This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.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.
»
- 43103 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Is New York under water or frozen yet? Been waiting for that. Why did Al Gore buy an estate on the coast if he thinks the oceans are rising? He wants a submarine house?
Worry about something real. Like the Banksters destroying our country.
The banksters, you mean the capitalists - you know the ones with all the capital. Yes, indeed, capitalism is like a social pathology and a deadly one at that
PROTIP: No one gives a fuck what you think.
I kinda do.
You are not "no one".
You have some social "issues" I see. Leave the basement for a bit, ask mom to lend you a couple of bucks, go see a movie or something.
Huge snake found a couple years ago. Only way it could have survived at all?
Current tropical climates average 24 to 26 degrees Celsius (75 to 79 Fahrenheit).
Scientists concluded that Titanoboa could have thrived only if temperatures averaged 30 to 34 degrees Celsius (86 to 93 Fahrenheit).
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/05/health/05iht-snake.1.19949206.html
Also consider what kind of temperatures are necessary for dinosaur survival.
The planet could take a lot of warming and still be ok. As a species im pretty sure we're better off being in really warm climates than freezing cold ones. just look at natural dispersion across the globe. Where does everyone want to live? where does no one want to live?
http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-positives-negatives.htm
Thats about where I'm at.
The 'global warming-global cooling-man made vs natural- not even happening' arguments are worse then the 'repub-dem-3rd party' arguments about political articles... Its a bunch of bull. I wish they never would have started all this rhetoric and just stuck with the 'polution causing environmental damage' terminology of the 70's
After record high temperatures for 20 years people STILL can't get a clue? Something IS going on. It would be better to get beyond the mindless bickering, but it won't happen.
So, start adapting. Set the ac on 85. Stay outside for a few hours when its over 100. Thats where its at in the near future, as far as I can tell...
None of what you stated above is proven, but even if what you say may be true, but it still does not prove AGW. And that is the point. If you really cared, you would promote real environmental causes, instead of touting the AGW fraud. As far as I am concerned, you are simply another shill for the banking and oil interests, promoting carbon credits, in effect taxing the right to breath. Go fuck youself.
Yes, there are people (including evil ones) who are positioning themselves to profit from how society will react to these issues. But that doesn't mean the theory is bullshit. The fact that Goldman Sachs' carbon credits scheme is a scam designed to loot the peasants does not mean the concept of man made global warming/climate change is a scam. I'd hope some people would have the intellectual firepower to be able to distinguish the two.
I suggest that you google climategate and read the emails exchanged by the AGW scientists. Then tell me that AGW and political agendas are not intertwined.
Even if what you are reporting is true, it still does not prove AGW. Sorry, but climate change proves nothing other than that climate changes.
"Ocean temps are rising. Ice is melting. Permafrost is melting. Forests are dying. Record weather disasters are happening at increasing frequencies."
Hey, RELAX, wouldja? Like I said: the Free Market [tm] will take care of everything! Ayn Rand and Milton Freidman said so.
If you short humanity and win, how do you collect?
By replacing them as the dominant species.
Loot the Bank CEO summer houses. He can't occupy all them at the same time. For a small fee addresses can be provided for the summer home of the CEOs of the 100 largest banks. Think of it as a CDO payment to insure your investment plan.
go long plants
i'm not sure if the question which grasped me in my salad daze is quite the same as yours, but i'll give it you, anywayz: if you have not yet achieved immortality, what can you do at this point?
http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/6615674/
http://www.presstv.ir/usdetail/194918.html
Long TPB, Bitchez.
i don't do "links" jay-dub, on what i reponded to BK_b about
if you wish to respond to what i posted, please pen a response from yourself
if that doesn't work, you prob'ly shouldn't be getting involved at this level, ok?
Futurist demographers suggest Whites will be extinct by 2200, although the architects of that extinction, that genocide, pass as Whites, indeed are the most powerful "Whites" in the White homelands. In the USA the key weapon was the 1965 Immigration act. This open the floodgates for invasion of White habitat to alien genes. I know this is awfully politically incorrect but it is all documented, in a Cal State Professor's tome, The Culture of Critique.
Oh, shit! -- and my son is dating a LATINA! Hey -- do you know if Spaniards are white people?
