basic research....
And while not related 5 years experience in structured finance on Wall St.
Hope that helps....
Just curious Flaky. Been following the thread and noticed quite a pattern on your part. You seem to tout any opposing view as bunk because of the lack of credentials on the part of the poster, regardless of what credentials they present. What are your credentials? I mean, specific degrees related to your stated opinions? Where did they originate from (what institutions of higher learning) specifically? When did you aquire them (what dates)? Just in the interest of vetting your stated superiority of course.
M. Sc. in Theoretical Physics, Ph.D. Experimental Physics,
Post Doctroral Experience: U. of Chicago, U. Michigan, Visiting scientist U. of Manchester,
Staff Scientist at Brookhaven National Lab
Primary author of ~20 peer reviewed research papers....
Referee for the Physical Review
Internationally known: Invited seminars and colloquia in 7 countries, 3 continents.... ~20 of the top 100 research universities in US, places like Stanford, CalTech. Featured speaker at 2 international conferences....
Over 20 years experience basic research....
And while not related 5 years experience in structured finance on Wall St.
Hope that helps....
show us your CV, flakmeister. PROVE IT. - Ned
Use the same faith you muster when denying the science of AGW.... given how much people force themselves to believe what they want, it wouldn't take much effort....
It is a start.
"M. Sc. in Theoretical Physics, Ph.D. Experimental Physics"
What university(s) did you say this was attained through (and when)?
"Post Doctroral Experience: U. of Chicago, U. Michigan, Visiting scientist U. of Manchester,"
When (what years) did you study at these institutes?
"Staff Scientist at Brookhaven National Lab"
Currently or past? If past, length of term?
"Primary author of ~20 peer reviewed research papers...."
Name the papers and dates of publication and review.
"Referee for the Physical Review"
In what capacity (IE:Atomic, Molecular, Optical Physics, etc.)?
"Internationally known: Invited seminars and colloquia in 7 countries, 3 continents.... ~20 of the top 100 research universities in US, places like Stanford, CalTech. Featured speaker at 2 international conferences.... "
Which 7 countries? Which 20 research facilities? What dates?
"Over 20 years experience basic research...."
What field(s) of research? What timeline?
The reason I ask specifics is I too can provide a substantial generic resume with some quick cut and paste:
"Ph.D. from Cornell University, focus on chemistry and surface science.
Laser physics group at the IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center in Yorktown Heights, NY
Brookhaven, the Materials Science Department
Study of Condensed Matter Physics and Materials Science
Member of the American Physical Society and the Optical Society of America."
Of course, I have none of these qualifications. They are simply cherry picked from one of the former directors of the Physical Review. So yes, I am quite skeptic of your list. The onus is on YOU to provide supporting data. Gee, kind of like science, isn't it?
Why don't you check the Rick Perry thread where off the cuff I discuss the fine structure constant as a function of z. People who cut and paste aren't capable of doing that....
And that was posted well before this....
There is another discussion here at the hedge on fusion where I compute the attenuation factor for 14 MeV neutrons from D-T fusion using Li6 in post... Sorry lost the link...
And if you think I will clearly identify myself on this site, you have another thing coming....
What are your credentials? I'll take em at face value.
C'mon Give us Deniers a thrashing Flaky. Link to your 20 peer reviewed, authored papers as per your CV above.
Love
Russki
PS I am not surprised that you would accept someones elses credentials at face value. After all, you believe in AGW, so at least I know you come by your guilibility honestly.
The fact of the matter at hand is I never claimed to have any academic credentials. Ever. YOU, however, claim it on a regular basis with NOTHING to back it up. Any internet "discussion" as you phrase it, is easily cut and pasted. Basically my take is that your academia is a fraud. Looking at the tenor of your posts, your terminology, your structure... I simply don't believe your pasted in, generically stated criterion. Prove it and put it to rest or, to so eloquently quote you in several academically superior posts.... STFU.
For the record, I was asked to supply my credentials. So I did in a manner appropriate for an anonymous internet site. You choose not to accept them, fine with me...
Clearly time to move along....
Very impressive, Flaky. So assuming your CV is accurate, please provide links to your 20 plus peer reviewed papers so that we may independently review their content. If you do, I promise to stop posting until I've read at least 2-3. Go ahead... I am waiting.
Still waiting....
If you think I will indentify myself you are out of your mind....
Of course you won't.... god forbid that the evil deniers might actually read and (GASP!!) refute them. The truth is you are nothing but a chronic BS artist, a fraud artist hiding behind a pseudonym.
I have worked with many PHD quants and none of them would ever make the stupid assertion that greater than 98% of scientists support AGW, or anything else for that matter, without providing the raw data to support their assertion.
