by Dane Wigington
In recent years there have been numerous scientists and scientific agencies discussing the challenges with global warming and suggesting ways to remediate further global warming from occurring. These solutions, labeled as “geoengineering”, range from the realistic and possible, to the clearly impossible and absurd. The question is: Is geoengineering currently being advertised as a ‘proposed solution’ when in reality geoengineering is already taking place? If geoengineering is occurring, is it a reasonable strategy to combat global warming, or is it a potentially catastrophic measure that has lethal consequences? Lastly, is the intent of geoengineering being advertised to the general public as a way to stop the problems associated with global warming, when in actuality there are other agendas taking place?
The massive elephant in the room is that geoengineering programs are real; they are currently being deployed across the globe and have been for at least several decades. Stratospheric Aerosol Geoengineering (SAG) and Solar Radiation Management (SRM) are programs designed to saturate the stratosphere with reflective aerosols through the use of modified jet aircraft. Unfortunately, most scientists are either turning a blind eye to SAG and SRM, or are simply misleading the public intentionally as to their existence. These programs are stated in numerous patents and documents (about 150), are openly discussed in U.S. Congressional hearings on weather modification, and are outlined by numerous scientific agencies including the Royal Society, the United Nations, and the UK Meteorological Society.
Those unconvinced of the current deployment of such aerosol campaigns need only look more closely at the available data now accumulating across the globe. An objective analysis on just the surface can convince even those who are most skeptical that indeed geoengineering is occurring and there are devastating effects taking place.
1) Consistent horizon-to-horizon aircraft trails that slowly expand and merge until the entire sky is often covered with a blanket of artificial cloud. Bright trails that seem to dissipate (but leave the sky a silvery white, often with “cob web” like wispy clouds) appear to be yet another method of dispersing geoengineering particulates.
2) Elements such as Barium, Aluminum, Strontium, and Manganese showing up in lab tests of precipitation in lethal quantities across the globe. For example, a lab test for a single rain event taken in Shasta County, California in 2006 measured 7 parts per billion (ppb) for aluminum, already high, and less than five years later at the same location a single rain event measured 3450 ppb for aluminum. This is an increase of nearly 50,000%.
3) According to the California Air Resources Board (CARB), which has studied aerosols migrating from China and other locations around the globe, elevation in aluminum ratings are NOT due to any aerosols that may be migrating from China due to their industry.
4) Tests have determined that the soil PH has been so radically changed in the forests of the Pacific Northwest, that tests from Shasta and Siskiyou Counties for example, have changed as much as 15 times toward alkaline.
5) Aquatic insect populations have been severely affected by metal contamination in the formerly pristine watershed in regions of northern California. Aquatic insect population has declined as much as 95%, according to 35-year US forest Service veteran biologist Francis Mangels.
6) “Global dimming” — the reduction in the amount of global direct sunlight that reaches the earth’s surface -– has increased 20% due to reflective metal particulates in the atmosphere reflecting sunlight.
7) Global drought is now the norm with few exceptions.
8) Verified massive ozone holes are now present over the northern and southern hemispheres.
9) Atmospheric conductivity has increased radically, thus leaving the earth more prone to increased lightning strikes.
10) The Arctic Methane Emergency Group (AMEG) has recently called for “emergency war-time-scale geoengineering” to avert a planetary emergency unfolding in the Arctic — an attempt to stop the imploding Ice cap and methane mass expulsion.
11) The US military has repeatedly stated its intense interest in such programs for strategic military purposes, i.e. “Owning The Weather By 2025″ (pdf here).
Some may be shocked to know that the above examples exactly match the expressed goal of numerous geoengineering patents. In addition, the metals that are showing up all over the globe also precisely match the elements named in numerous geoengineering patents. It does not appear that this bombardment of toxic materials (notably aluminum, barium, strontium) is decreasing either; on the contrary, it appears to be increasing rapidly. Unfortunately, many government officials, including Obama Science advisor John Holdren, have openly stated their support for global aerosol geoengineering.
In the midst of all this metal showing up in our soil and water, our forests are suffering huge losses. Forest fires are out of control around the northern hemisphere. At of the end of August, over 74,000,000 acres burned in Siberia alone. Many other countries have had prolonged states of emergency from record wild fires as well. Drought, the main consequence associated with geoengineering aerosols, also is reaching an epidemic level this year.