What is a Latina? A made up race? Let me see, if you are on this side of the river, and your ancestors were here before Columbus, you are a Native American. If you are south of the river, you are a Hispanic! Even if you don't speak Spanish! You can even be a Jew from Spain, not one drop of blood at all in all your family history that came from this hemisphere, be born in, say, Puerto Rico, and you would be a Latina! Hey, it's great! So there I was, in Honduras, and I saw some black people from the coast. They don't speak Spanish, and they never mixed with the locals, but hey! They are Hispanics! Or Latinos.... or Chicanos or something.
I think it is great you believe in made up races. We, here in the United States, at one time called ourselves Americans. That is a nationality. It woudl be nice if we could be that again. Maybe we can call ourselves "The Race". Oh, never mind, I think somebody took that already.
As a recently elected official in a northern illinois community, representing a ward that is 65% "hispanic," I can tell you that they are as nationalistic as anyone else in this wide world. The only difference is, it is not reported, and their "leaders" fan the flames of racism and unfairness to get themselves a favorable district electoral boundary map. We have all seen those abortions in our larger cities. Check out the shape of Luis Gutierrez' district in the city of Chicago. I have been exposed to "hispanic on hispanic" racism in the short time I have held this position. As a conservative, mostly libertarian, I love/hate everyone equally. I don't care what your country of origin is. You respect me, I respect you. That reminds me of a General James Mattis quote. In closing, I wonder where Trav7777 is? I wish he would weigh in.
As a recently elected official in a northern illinois community, representing a ward that is 65% "hispanic," I can tell you that they are as nationalistic as anyone else in this wide world. The only difference is, it is not reported, and their "leaders" fan the flames of racism and unfairness to get themselves a favorable district electoral boundary map. We have all seen those abortions in our larger cities. Check out the shape of Luis Gutierrez' district in the city of Chicago. I have been exposed to "hispanic on hispanic" racism in the short time I have held this position. As a conservative, mostly libertarian, I love/hate everyone equally. I don't care what your country of origin is. You respect me, I respect you. That reminds me of a General James Mattis quote. In closing, I wonder where Trav7777 is? I wish he would weigh in.
I was being facetious. Although my son is dating a Latina, which isn't a race as you so thickly point out. I don't give a shit about race, or purity of culture, or purity of language, or purity of anything really.
No worries, Spastica-
I had a couple of Latino kids visiting my house today, and they looked pasty enough to me- and I'm Irish enough to be essentially see-through.
I'll bet there are people in Siberia who wish this Global Warming would hurry up
Yes, and your name reminded me of my favorite movie.
Great Article. Loved the whole thing.
The only thing I would add, to cheer anyone up who isn't, is that there is no God. Just ask Richard Dawkins. He straightened me out on that one a while back, and I have felt super ever since.
On that note:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdapSNjTamk
I put together a video on the myth of nature for my site.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gn-4IKxTG0
http://www.mcguffeysonlinetutor.com/public/main.cfm
R3volution through education!
Everyone has their pet end times scenario. For some it's climate change, others site economic failure, nukular (lol) holocaust, Brown shirts, Mayan prophesy, second coming of Christ, Aliens, etc. I say pick your poison and do what ever it is that allows you to sleep well at night, for death will surely come to us all in the end; however I do have one small favor to ask of you..............STOP TRYING TO TURN YOUR FEARS INTO ECONOMIC POLICY THAT INSTALLS AND REVOLVES AROUND ANOTHER FUCKING PYRAMID SCHEME FOR THE BENEFIT OF A HANDFUL OF ELITIST ASSHATS. Thanks in advance for your cooperation.
BRILLIANT!
For a lunatic, you sure are level-headed.
hey Tyler you might like this:
"MOODY'S ANALYST BREAKS SILENCE: Says Ratings Agency Rotten To Core With Conflicts"http://www.businessinsider.com/moodys-analyst-conflicts-corruption-and-g...
umm, if this circus is going to carry on in i t's present state, the system badly needs objective agencies i.e. non-profit agencies. The idea of an agency that has to downgrade it's paymasters is just a fucking fantasy, good dogs dont bite their owners.
cheerful
global warming is not provable, disprovable, or relevant.
tangentially, people seem to have forgotten that green plants consume co2 and produce oxygen.
good thing we havent gmo'd that out of circulation.
humans will not go extinct. but looks like were gonna give it a shot.