This is why many of the ZH readers hate seeing anything posted about AGW. They are sick of the lies, and sick of idiots like you spewing out warmist propaganda. You, like AGW are a fucking fraud!
Peer-reviewed papers end up in journals. So post the links to them, and we can all decide what you really think.
As I said in my first encounter with you, I've been working for decades with PhDs of all sorts, and they ain't all the same.
That you've only twice in 20+ years been an international conference speaker tells me you're no headliner. I've been an expert witness more times and in more places than I care to remember, so I understand credibility.
If you are as you say, and have all zeal for your "AGW", you must've been hiding in the junk science shadows in the 70s. Until you show us the goods (which you won't), I'll keep believing you're a 30 year old lib quant jockey with an axe to grind...
Blah blah blah, more BS from an ecofascist. Time to find yourself another religion. The onus is on AGW'ers to prove their case, not for us to refute it. Even if climate is 'proven' to change, that does not mean that AGW is responsible. Try again asshole.
The case has all but been proven, you don't even have the mental capacity to understand the reasons and the conclusions..,.
The above poster is a classic example of the Downing Effect...
Sorry Flakmeister, words are not proof. And the case is not proven, despite your fervent religious beliefs. And I do not argue religion with a fanatic.
My faith lies in my understanding of the science, whereas the deniers faith lies with their ideological hopes.
Sorry, but denying your AGW religion is not ideological, simply an expression of our freedom from dogma and state imposed beliefs.
You have not made a rational scientific case for your disbelief, all you have done is say in so many words that ideological implications are anathema to your world view...
Sorry Flaky, but I do not have to make a scientific case for my disbelief. I do not have to prove a negative. I am not making the extra ordinary claim that AGW is proven Instead, why don't you post links to the 20 plus peer reviewed papers that you purport to author. I am sure that the ZH community would welcome your erudition.
For a while you had me fooled that you have a sincere interest in the issue. But you really just care about being the smartest guy in the room. For what void are you trying to compensate?
Hey be an agnostic on GW, you can say that you are uncertain about the data. But to come out and say it is a fraudulent politically motivated attack on your liberties and that you will not accept it is the the sign of a closed mind.
This country has suffered the closed minds of fools for too long...
Can you cite Anything rational or coherent with proven facts to back it up
or do you just spout shit between today and check day,when the check comes and Hank pays the cable bill.and they put the food in the frozen food box and the creature in the basement puts the lotion on it's skin
or it get's the hose,it puts the lotion on it's skin or........it...ggg,
i'm not worried, isaac newton says we have till 2060...
Ahmeexnal
"global climate change"He must be one of Al Gore's interns.
*********************************************************************************************8
Global Warming - NCDC - NOAA www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ol/climate/globalwarming.htmlSimilar You +1'd this publicly. Undo?
Global Warming Frequently Asked Questions - NCDC - NOAA
www.ncdc.noaa.gov › NESDIS › NCDC - CachedSimilar You +1'd this publicly. Undo
Aug 20, 2008 – World's largest archive of climate data provides answers to ...
NOAA Paleoclimatology Program - Perspective on Global Warming
www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/globalwarming/home.html - CachedSimilar You +1'd this publicly. Undo
Jul 13, 2009 – NOAA Paleoclimatology Perspective on Global Warming.
NOAA Paleoclimatology Global Warming - The Story
www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/globalwarming/paleostory.html - CachedSimilar You +1'd this publicly. Undo
Aug 20, 2008 – NOAA National Environmental Satellite, Data, and ...
Show more results from noaa.gov
NOAA Scientist Rejects Global Warming Link To Tornadoes | FoxNews.com
www.foxnews.com/.../noaa-scientist-rejects-global-warming-link-tor... - Cached You +1'd this publicly. Undo
Apr 28, 2011 – A top official at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) rejected claims by environmental activists that the outbreak of ...
More rubbish from a global warming religious fanatic. I won't even waste the time refuting his garbage. Instead I will rejoice in knowing that these eco fascists will be forced eventually to get their next meal from a dumpster (at least the dumpster will likely be green, so that should provide some comfort to these deluded human haters).
www.dailykos.com/.../-Global-Warming-is-real-say-the-Koch-Broth... - Cached You +1'd this publicly. UndoDaily Kos: Global Warming is real say the Koch Brothers
Apr 4, 2011 – Global Warming is real say the Koch Brothers. The Climate Change Denier Scientist the Koch Brothers paid to debunk Global Warming has come ...
?
The Koch Brothers' Vast Right-Wing Media Conspiracy | Mother Jones
motherjones.com/.../2011/02/koch-brothers-media-beck-greenpeace - Cached You +1'd this publicly. Undo
Feb 4, 2011 – The Koch brothers are outraged—outraged!—that people were tricked into believing they care about global warming. ...