It is important to understand how forest fires and drought apply to geoengineering. In addition to robbing the environment of moisture, an atmosphere saturated with geoengineering particulates also increases atmospheric conductivity. With the forests at record low moistures levels due to the drought this year, the effects of the SAG and SRM have proved a devastating combination as dry-lighting strikes have become widespread, thus fueling spontaneous wildfires.
Clearly, with geoengineering, the weather on the earth can be modified by the timing and quantity of particulates being sprayed into the environment. This begs the question of the true intent of geoengineering. Is it a potential way to gain power via control of the weather rather than a proposed solution to prevent global warming? It appears as though the primary motivation for pursuing geoengineering by the U.S. military may be the strategic advantage of weather modification during times of war. Controlling the weather creates a powerful force multiplier for a nation’s military during a conflict. For example, if one nation were able to ground an entire country’s air force because of severe weather, or create a drought so bad that a nation is weakened internally and rebellion against its leaders takes place, a nation could win a war before firing the first shot.
The U.S. military historically has been vocal about the desire to be able to modify the weather going back to the 1940’s, when they partnered with General Electric, which was researching weather modification at that time. For the third time, the president of Iran has stated that he believes his country is the victim of ongoing NATO weather-modification assaults that have left his country in a dire state of drought. Officials in Pakistan also have made similar accusations. Recently, when the government of Thailand drug its feet in regard to granting a new base in their country for the U.S. to “monitor” weather changes (conduct weather modification?) they were decimated by record flooding. Coincidence?
Closer to home, don’t overlook the still-worsening drought decimating the continental U.S. Is it yet another coincidence that Monsanto (the world’s largest genetically modified seed company) has introduced its newest drought- and aluminum-resistant corn in the midst of this unfolding disaster? This point is well documented in the recently released film “Why In The World Are They Spraying” produced by film maker Michael Murphy. Murphy also documents in the film the weather derivatives market, which amounts to casino bets place on weather catastrophes — where they will occur and who they will effect. Could this be the corporate/industrial/military complex manufacturing weather catastrophes and then making massive profits of the damage done? All indications point towards a new type of profit-investment market, disaster capitalism.
Who are the players that appear to be involved? Things that can be said for certain are, The Raytheon Corporation, which is up to its neck in weather-modification patents and appears to do all the weather modeling for The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association (NOAA) and the National Weather Service. Another player in this gamble on the future of our planet is The Lockheed Martin Corporation, which is also heavily invested in the weather modification business and appears to do all the weather modeling for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Could the foxes be watching the hen house? Are they predicting weather at this point, or giving us the “weather schedule”? If they were, would they want to disclose this?
Many ask if the materials that are being deposited in our atmosphere are part of jet fuel, or are they part of a “payload” delivery system that is actually sprayed, however all data points to the latter. First, there is already a patent for a “powder contrail generator” which would be used for this exact geoengineering purpose. Next, the massive amount of metal aerosol tonnage proposed by geoengineers to be dispersed on an annual basis (20,000,000 tonnes according to internationally recognized geoengineer David Keith), is simply far too much for any type of fuel additive. There are also countless compelling photos and extensive film footage that clearly indicate spraying from separate nozzles on the plane. Shockingly, some of this footage actually shows spray coming from the front wing of a rear-engine jet, with visible spraying from nozzles starting and stopping at various times.
So, why in the world are they spraying if it is doing so much damage to the planet and life on earth? It would seem because they can, and there is no one to stop them. The craving for absolute control appears to have no bounds or limits even if that quest puts the seekers themselves at risk. Why did the same power structure feel the need to detonate more than 1,800 nuclear weapons even though that has contaminated all life? Why has the same power structure constructed a nuclear arsenal large enough to destroy life on earth some 12,000 times over?
Coming up with an answer to such questions is difficult. What it is possible to say is that a mountain of data confirms the harsh and lethal reality of global geoengineering. The ongoing spraying appears to be completely disrupting all natural weather patterns, creating catastrophic global droughts, shredding the ozone layer, contaminating our soils and waters, and even more critical, poisoning every breath we take with microscopic metal and chemical nano particles that are extremely damaging to the human body.