You should switch your major to PE.
Now that was a riposte of the finest kind.... \hattip
Oh yea! Yes, that was brilliant! How fun! High fives all around.
Are you two posting from the same room? When you come up for air, dust mine off and have a go. I'll get a wet nap for your chin.
Find something relevant to say or keep dusting your own shriveled excuse for a dick off, you pusswad of an incompetent trollboy.
Oh yay! That was brilliant! Golf claps and hat tips all around.
With me in your mouth and Snowflake in your ass, will we ever get to the part where you fuck off and die. Yes?
Someone should slip a cunt over your head and fuck some sense into you....
The Conquistadors would cut the vaginas off the dead native women they had killed and stretched them over the peak of their helmets to scare their enemies.
Those "Latino Hispanics" had it goin' on. Their descendants could be dating your son or daughter. Or you, in fact. Would they be considered "white"?
In any case they were totally "whitewashed" by papal church for their zealous acts. The conclave of Valladolid declared that "killing the Amerindian native was not a sin as they had no soul"...A papal legate in the sixteenth century...The incident made into an immortal french film.
http://www.bestfrenchfilms.com/19_valladolid.php
Tut tut, Flakmeister. Such potty mouth language from an esteemed academic such as yourself is unbecoming. Instead of hurling gratutious insults, why not link to the 20 plus peer reviewed papers that you purport to have authored? Educating is a higher calling than condemning, unless of course you are a religious fanatic. Anyways, I attach your CV for the benefit and amusement of others.
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....
The Yellowstone caldera might blow within 10 years. We might possibly be hit by a rouge asteroid. The poles might reverse causing God know what kind of devastation in its wake. Heck, the Sun might emit the mother-of-all-solar-flares tomorrow setting the evolutionary clock back to cockroaches and lichens.
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Wake me up when it happens.
You're more likely to get killed getting into your car and driving to 7-11.
Long PMs. Short Financials.
I'm gonna get a good night's sleep.
We might even get hit by a green asteroid--or some other color entirely.
We might possibly be hit by a rouge asteroid.
So we should short cosmetic companies?
Rouge Asteroid: Tammy Fay Baker descending on an all you can eat buffet...
lol
Four fifth's of the article is a logical massive FAIL. Correlation does not imply causation (as the inept IPCC found out the hard way).
But we dun had big weather disasters, Herpidity Derpidity. The Climate changes; it must be man.
We should tax carbon emissions so we can us the Chicago Climate Exchange so brokers can get mega rich on new derivative schemes and transactions.
I bet the reason that Flakmeister is so pissy is because his shares in CCX are worth dog shit!!
CCX.... naw, I don't invest in that kind of shit.... try GWG.TO, 100,000 shares at 0.09 or IPT.TO, 10,000 shares at 0.22
Check em out....
I have said it before and I will say it again. Regardless of the science, regardless of actual temperature changes, regardless of political actions or opinions we will stop using fossil fuels and creating CO2 exactly when the cost of extraction exceeds the value of what is extracted. Either we come up with an energy source that is more economically effecient than oil/gas/coal, which then displaces them, or we burn up every last bit that can be extracted under EROEI principals. No point in hand wringing, that is just how it is going to be. Wear sunscreen, move north.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eScDfYzMEEw ....Carlin was ahead of you on this one Bro ;-)
Extinction via evolution. No serious discussion would leave out far more likely and immediate threats to our existence such as skynet and diseases. (or inability to enable the spell checking feature on the new UI)
this i know...it's fuckin hot in texas
It is August dude. Down here in the South we call that SUMMER.
call it what you want...lived here all my life...it's hot
it's gettin hot in here
And up here, it's cool for August, with more rain than usual.
Lest we forget...
When I was a kid, I recall riding my bike through floodwaters at the base of the bridge into town. It was deep enough to reach all the way up the seat of my BMX. Good times.