Koch Industries: Secretly Funding the Climate Denial Machine ...
www.greenpeace.org/usa/en/.../global-warming-and.../koch-industri... - Cached You +1'd this publicly. Undo
Charles and David Koch have quietly funneled over $55 million to ... that are working to delay policies and regulations aimed at stopping global warming. ... The Koch brothers, their family members, and their employees direct a web of ...
Koch Industries multibillionaire Koch brothers bankroll attacks on ...
www.climatesciencewatch.org/.../koch-industries-multibillionaire-ko... - CachedSimilar You +1'd this publicly. Undo
Mar 18, 2010 – The Koch brothers have stepped forward with deep pockets to bankroll ... Red Hot Lies: How Global Warming Alarmists Use Threats, Fraud and ...
New Yorker exposes Koch brothers along with their greenwashing and ...
thinkprogress.org/.../new-yorker-koch-brothers-smithsonian-tea-par... - Cached You +1'd this publicly. Undo
Aug 24, 2010 – TRENDING: Global Warming · Climate Change Deniers · Election 2012 · Science ... Koch Brothers Fund Bogus Study Bashing Offshore Wind ...
Billionaire Koch brothers back suspension of California climate ...
latimesblogs.latimes.com/.../koch-brothers-global-warming-prop-23... - CachedSimilar You +1'd this publicly. Undo
Sep 2, 2010 – A company owned by oil billionaires Charles and David Koch has contributed $1 million to Proposition 23, a November ballot initiative to ...
Let me guess, next post will include links proving that oil companies are behind the debunking of AGW. Another lie, since Enron demonstrated to the major oil companies that they can make billions trading carbon credits without the fuss of capital investment or actually producing anything. The international banks, such as Goldman Sachs, would also make billions creating and trading derivatives based on ... yeah, thats right, hot air. What a fucking joke!
"global climate change"-- I stopped reading at exactly those words. Propaganda.
I know..
Seriously ZeroHedge, WTF is this Shit? Man Made Global Warming is a fucking farce. Why is this shit on ZeroHedgE?
Because ZH even lets idiots like you post, that's why.
Hey Genius, you're full of shit. The glacial age hit its peak 21,000 years ago , carving out the great lakes in the process and ended 10000 years ago. Warming started a long time ago, long before man had any effect.
Now STFU...
Now, now... why don't you write a paper based on this and refute all the conclusions of the climate scientists...
My fuck, if it was that simple.
Space cosmic ray affect the cloud cover on earth. The sun affect the earth magnetic belt, thus affect the number of cosmic ray that hit the earth.
There, you have it. Man made global warming is a joke designed to give us world governement via world wide taxation and regulation.
And what effect do the cosmic rays have on earth? Could you cite any study that shows a variability of the cosmic ray flux that is consistent with any changes in the earths climate?
Here I'll save you the effort
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/12/081217075138.htm
It sounds like you have an ideological desire for GW to the false. Science always trumps ideology....
Not always, the Catholic church did burn a lot of really good stuff in time for the dark ages.
For me, I don't need to know if global warming is happening, or not. The environment is being fucked over by what we are doing. Clean food and water are becoming a problem. This is so easy, some of these debates are not needed, they are a distraction or outright divisive and destructive. Attend to downsizing to improve our food, water, and air, and if this other shit is true, it will be helped. If it is not true, we still have protected our environment instead of selling it to the highest bidder.
I've often wondered if "global warming" was really just a marketing proxy for peak resources (water, land, fuel, whatever). An easier sell plus lots of money to be made thru carbon trading, etc. while winding down. Zero (or negative) growth will be a bitch, if it comes.
No, I don't think that was the case 10 years ago. Now more than a few people have connected the dots. To a certain degree they are related, i.e. the different sides of the same coin, esp. for coal.
excessive government intervention into the developed world, to be skimmed off through the tax system, ostensibly for the benefit of the "lesser developed nations". But really, we can see (one example here, only, many can come up ...) that AlGore has benefitted greatly. Why, he sacrificed publicly his relationship w/Tipper for release of his chackra (or whatever).
Here's another thing for your wondering: Are the planned efforts that will result in negative growth intentional?
- Ned
Ironically, most of the burning was done after the Renaissance emerged. Sometimes the trumping takes longer, but it does occur....
Science always trumps ideology....
With perhaps the notable exception of the Lysenko affair in the USSR under Stalin, which seems to resonate today with global warming/cooling, whatever the party line of the day is.
global cooling = must be man = something must be done
global warming = must be man = something must be done
Tornados = must be man = something must be done
Hurricanes = must be man = something must be done
Droughts = must be man = something must be done
Earthquakes = must be man = something must be done
Seriously this is getting to Mayan type levels of absurdity where the government will tell us we need to sacrifice people so the sun will come back.