As if all this was not enough, the damage done to the planet now appears to have reached a critical point. Catastrophic methane release has been triggered on the East Siberian shelf of the Arctic. Though methane is often considered to be about twenty times more potent a greenhouse gas than C02, this is over a hundred-year time horizon. Over a twelve-year time horizon, methane is considered to be perhaps 100 times more potent than CO2. To put this in context, the methane release that has been triggered is a global
game-changer in and of itself, with potential consequences that are unimaginable. Global geoengineering is literally putting life on earth in a dangerous balance. All available data has led this author to the conclusion that short of nuclear annihilation, the ongoing global geoengineering atmospheric spray programs are the greatest and most immediate threat to life on earth.
So what can we do? Raise awareness at a grass roots level. This is the only way to battle this issue. All governmental agencies and representatives are part of the corporate/industrial complex and no ground can be gained through the “system”. I say this after ten years of effort working in conjunction with the California EPA, the Cal Energy Commission, the Cal water quality, the USDA, USFS and other institutions. Only when the population at large is made aware of the fact that they are being sprayed like lab rats can the geoengineering be brought to a halt. If the population is aware, military personnel and families will then be aware, and we would hope they would at some point refuse to participate in their own demise. There are many good people in the military that would care if only they were informed. Certainly, they will never be told by the system they are in.
How do we raise awareness? From our own home computers we can all work to locate and identify people, groups, and organizations that would care if they only had a clue. These groups can include journalists, environmental organizations, ADD groups, Alzheimer’s, autisms and agriculture organizations. The list is endless. The film mentioned above, “Why In The World Are They Spraying” can and should be handed out. The film producer has generously allowed reproduction as its goal is to get the word out, not for profit. (Though it should be mentioned that the only way the film producer’s efforts can continue is by film sales, so if you really want to help, buy at least one commercial copy then make duplicates from that). The website “geoengineeringwatch.org” is also a tool for educating.
It’s up to us. Geoengineering is not just another environmental issue, it is the issue. The ongoing implementation of these programs is virtually decimating the biosphere from top to bottom. If it is not brought to light and to a halt, all other issues will soon enough become moot. Geoengineering is a lethal reality.
_______________
Dane Wigington has an extensive background in solar energy. He is a former employee of Bechtel Power Corp. and was a licensed contractor in California and Arizona. Personal residence was feature in a cover article on the world’s largest renewable energy magazine, Home Power. He owns a 1,600-acre “wildlife preserve” next to Lake Shasta in northern California. He focused his efforts and energy on the geoengineering issue when he began to lose very significant amounts of solar uptake due to what ever-increasing “solar obscuration” caused from the aircraft spraying as he also noted significant decline in forest health and began testing and research into the geoengineering issue about a decade ago.
_______________
McPherson’s latest conversation with Sherry Ackerman, Madness of the mainstream, is available at Transition Voice
September 29th, 2012 at 10:39 am
A program of such a massive scale is mind-boggling and leads one to ponder how the government keeps whistle blowers quiet? This would be a government program comparable to the “Final solution”, Nazi Germany’s horrific program of Jewish extermination.
September 29th, 2012 at 10:44 am
conspiracy theories do not float in my boat
September 29th, 2012 at 10:48 am
If I understand this article correctly, its author is basically claiming that most, if not all, of climate change is due to geoengineering (spraying of fine metal and chemical particulates into the atmosphere from jet aircraft), not fossil fuel consumption. This includes both Arctic sea ice melting and out-gassing of methane from the Arctic sea bed.
“Everything you thought you knew about the causes of global warming is wrong”. That’s one hell of a claim.
ExxonMobil must love this guy.
September 29th, 2012 at 10:55 am
I also took the opportunity to read the Transition Voices article,
“Madness of the Mainstream”. I must say that much of what Shelly Ackerman said sounds disturbingly like what a certain member of 350.org often says.
Not that there’s anything wrong with that.
Though I must say, someone does need to send a copy of Malcolm Light’s AMEG article. She should at least be aware of where the cutting, er, bleeding, edge is with respect to climate science.