A few years later, we had draughts severe enough that people went to the effort of screen-printing T-shirts that depicted cartoon trees chasing trees chasing cartoon dogs that said "I survived the draught of (whatever the fuck year it was)"
This year, I drove through a smallish pond that had swelled up enough to cover the county highway for almost a month.
What does it all mean?
Nothing. Nothing at all.
Not just Tejas, but all through the plains.
All time record cold in New Zealand this week, their winter. Last year saw cold records fall all over the Southern hemisphere. 400 died from the cold in Peru last year and mass fish kills and reptiles died from the cold in Peru and Equador, and snow in Buenos Aires.
But then, friend yesterday said it was 110F near Dallas, TX.
Had some big cold in Tejas, Arizona, New & Old Mexico last winter too. Some may remember lettuce & tomato prices going thru the roof, or not being in the store.
Thats one of the bad things about all the rhetoric. Now all the 'global warming' & 'global cooling' debators have enough ammo to make the debate endless.
the snow in austin killed my plants
I have a yard full of dead trees. The bastards at the nusery market them as 'the perfect tree', then we find out they are native to Hawaii and die@30 degrees.
Not so 'perfect' after all...
exactly...sucks...i planted "drought resistant" native wildflowers this time...lantana grows like a mf'er
Perhaps we have burned enough carbon stuff to offset the reduced solar activity, thus preventing an ICE Age!
In other stupid news, apparently portions of the MSM partially read Krugman's rant that we sould ramp up gummint spending for an alien invasion.
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/08/scientists-aliens-may-punish-our-species-for-climate-change/243886/
And I actually own a publishing company that produces "
fiction"....PLEASE! The 1950's movie was "The Day The Earth Stood Still."
The author will probably walk out of house and get hit with a meterorite while reading the latest story on global warming. You can die a hundred ways in a hundred days.
When someone comes up with a way to get 8 billion people to live environmentally responsible, including the Elites, I will care. Until then, I can be responsible for myself and keep my head up.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eScDfYzMEEw
FAIL
No more qucakademics on z-hedge. The human race will not end from any of the things mentioned in the article.
Everyone knows, and it is a confirmed scientific fact according to NASA, that space aliens will exterminate the human race for our environmental crimes long before any of this comes to pass.
Everyone get out your white sheets and find the nearest hill top. (after giving all of your worldly possessions to me of course)
Trying to save he human race will make it go extinct. It's a fool's quest. Bad idea from the start.
I think Mr. McPherson is far too optimistic. The continued presence of thousands of functioning nuclear weapons almost certainly guarantees a rapid extinction event, followed by the nuclear plant melt-downs, whose radiation, spread by wind and rain, finishes the job of wiping out charismatic megafauna. Insects, plants and bacteria should survive. Some of them, anyway.
Yes way too optimistic.
Now there's a doomsday scenario I can believe in. The sooner we end the empire and start putting our energy into diplomacy and trade instead of war the better.
I just contributed to Global Warming.....
It smelled like bananas!
Quick Quick, send a sample to Flakmeister... he has the necessary qualifications to document human produced global warming <g>
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....
Excellent post. Hard to argue with the scientific method. It is painful to see ignorance sputter and wail when their religion is challenged.
"No matter if the science of global warming is all phony...climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world." - Christine Stewart, former Canadian Minister of the Environment
But the science isn't phony. What piece of actual observable data can you post? Or are you only good for cutting and pasting quotes you found on ACC denier blogs?
I'm posting direct quotes from those who believe in global warming. Deniers have nothing to do with what these people have said of their own volution.
Why do the proponents of global warming say time and again that is OK to lie to promote the AGW story? How can you defend the "science" of those who encourage fabrication of data?
What other self admitted liars do you fervently believe in?
You can damn all climate scientists based on cherrypicked comments of a few...and you still haven't come up with a single piece of objective data, I've noticed.
Top scientists and politicians promoting the global warming agenda have admitted that they are lying. I have shown you their admissions in their own words. How much more objectivity do you need?
Do we really have to spend more time "objectively" debunking the lies of those who admit they are lying? If so, why?
Then it should be very easy for you to point out a single piece of "falsified" data, right? Still waiting...
Still not falsified. Not peer-reviewed, but not even incorrect with respect to final conclusions.