Ummm. the trumping does take time.... Not everything is a 24 hour news cycle kind of thingie...
It sound like you have an ideological desire for GW to be true. This article is 3 years old and research on this topic are still ongoing. Maybe you know the latest CLOUD experiment made in 2011? You probably won't here any meaninful conclusion from it though, because the team was asked not to interpret teh data they have because the subject is "too political".
You are sure quick to come here and defend the GW idiocy, but all you do is post some study report found in a general public newpaper and then claim its the true. And if we do the same you say it is discredited. You sure seems to be very knowledgeable on the topic, are you part of the team that produced the laughable hockey stick prediction in 1998?
Well, it seems that the deniers here are unable to educate themselves about the basics. No point in pointing them to more scholorly works... capeche?
BTW, refresh yourself on the latest developements in the Hockey stick... I doubt you can even understand what the debate was about and how it was resolved.
Flak, the root problem most people have that I talk to (regarding the hockey stick graph) is the combining of proxy data and directly measured data the way it does. The gradual drop in temperatures prior to recent times is taken from the proxy data, and that same data shows a continued decline on temperatures into our day. But that decline in temperatures is masked by removing the proxy data for recent years and using directly measured temperature data which shows an increase in temperatues over the last centuries.
This is nothing more than statistical sleight of hand.
Your 'arguments' so far are nothing more than appeals to authority, which is a logical fallacy if there is no clear basis to believe the authorities are objective and have nothing to gain from their pronouncements.
We all know now the AGWers do have much to gain through continued government research grants and that many of them in key positions collude to shun critics and ostracize them from the scientific community. It seems that in this respect the AGWers arelosing badly today.
And since when did scientists defend something on the basis of authority anyway? Where would we be today had scientists been so subserviant to authoritarian declarations during the time of Kepler, Gallileo, or Einstein?
The scientific authorites are regularly wrong and change only as the old guard dies off. Thus why Khun said that some scientific advances are too often only acheived by generational change in scientific paradigm rather than through the use of reason, evidence and the scientific method.
There is other evidence beside the Hockey stick and its attendent controversy... The evidence from independent sources is piling up.....
The point is the Hockey Stick graph is NOT evidence of anything. It is stacked deck fallacy agit prop.
Look, I agree the Earth has been warming up to 1998 at least, but it maybe plateuing, it depends on what you are measuring.
I just do not think the evidence that mankinds production of CO2 is driving it, though it may have some effect, which is a small fraction of all the CO2 produced as we are eclipsed by nature, i.e. the sum of what the oceans, other animals and volcanoes and so forth produce. Also, the contribution of the Sun overwhelms everything, so even minor fluctuations of heat can make a huge difference that would seem to leave CO2 in the rear-view mirror.
This whole thing just seems like human hubris to even entertain the idea that we can destroy what random catastrophic events have failed to do for a gazzillion years prior to us.
No, I do not want to live in a smoggy atmosphere, or a poluted planet but it is excessive to insist we base all that we do to clean things up on AGW concerns. No, I just dont see the justification at this point in time and the remedies seem to overshadow the true scope of the malady.
Yeah, we better fight AGW since if we don't, the space aliens will wipe us out for polluting the earth with carbon, Ha Ha!
Sorry Flakmeister, but the onus is not on us to debunk AGW. Instead, it is up to you and your co religionists to prove AGW, since it is your criminal cabal that is trying to extort money from the rest of us. Not believing me won't cost you a cent, but if I were stupid enough to convert to your AGW religion, then I have no doubt that my money would eventually be conned away. That is why most of us refuse to sign onto your new religion, we do not want to be ripped off again by religious crazies like yourself.
For those blinded by ideology like yourself, there can be no proof....
The planet could look like Mordor and you would still say that nothing is proved...
You are right, I am blinded by ideology. It is called the desire to be free of oppressive governments and religions.
Study a few of the works of Dr Patrick Michaels, climatologist, and get back to me
http://www.cato.org/people/patrick-michaels
Why don't you link to the 20 plus peer reviewed papers that you purport to have published? Let's start there, if you really are who you claim to be, as per your CV. I am waiting....
Give it a break....
Go back to your whoreing...
Yeah, I though so.... no links to any published papers. Fucking Liar!!
I suggest everyone say hello to Piers Corbyn.
http://www.weatheraction.com/
And hedge/dress accodingly.
Vivek (ORI)
slewie did
he has these words describing (underneath) his "5-8-11" posting which, if we look above to his 14-8-11 seems to be from august 5, 2011: August Solar & geomagnetic action
works for me! thxz, Vi!