September 29th, 2012 at 11:12 am
some hunter-gatherer groups had to move quite swiftly at this time of year under certain latitudes, carrying belongings, babies and children, available prepared food, and whatnot (sacred objects, herbs, ???). some of these groups could not afford to carry old and sick people. so they would let them there to die and the group would start its fall migration, following the river of life. well, with a discal hernia and not able to walk, I would be left behing this week or the next.
concerning the essay, global dimming is very bad (and complex), but when the veil lifts (when grid goes down), the light will be sudden and blinding. most have already forgotten in their minds (but not in their hearts) what a bright day is. here is 24 hours of planes in the sky in one minute http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fz76-PIKg74. imo, we did not need any more geoengineering than that to profoundly disturb the atmosphere that has sometimes in the history of this planet been a comfortable blanket for our oxygen hungry forms of life that can only live in a very narrow range of temperatures.
I am not a scientific, I do not even really understand what science is. actually, my expertise is not recognized in most fields that i studied for lack of diplomas. so this is really my opinion, considering that not all opinions have the same value.
I would like the comments on this site to have a number (1-2-3-etc., if it is easily feasible), because when I come back to read the new ones, it is not easy to find where I left.
September 29th, 2012 at 11:25 am
It’s getting more difficult to deal with climate change
http://youtu.be/ARJK0MWAITM
September 29th, 2012 at 11:33 am
Michelle, the entries have a time stamp – it is the time at Guy’s location but once on a submitted comment it stays put. As you leave the site, note the time of the last comment you read. When you come back do Control F for find and type in the time such as 10:55 or 11:12 and it will take you to the last entry that you posted or read.
September 29th, 2012 at 11:47 am
Robin – thanks, the humor is welcome
I really don’t know what to think about contrails -but as long as we are exploring what THEY might be up to – Angels still don’t play this HAARP
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLZcaItj70U
Based on the best selling book Angels Don’t Play This HAARP, narrator Dr. Nick Begich presents a compelling discussion of one of the important military advances of the United States government.
September 29th, 2012 at 12:04 pm
It is sad and strange to see how many people quickly marginalize information like this without checking it out for themselves. It’s also strange how we constantly get caught up in “who’s fault it is.” My answer to that is “who cares.” The important thing to see right now is that it is happening. I challenge anyone with an average IQ to look at the facts about geo-engineering and still have doubts. And for those of you who call this a conspiracy, well, what do you think it is when a group of people contrive a plan in secret…it’s a conspiracy. This is just one more example how the powers that be have indoctrinated us into redefining certain words like “conspiracy, democracy, peacekeeper rockets, and a host of other terms).
It’s time to get wise and wake up and stop being controlled by our ignorance, meaning to ignore the facts. Thanks for letting me add my viewpoint and remember that this is a view from a certain perspective through personal experience.
September 29th, 2012 at 12:05 pm
It is sad and strange to see how many people quickly marginalize information like this without checking it out for themselves. It’s also strange how we constantly get caught up in “who’s fault it is.” My answer to that is “who cares.” The important thing to see right now is that it is happening. I challenge anyone with an average IQ to look at the facts about geo-engineering and still have doubts. And for those of you who call this a conspiracy, well, what do you think it is when a group of people contrive a plan in secret…it’s a conspiracy. This is just one more example how the powers that be have indoctrinated us into redefining certain words like “conspiracy, democracy, peacekeeper rockets, and a host of other terms).
It’s time to get wise and wake up and stop being controlled by our ignorance, meaning to ignore the facts.
September 29th, 2012 at 12:05 pm
Hmmm. I agree with Arthur Johnson’s comment. It seems the author is suggesting that global warming is entirely, or at least significantly, the result of geo-engineering, and has little, if anything, to do with the industrial economy. I think there is ample evidence to prove that CO2 has been rising since the beginning of the industrial economy and that rising CO2 is responsible for the increase in temperature, release of methane, increased acidity of the oceans, climate change, drought, etc. If geo-engineering is contributing to any of this, it’s insignificant at this time.
I’ll repeat myself from multiple earlier threads: the root cause of all our problems is population overshoot. We have 6.5 billion people too many on the planet. All the geo-engineering, grass roots activism, speech making, etc., won’t do a damn thing in the face of too many people consuming too many resources.