They accidentally included a reference to a report they shouldn't have, and admitted their mistake (can you?) but it doesn't change the fact that
glaciers are retreating as you can read for yourself from the actual chapter about glaciers, snow and ice from the same fucking IPCC report here.
So you think that the Himalayas are going to be a temperate zone in 24 years? And you claim that willfully publishing incorrect information in order to score political points is neither falsification nor an indication of factual error?
Forget the computer models, dude, you need to study a dictionary.
Take a look at the cumulative mass balance of glaciers and tell me you can't see the trend at work?
http://www.wgms.ch/mbb/mbb11/preliminaryMB_2009_fig2_new.pdf
"With respect to final conclusions"...i.e. that glaciers are retreating and that this is due to warming temperatures.
Was that paper in error to say 2035? Yeah, especially in light of the effects of debris cover on glaciers in the Himalayas and the complex interactions between ice and weather in that region.
Was the IPCC wrong to include a reference to that paper? Yup, but they admitted their error, as stated above putting a huge dent in your use of the word 'willfully', I might add.
And "to score political points" is an inference on your part indicative of your massive confirmation bias, at best.
Neither has your bum buddy Flakmeister, nothwithstanding the fact that he has authored over 20 peer reviewed papers. CV attached, below.
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....
Sorry Snowball but I do not subscribe to your AGW deathcult religion. Go argue theology somewhere else.
Too bad nature and the science that studies it don't give a flying fuck what you believe or don't.
How about you go find some other sand to store your head in.
But you don't believe the AGW scientsists. They say they are lying and you dispute the fact. Why do you argue against the very same people with whom you claim to agree?
Data, fuckwad. Last time...
The scientist behind the bogus claim in a Nobel Prize-winning UN report that Himalayan glaciers will have melted by 2035 last night admitted it was included purely to put political pressure on world leaders.
Dr Murari Lal also said he was well aware the statement, in the 2007 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), did not rest on peer-reviewed scientific research.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1245636/Glacier-scientists-says-knew-data-verified.html#ixzz1VchawtTU
Unfortunately, for you, the science is phony.....
http://assassinationscience.com/climategate/
FYI, the onus is upon the AGW Religionists to prove their faith. The earth could be warming up for any number of reasons that have nothing to do with AGW. Besides, if you are going to extort money from the public purse, you better have a damn good reason.
The science doesn't lie. Do you think they're out there blowtorching the ice sheets and making fart bubbles in the ocean to keep the temp up or something?
I can't say that I'm amazed that you'll accept some idiot's cherry-picked gibberish quotes while ignoring physical facts about the actual world all to maintain your belief system that a vast conspiracy is out to screw you.
Same challenge to you as to the Almanac: what data was falsified?
Tom Wigley, Climatic Research Unit to Phil Jones - "How does Keith explain the McIntyre plot that compares Yamal-12 with Yamal-all? And how does he explain the apparent 'selection' of the less well-replicated chronology rather than the later (better replicated) chronology? … The trouble is that withholding data looks like hiding something, and hiding something means (in some eyes) that it is bogus science that is being hidden."
See: Climate scientists withheld Yamal data despite warnings from senior colleagueshttp://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/feb/09/yamal-climate-tree-rin...
"We do not select tree-core samples based on comparison with climate data. Chronologies are constructed independently and are subsequently compared with climate data to measure the association and quantify the reliability of using the tree-ring data as a proxy for temperature variations."
And guess what...completely removing the tree data doesn't change the outcome of the science!
There'd be absolutely no point in cherry-picking it (not that Briffa did: he made the data usable in concert with other time series no more, no less).
You're really going to have to do better than that. Try actually learning some science instead of regurgitating what was spoon-fed to you in the denier blogopshere.
How much better do I have to do in order to combat your incurable insanity?
You could present some objective data that contradicts current climate science, for a start.
Tut, tut, didn't they teach you in science class that you cannot prove a negative, that a scientific theory must be falsifiable to be valid.
Ask your anal partner Flakmeister, I am certain that he can provide you with all the necesary objective date to prove the AGW case, NOT.
You mean there is a political agenda behind the promotion of the AGW fraud? Who would have thought?
You would make a horrible scientist with that attitude.
<< You lookin for me ?