Good one Slewie! +1 ~ sideways!
yen
Ignorance can be cured if you attend school and learn about the physical world. You can't repeat crap spewed by idiots and expect people that have studied science to allow you to misinform without being schooled. The author is describing extinction events created by man. Do you understand this is somewhat more recent than what you call "the glacial age".
Maybe you could stay on topic and give us a solution for what the author has said, rather than what you think you read.
You deniers belong with Denninger because he right about everything, LOL!!! Let's see I read someone kicked from his blog after they say gold will go higher when it around $600, I think!
"The emerging environmentalization of our civilization and the need for vigorous action in the interest of the entire global community will inevitably have multiple political consequences. Perhaps the most important of them will be a gradual change in the status of the United Nations. Inevitably, it must assume some aspects of a world government." - Mikhail Gorbachev
The HULKSTER Lives! YES>
For the other side of the academic debate on global warming, the works of Dr Patrick Michaels are a must read
http://www.cato.org/people/patrick-michaels
Also, patrick Moore , of Greenspirit
http://www.greenspirit.com/
Let me guess, next post will include links proving that oil companies are behind the debunking of AGW. Another lie, since Enron demonstrated to the major oil companies that they can make billions trading carbon credits without the fuss of capital investment or actually producing anything. The international banks, such as Goldman Sachs, would also make billions creating and trading derivatives based on ... yeah, thats right, hot air. What a fucking joke!
*************************************************************************************************************
Redefining What's Possible for Clean Energy by ... - Gigaton Throwdown
www.gigatonthrowdown.org/files/Gigaton_EntireReport.pdfSimilar You +1'd this publicly. Undo
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat
With such a policy, we can achieve gigaton scale by 2020, stabilize the climate, and create a new industry. While we did not prepare this report, ...
?
Introduction - Gigaton Throwdown
www.gigatonthrowdown.org/intro.php - CachedSimilar You +1'd this publicly. Undo
Download the Introduction (PDF: 491 KB) or the Entire Report (PDF: 9 MB ...
Show more results from gigatonthrowdown.org
And your point....?
Do I have to read this shit here? Please...what a bunch of crap global warming is. It has been discredited and we still have dumbasses like this guy.
No you don't have to read anything here. Autonomy and choice for some can be quite a revelation.
Hmmm...is God giving us a second chance?
Lines and paragraphs break automatically. NOT
\___________
\___________
I'm not buying into global warming 100% ... Yet. Why no mention of Peak Oil? Stop the flow (or run out) and you stop the world.
I'm currently working out of town in Arkansas for a place that heat treats drilling pipe. The amount of energy used is mind boggling. The electrical conductors used to power the induction coils (to heat treat) are water cooled because of the extreme current and frequency that is required.
Also, I just got back from the Memphis airport to drop off a co-worker and on the way back I stopped at a McDonald's. The place was so cold the windows were dripping wet with condensation on the outside. No reason or need for it to be that cold - just a waste.
Speaking of how the human race is screwed ..... just got out of a Walmart here in Arkansas. Words can't describe the constant parade of huge lumbering welfare queens and kings waddling (or driving the handicapped carts) through the isles. Isle after isle of worthless crap made in china. These terrifying and horrific hunks of human flesh wouldn't last a week after the SHTF.
Taint Boil:
Off-topic, but I'm curious.
Do you guys passivate your pipe? If so, how?
(I am asking because I've had a 3-yr long debate at work on the subject, and I know Japanese nat gas companies use the method I've proposed.)
Thanks for any input.
I've also read that we are going into a period of weak solar activity. If our causing global warming is true, this should buy us some time.
WOLVERINES!
Definatly Bearish news this !
Hybrid-bearish.
Go long bullshit and living in caves. Living the socialist dream.
There has got to be a way to cop a fast buck off of this extinction event. Any IPOs on iodine tablet makers, sunscreen, or body bags?
Sorry. I'm a scientist, and I see no hard evidence of global warming that cannot be explained by natural cyclical processes. This is about social control, not sceince.
Interesting. BTW, when does ZH think it is "mission accomplished" and decides to have an extinction party?
This after 50+ years of high minded Liberal BS!! I really hate F.. N Liberals.
Am curious how is this essay connected to Liberals? And what is your definition of a Liberal?
Don't waste your time, Magic. A "liberal" is anyone or anything that he/she disagrees with or is threatened by.
Fat people are all liberals,check it and see.
A liberal is a hate bucket. Every self respecting man of conservative breed needs a bogey man, a 'jew', a 'heretic', a punching ball. Carthago delenda est!
Well it can't be them! Unthinkable.