That 'article' is some seriously fucktarded ass-hattery, posted (IMO) for the sheer entertainment pleasure of the Tylers in watching the lemmings verbally bash each other about their virtual heads and faces with semi-linguistic baseball bats. Wonderfully chaotic, and in the Fight Club tradition (insofar as such an organization has no traditions).
I'm grinning with approval.
Agreed, and if I hadn't have been drinking and pre-annoyed by all the neighborhood children re-enacting Lord of the Flies in my backyard all day, I might have given it a pass.
But, what the hell, it's supposed to be fight club, after all.
It isn't going to be the end of everything. It's just going to be the end of you. Well not you maybe but many other yous, of which there are now 7 billion. How bad it is going to be depends entirely upon how well we proceed with our colletive needs and good. Since government is waning permanently if corporations cannot successfully deal with supplying for the collective good then we will enter a new Dark Age.
I think were all in aggrement that pollution is damaging, however, were not all in aggrement that there is an ever increasing global blanket of CO2 , that due to increasing burning of fossil fuels by man , is growing and causing the average global temperature to rise.
As Gallagher once said, "I think we all learned in the sixties -- don't poop in the tub."
Hey - to each his own, man.
Doesn't actually work like that at all, there's no "global blanket" of CO2. The Greenies show you smoke stacks to make you think that.
There is the well known Carbon Cycle that recycles carbon all the time 24/7/365 and it is essential for all life and plants which take it in and produce O2!
We are at/near an all time low of CO2 in the atmosphere -- the average for the past 500 Milion years is 1250 ppm, today only 388 ppm.
95% of all greenhouse gas is water vapor -- nothing to do with man. Ony 3% is CO2, and only 3% of that is made by man -- Ie, only .003% is made by man and that is more than absorbed by the capacity of plants and the ocean in the carbon cycle.
You're yard produces lots more CO2 gases every year through the rotting organic plants and bacteria in the topsoil that you do driving your car and using electricity.
Global warming is a hoax of the worst sort.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-higher-in-past-intermediate.htm
http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-residence-time.htm
http://www.skepticalscience.com/human-co2-smaller-than-natural-emissions...
Of course - it's a socialist plot for a new world order. Everybody knows the 5 decades of peer review is meaningless
There was no peer review. The University of East Anglia would not release their underlying data and eventually they claimed to have lost it.
Hey False Consciousness,
Do you know how the catholic church decides if someone is a saint? The bishops peer review materials presented by the saints advocates, and then hold a vote. If a majority agree, then the person is sainted. So if a small group of scientists review each others material and agree that it is correct, then I guess that makes it so. Kinda like how it was decided that fire was caused by a hidden element called phlogiston, or how it was determined by the Royal Society that heavier than air flight was impossible.
Yes you are right, peer review is meaningless.
Wow, talk about capitulation!
George Washington, is that you?
I have heard that "Tyler" is actually several people, allowed to use the 'nym'; this one should have his privileges suspended.
We are Not getting warmer,
Nature is adapting to us Just Fine (ask the squirrels, pigeons, and cockroaches),
Life flourishes in the Chenobyl exclusion zone, so even if some agency managed to orchestrate the simultaneous meltdown of every reactor on Earth, life would continue. Human life included; I imagine folks in New Guinea wouldn't even notice.
Ever been to Utah?
Radiation, yes indeed: you hear the most outrageous lies about it.
Slide . . .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=boj75h3urLU
The Author is another ignorant globalist hoaxer, full of shit about global warming. Al Gore is ejaculating on massage therapists these days because he also knows he is a fraud committing crimes against humanity to get rich.
The Earth's atmospheric CO2 levels are at near all time lows, going back 500 Million years. We are only at 388 ppm while the average has been 1250 ppm, and has been as high as 5500 ppm for tens of millions of years, when humans were not around.
The East Anglia University PhD's have already admitted they lied and cheated on their data, while repressing opposing research in a classical fascist way. They are guilty.
Turns out the only "evidence" of these experts has been computer generated climate model predictions, which were/are heavily doctored and skewed. Not only has the baseline data shown to be falsified, but their assumptions programmed into the climate models are wildly incorrect, which they are now admitting (under pressure) these days.