A conservative is a hate bucket. Every self-respecting man of democrat breed needs a bogey man: Denier, Birther, Bitter-clinger Tea-bagger, he of the land of low-sloping foreheads. Atlinlay akesmay ouyay eemsay artsmay!
This is FUN!! Let's do some more.
good dialectics. I am in agreement with you. Not with Segestan, who is one sided or appears to be, unlike you.
L0L! both 777 & shroom both destroy your post, so it is "good dialectic" and you "agree" with shroom, and completely flip... Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
but, kinda sad, too, considering how much time you spend here, making no sense at all
you are so sarked to the max, you are sarking yourself over how ridiculous you are, but you can't stop, can you?
sad, toy-boy. pathetic, rilly..., since you seem to have no self-awareness of the pshychodynamic involved w/ the f_p parade of self-shifting, as a defense for terminal vapidity, aka "nobody home but the lights are on"
you have a mental illness, and you need help. stop wasting our time and deal with it. i mean it! i care about you, toy-boy...
...you my BiCh!
luckily for me your are devoid of all feeling of any consequence except empty mirror on the wall vainess.
And don't lean on others, rat, to make your point. Stand on your own feet, even though they be more claws of vulture. Carrion flesh is the food of those who can't hunt on their own.
A liberal is a 'solutions-man'. He's got solutions, and he'll fund them with someone else's money, whilst taking a bit for himself, natch. He's always on the hunt for problems, real, imagined, or fabricated, which he may set about 'solving'.
And now not so cut and dry. I vote McCain last election, Does it make me liberal because can see with own eyes reading data and looking at information there is man-made climate change?
"The only way to get our society to truly change is to frighten people with the possibility of a catastrophe." - Daniel Botkin, "Renegade Naturalist"
Yes, it does, stupid too.
Really wish you'd learn to read and write before voting.
Just saying...
I suggest a 500 S&W Magnum at point-blank range as the solution to your problems.
Drinks are on me!
The bad news is that it's over.. the world and everything worthwhile is ending.
The good news is that it's time for a drink!
Amen to that and mowing your lawn!
glenmorangie please...thanks
nice choice but it's Balvanie fore me tonight
am partial to Oban...
I'll take a Grey Goose, neat.
Cheers!
The most worrysome ongoing cloud on the ecological front is the fallout in northern hemisphere of Fukushima nuclear particles and the consequential damage to human and animal survival. If any of the heavy stuff is up in the air as some suggest (Plutonium, Strontium etc. ...apart for Cesium and Iodine) it will be all over all living organic materials for centuries to come. Do they honestly monitor this evolution in our countries?
People have been saying this for generations just in different formats. People are really still sticking with climate change? And all the nuke plants will all of a sudden collapse? I expect more from ZH. Must be a very slow saturday.
Spare me the 2-hour movie version. And what's wrong with hybrid bears? At least they are fertile and making new genes.
Aren't you being a bit too optimistic?
The party is over.
The cops are coming.
Four of them.
On horseback.
----
Stolen without permisson from CiO
Nod. But the last two lines are out of order.
Dramatic metaphor can not be careless.
Shit, my bad. I'll get it right next time!
Flakmeister @ 12:41
The party is over.
Four of them.On horseback.
You sir are correct,except no one knows the time, nor the hour ,nor the day.
BUT we are well on the way, if not most likely already seeing the results of one, or two of the Horsemen.
This is all silliness.
Oil scarcity will force wars. The US will win those, but the Houston refinery complex will be wiped out by the very few Chinese warheads that can get through.
This will take the US population down to about 150 million over 3 years. China will also decrease to 150 million, over 3 minutes.
Other places in the world will suffer as absence of US spare parts prohibits oil production most places.
Extinction is not in the cards. Oil scarcity, asserting itself either suddenly or gradually, will take the 7 billion pop to about 1 billion, over 5 years time. That's not extinction. That's simply the number that non oil based agriculture can feed.
Good article on Bloomberg about horses in NYC at the turn of the 20th century. 2.5 MILLION pounds of horse manure per day and 60,000 gallons of horse urine per day. That's what it took to fuel transport of food into a city of just 1 million. (and the food/fuel for the 300,000 horses)
If it goes down that way (and I think there's a decent chance it may) all those ex-pats are going to feel mighty silly when they die of radiation and/or hunger.
Of course, if we were to round up those horses, that'd make a whole lot of methane...
Yup very silly. Guessing how the the inevitable war(s) go is silly too, unless you are in on the evil plan or you got a TARDIS!
This i think is likely, except the timeline could be faster or slower. 3 years to 100 years. Also population could crash further to below what is sustainable. Not predicting that but it is possible, even likely. How many of present folk do you suppose would survive just the hard labor required by an oil crash. It will not matter if the scarcity is real or designed. AGW and 9-11 prove most folks can be fed anything.
Lastly, even without disaster population will decline. The rate of population growth is dropping everywhere. If this trend continues, it will soon turn negative worldwide. To illustrate: My grandparents had 10 and 12 children. My parents had eight. Myself and seven siblings have ten children altogether. Those ten children (most in their 30s now) have had two children total, (Average children per woman: Gen1: 11 Gen2: 8 Gen3: 2.5 Gen4: 0.5) That is pretty dramatic, even if the women in Gen4 have another child or two, they are unlikely to acheive replacement level.
This is why we have to get off the planet. Announce that we must do it. Issue 100's of QUADRILLION dollars in order to fund it, employ the world and 100 years in the future BK.
You can't live your life on a negative presumption. If you subscribe to this author's views, might as well off yourself right now. Or at least get a vasectomy, just to make sure you don't bring another life into this situation.
Most people on this board know that we are approaching the end of the road. We don't know what's on the other side of the abyss, but it sure helps to be optimistic.
Forget defeatism and do something constructive. If you are unhappy with the system, put your two cents in to change it - maybe, just maybe you will make a difference. You can start by donating some fiat to today's moneybomb.
Geology doesn't care about your positive attitude.
When porosity is empty and permeability is low, the oil does not flow.
This happens regardless of your gung ho attitude and pleasant thoughts for your soon to be dead kids' future.
When there is nothing you can do, there is nothing you can do.
You need serious therapy.
Food will be thought of as therapy. For all of us.
Soon.
People will be thought of as food.
Eventually.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Sp-VFBbjpE
The hybrid bears are already considering that, I hear.
I can't comment on his relationship with his mother, but CiO took the Red Pill a while back...
Maybe you need another Happy Meal laced with SOMA...
Kudos for the Island reference...maybe we can convince the cons to stomp the demons out? But what would they be without all that hate to keep them turgid?
Snowball, I generally enjoy your posts- but "the Island"? Seriously?
Unless I'm wrong, that's a semi-crappy movie.
Soma is a Huxley reference, not a Hollywood one. Unless it's really old-school, and then it's a Gnostic reference.
(BTW, what happened to the guy with the knives? I dug that avitar.)
In this instance, I'm afraid, you're wrong; it's a Huxley novel...named "Island", but I suppose a "food of the gods" might be handy in seeing past demiurges and achieving gnosis too. ;)
I thankfully haven't seen the dreck of a similar name.
The Sheen avatar died of a cocaine-induced aneurysm...still getting the stains out of my carpet.
So, CIO, how do you really feel about the current state of the world? Surely some of the optimism in your post above is mis-placed? ;-)
But seriously , finance writers should stick to finance and leave the doom and gloom to us.
We've got gloom down and doom downer.
Gloom and Doom, FTW!
Elenin, FTE!
Vivek (ORI)
http://aadivaahan.wordpress.com
Doomsters come in degrees and in flavors.
The more extreme the degree, the more sneered at the conclusion, regardless of analysis -- because you see, there is that normalcy bias thing. The same one the French had behind the Maginot Line with stories of Nazi armies massing to the east and north.
In the world of oil, the two flavors are slow diminishment of production and a fast avalanche of production. The fearful, of course, see slow diminishment.
The rational group, of which of course I am a dues paying member, say this:
Gradual diminishment gives the ambitious of the world a chance to see what's happening and to realize that their ambition of world domination means they have to defeat other oil consumers. In fact, if their ambition is merely Business As Usual for themselves and their countrymen while others slide down, then that suffices as inducement. We are seeing only phase I of the use of military force for oil. We're in the "secure supplies" phase. That won't last much longer. Then the "suppress others' consumption" phase of military action kicks in. Ambition is universal and forever and it will transform the effects of gradual diminishment into global nuclear war. (btw phase III is "take supply from others domestically for use by the military and military families")
Rapid avalanche means you drive to the convenience store and find nothing there but other empty cars. The plan of the preparers to ride their bicycles and tricycles to the convenience store for food falls afoul the reality that those stores expect revenue from gasoline sales and when it disappears, so do they. This leaves the preparers with tricycles, but nowhere to go on them. Pretty much any store with a big parking lot depends on big time car traffic to survive. When it disappears, so do they.
Then where do you get your stuff?
There's no difference in the result. The inevitable is inevitable.
You know, Crash, with a feeling similar to your namesake I was pretty optimistic about our chances as a species to get through the oil crisis. I knew there would be a lot of death, but figured anyone left could go back to a pastoral life and perhaps we would get wiser as a species and develop a sustainable civilization.