Moreover, 95% of the greenhouse gases are water vapor, which we can do nothing about. Only 3% is CO2 -- and of the 3% that is CO2, only 3% of that is man made CO2. In other words, man made CO2 is only .003% of the greenhouses gases. Put another way, the organic decay and bacteria in my yard produce far more CO2 every year than I do driving my car and using electricity.
What's more, of the tiny .003% of the CO2 man produces, the atmosphere, oceans, and vegatative organisms sop up in the natural Carbon Cycle, and if anything, there is a CO2 shortage going on if you are a plant because this low CO2 is actually stunting your growth. The atmosphere contains 700 Trillion tons of CO2, but the oceans have 40,000 Trillion tons of CO2 and with the huge capacity to absorb any extra CO2 from the atmosphere, that the plants don't get, in a dynamic equilibrium. So, even if man doubled or quadrupled our CO2 output from currrent levels, the oceans have a huge capacity to absorb lots more.
And there are lots more common sense facts swatting down the global warming moonbats these days, but here's one of the real clinchers: CO2 does not even cause global warming. Even Al Gore admitted in congressional testimony that warming occurs first and CO2 rises as a secondary finding. Rises in CO2 actually lags sun cycles and decadal oscillation warming by many decades, if not hundreds of years. And did I mention that the Earth is at near all time lows in CO2 with only 388 ppm??
Even 8th graders know that when you leave a cold soda out, as soon as it warms up, the CO2 escapes making it go flat. The soda did not get warm because the CO2 left the liquid, it was the other way around.
And the environmental wackjobs are actually just making things worse. They are shutting down and driving all energy production away from the West to the dirty places of the world, like China and the Niger Delta. The point of 40 years of cleaner regulations was to make it safer, not to shut it down. All the GreenBots have accomplished is to dirty processes to prevail in countries where they refuse to go and lobby for clean regulations that match ours.
And the really peculiar and astonishing thing is that the GreenBots become extremely emotional and angry if persented with mountains of conclusive evidence that Doomsday has been called off! You'd think they'd rejoice and be happy about it -- but NO -- they become disoriented, violent, shout out with namecalling and dig in their heels. They want a crises, even if it is manufactured. It matters not to them.
Take the red pill and start here at this site for the best evidence to counter the government sponsored green propaganda: Climate Depot
Remember to recycle, and remember we are also actually at an all-time low on atmosperic CO2, so it's OK to Free the Carbon.
This has always been about money and not the environment. Unfortunately the greenies are just the useful idiots being used by those that want to create their utopian Climate Exchange so they can get rich just like the wallstreet bankers got rich.
Extra benefits for suppressing the western middle class and getting more control over the populous.
Blythe Masters is on board...
http://reduxpictures.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/BB_Bloomberg_Markets_Jan10_01.jpg
Gee what a surprise! Blythe Masters believes in AGW. If the wall street banksters are in favor of AGW, that is reason enough to reject it!
Sure, because if they have a vested interest in carbon trading, that must mean the science is faulty. You run around employing logic like that and think that other people are responsible for your failure in life?! LOL
Listen up, numbnuts, If you are in the upper 1% of the income level, as you stated in a previous thread, do you honestly think that we, the unwashed masses will care if you support global warming/climate change, or not? We just want jobs and to feed our families, and if you are not too old, maybe you will be our first meal after the shtf. gfy
I want you to have jobs and feed your families too, having been the 'unwashed masses' myself, but by all means, go ass-up for the people who have been taking you to the woodshed for years like a good little soldier.
yep...~95% of the green house effect is due to water vapour... you might add that it is in equilibrium.
Yes, lots of non man made CO2.... there is a well defined atmospheric cycle for dealing with C02...
"lots" of non manmade methane, again there is understood cycle...
Now, drive the CO2 cycle with more CO2 than it can handle. Compute the effect of extra C02....
Likewise for methane....
Lot of psuedo science bull shit in this one...
You might want to get a libel lawyer, East Anglia scientists did no such things.
Just a link to ponder, given the libel charge:
http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech-mainmenu-30/environment/2377-ipcc-res...
"Now, drive the CO2 cycle with more CO2 than it can handle. Compute the effect of extra C02....