But then Fukushima happened and I researched the current state of nuclear power and I got very, very sad and depressed for awhile. Because the risk is very high that if we have a quick economic or infrastructure collapse, or a nuclear war, or a large solar EMP, then the plants will begin to melt down in a domino fashion. This will certainly lead to an extinction event that will likely take out most life on the planet, and certainly any mammal bigger than a rat.
The sad feeling has subsided, not because I am not worried about this event, but because I can't live my life all day with that kind of sadness and anger.
I wish we could all understand the danger of these plants, but as long as people feel economic pain we never will see it until it is likely to be too late. The reactions to Fukushima are proof of that.
TPOG
Cheer up.
Progress is being made.
Barook Skyrocket is significantly reducing the threat of coal fired electricity.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/getting-ready-for-a-wave-of-coal-plant-shutdowns/2011/08/19/gIQAzkZ0PJ_blog.html
Since I fall into the "preparers" group, just let me say I don't plan to ride my bicycle very far, and certainly not to stores. There are plenty of people who have taken the steps towards real self-sufficiency and can deal with some level of breakdown in the large technical systems that enable modern existence, e.g. food distribution system, electrical grid, banking system, etc, and can make what they need or live without it. On the other hand, I'm basically where That Peak Oil Guy is at regarding the likelihood of massive nuclear releases and the extinction level event it will represent. Chekhov wrote (and I'm paraphrasing here) that if there is a gun on the wall in the first act, in the third act it will be used. After that, I think the world will look very much like The Road until all the mammals are gone. The insects will make it through though. The cornucopians of the world will be in denial until the very end.
Geek, given your frame of mind I hope you have an intensive period of butt bumping planned in your coming life span. Decameron style. Go out with a bang if going out is the only option for a mammal whose urge to surge never leaves a day of peace unused for piecemeal celebration in total effusion. No need for chained reaction to go nuclear as missile is not fissile nor bodily fusion delusional encounters of third type.
I feel much better having said that. I must be totally cornucopian, even concupiscent, in dreams of multicopulation, on a glass of pinot noir with a zest of coriander and mint tea.
But that is the result of your Chekovian vision of gun on the wall. A water pistol of lethal emotional content that squirts its victim in the denouement, acte final.
Poetic.
I could take the time to figure out what that meant, but I think I prefer to leave it as the verbal assault that it was- sometimes, that is just more entertaining.
Falak, you couldn't be farther from the truth, but I do admit the logic of your proposition. It follows that if I believe the world is fucked, then I should behave as a nihilist, and aim to satisfy whatever natural desires I have until the last day.
But, I still have a small hope that some of us will make it through the coming tribulation. If we have our wits about us and can work together for the real common good, then maybe we can shut down these nuclear plants and deflect the Sword of Damocles that is hanging over us all?
Dismayed but not defeated I drink to thy escape, oh muse of my decadent reverie. What the immortal poet said still rings in my head : a loaf of bread, a jug of wine and thou besides me...but I'm a swine for repeating something so fine.
Lets hope the Pope will file a decree banning all nuclear plants by God's imperial will. Then we'll know for sure we are back in obscurantist times! As rational man, our elected Potus squared, won't. That is the moving finger that has writ, and once it has writ has moved on!
Personally, I'm a psuedo-optimistic doomer.
Can't jump on the solar, ethanol or wind bandwagons, but there are other options. So far, no clear winners, but there are people, including myself, who don't care to see the neighbors die.
Those who care, are trying. We may not win, but then again, stranger things happen every day.
You can ride a bike to the teaparty.
shhhh! the true doomers are hopeless, by defintion, b/c of this & that, too! this leads to atrophy of thought, b/c once you reach that "conclusion", why think? it can not help you! and no one else should think, either, b/c it is a waste of time and can't help them either.
nice of so many of them to show up here, day after fukin day, and try to "reason" with us less fortunate BEingZ, tho, doncha think? /s/
U-2 giggles...
You don't understand doomsterism.
We're talking about 6 billion deaths out of 7 billion.
1 billion alive is not extinction level. That 1 billion killed the other 6 because they were tougher.
Not smarter. Tougher.
Most of us hope we are wrong and continue to live life in two worlds.
TPOG
LFTRs will save us all. Just wait.
They won't make that widely available until after the cull. I'm pulling for you though.
+m*(299,792,458m/s)^2
Sun spots account for most of climate change. Manmade global warming? Don't make me laugh.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eScDfYzMEEw
Shooting fish in a fucking barrel...
http://www.climate4you.com/
Click on the sun menu item to the left.
This site is the data, and only the data.
Hmmm, very interesting. So why do not link to the 20 plus peer reviewed papers that you claim to have published. I am waiting...