Likewise for methane...."
What scientific data or basis are you using to determine what the maximum C02 level is and ditto for Methane? Just curious as your hypothesis is the based on the computation based on "extra" C02 and "extra" Methane.
Start here
http://www.skepticalscience.com/human-co2-smaller-than-natural-emissions.htm
and move on to
http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/pdf/tar-03.pdf
or here
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=atmospheric+c02+cycle&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart
...and I parry your false thrusts with
http://www.co2science.org/articles/V5/N52/EDIT.php
and move on to
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton/temperature_and_co2_change_br...
or here
http://www.plantsneedco2.org/default.aspx?menuitemid=371
Monckton has been discredited so many times, I have lost count...
Any of this stuff peer reviewed? Didn't think so...
So... your sources are credible, everything else is hogwash. Ahhh. I see. It is because I say it is and nothing else matters. Quite the ideological dogma. Peer reviewed by select peers? Like maybe only peer review within the brainwashed global warming camp? Enjoy your created reality. The crux of the matter is the unmittigated gall to believe in the self import of humankind having enough of a physical effect on the environment to affect it. Good try though.
If you only understood scientists... I can assure you that if one could overturn AGW and GW they would because they would gain everlasting fame (not necessarily fortune...)..... The vast majority scientists pursue the goal of understanding the universe, i.e. the truth... Now there are a few that will sell their integrity to the highest bidder. however, on the scale of lawyers, bankers, financial types, scientific integrity is all but beyond reproach....
You are right, maybe the East Anglia Scientists did not lie, distort and obsfucate their data. But we will never know because Phil Jones 'lost' the original data sets. So science fact, is now science fiction.
Still waiting on your response to the FACT that your precious East Anglia "Scientists" did no such things. Swept that one under the rug nicely.
Yeah Flaky, you should know. After all, as per your CV below, you have authored over 20 plus peer reviewed papers. Of course none of us on ZH have seen or read them, but hey if you were to attach links to said papers, perhaps some of us Deniers might be convinced. I promise to STFU and read at least 2-3 of the most relevant.
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....
"The East Anglia University PhD's have already admitted they lied and cheated on their data, while repressing opposing research"
TRUE. It is clearly time to reject the work of PhDs, and of scientists in general. Fool me once...
And as for ejaculating on massage therapists: don't knock it till you've tried it!
Shhhh...
The eco-nuts are on a tear, and reason doesn't work on them. Best to just punch 'em in the nose and call them poopy-heads, that way, they can assume that the rest of us are ignorant, and go to bed.
Very nice gwar5...Damn near got a boner reading your comment.
Monckton Bitchz !
+++
Those Brits do have a way of putting things that leaves no stone unturned. Thanks for reminding us all!
Lord Monckton unleashed: Is Obama Poised to Cede US Sovereignty? - YouTube
There is a large difference between a substantiall winnowing of a population base and extinction. The Earth still supports life and some material number of humans will survive anythin other than a self inflicted nuclear extinction event. That said you I and everyone we ever met will probably not be among the survisors.
dup/deleted
Death by global warming? Not likely. The earth's been warmer and cooler in the past. When it warms, plant life thrives off of higher temps and CO2. Death by nuclear meltdown? Not likely. How many people died from radiation exposure at Chernobyl? 10? Dealth by unpayable government debt? Not likely. Although the path will be rocky.
Thousands, maybe tens of thousands, died from Cherobyl. Of course, the question is, will the radiaition kill me before I reach childbearing age? I think there was a StarTrek episode about this.
Life is tougher than we give it credit for. Ionizing radiation from 442 nuclear power plants will destroy civilization, if not homo sapiens. Climate change... well the climate changes one way, then the other... survival is based on growing seasons.
Hopefully, the finacial meltdown will give us a chance to shut down the nuclear reqctors before there isn't any money left. The stone age wasn;t so bad- we lived there for 9/10th of our race's existence.
I have read that Chernobyl prematurely ended the lives of about 1,000,000 people and Fukushima is said to be 1000 times as dangerous. Radiation isotopes are particularly damaging to children because they have fast growing cells. Also, radiation causes infertility. Give ZEOLITE to those you love or you may live, or not, to regret it. Tuco