Anyone who’s ever grown life in a petri dish knows that no matter what you do, once a population grows beyond the ability of its environment to provide it with the necessary resources, the population experiences die-off.
Until the human population is reduced to a sustainable level nothing can be done to “fix” our problems. Period. End of story.
September 29th, 2012 at 12:18 pm
From wikipedia:
Contrails (short for “condensation trails”) or vapor trails are long thin artificial clouds that sometimes form behind aircraft. Their formation is most often triggered by the water vapour in the exhaust of aircraft engines, but can also be triggered by the changes in air pressure in wingtip vortices or in the air over the entire wing surface. Like all clouds, contrails are made of water, in the form of a suspension of billions of liquid droplets or ice crystals.
Depending on the temperature and humidity at the altitude the contrail forms, they may be visible for only a few seconds or minutes, Persistent contrails are thought to have a significant effect on global climate.
The main products of hydrocarbon fuel combustion are carbon dioxide and water vapour. At high altitudes this water vapour emerges into a cold environment, and the local increase in water vapour can raise the relative humidity of the air past saturation point. The vapour then condenses into tiny water droplets which freeze if the temperature is low enough. These millions of tiny water droplets and/or ice crystals form the contrails. The time taken for the vapour to cool enough to condense accounts for the contrail forming some way behind the aircraft’s engines. At high altitudes, supercooled water vapour requires a trigger to encourage deposition or condensation. The exhaust particles in the aircraft’s exhaust act as this trigger, causing the trapped vapour to rapidly condense. Exhaust contrails usually occur above 8,000 m (26,000 ft), and only if the temperature there is below −40 °C (−40 °F).
There is more, of course:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contrail
September 29th, 2012 at 12:34 pm
The REAL Dr. House,
One way that would help reduce population would be to stop the practice of exporting cereals, in a step-wise manner. Stop insisting that the U.S. and Canada must serve as the world’s breadbasket. Countries now dependent on large imports of grain to support large populations (pick any desert country you like as a prime example) will need to restore their agricultural economies and reduce their populations accordingly to fit the new agricultural reality.
Of course, given that we now use 40% of our corn crop to make ethanol for use as an anti-smog additive in gasoline, we’re already in the process of doing just that.
September 29th, 2012 at 12:44 pm
Great article and it is great that Nature Bats Last have posted it.Thank you Nature Bats Last…Many will turn a blind eye and many will talk conspiracy theories and like article says,Geoengineering is not just another environmental issue, it is the issue……WAKE UP Please….
September 29th, 2012 at 12:48 pm
One last point, Share price and pension funds has a very big presence regarding this activity.
September 29th, 2012 at 12:52 pm
john foley,
Geoengineering is not just another environmental issue, it is the issue……WAKE UP Please….
I see. So if geo-engineering is THE issue, does that mean it’s now OK to extract and burn all remaining fossil fuels then? Do atmospheric carbon dioxide and methane levels matter at all?
September 29th, 2012 at 1:16 pm
The essay is intended to bring attention to the dire issue of geoengineering. It was not my intent to deny the glaring overpopulation issue or the fact that in general the human race has raped, pillaged, and plundered the entire planet. So much so that the long term survival of the human race is very much in doubt.These issues are a given to any that are even slightly awake. What precious few are aware of is that the entire biosphere is the subject of a totally out of control experiment that puts all life at immediate risk. Though some can throw out the usual “condensation trail” definition as a form of denial, they virtually ignore the mountain of data that makes clear what is going on in our skies can not be explained away so easily.
Clearly there are countless dire environmental issues, but stratospheric aerosol geoengineering is by far the most far reaching. Many will continue to ridicule without further investigation. Its those who have the courage to do honest objective investigation that matter.
September 29th, 2012 at 1:42 pm
Do the VERIFIABLE facts in this article mean nothing to you naysayers? Mr. Wiggington is not saying that the burning of fossil fuels or over population does not add to global warming. He is saying that geo-engineering, specifically those technologies that utilize the spraying of massive amounts of microscopic aluminum, barium, and strontium particles into the atmosphere is like throwing accelerant on a fire that you are trying to contain. These substances are highly toxic to humans and are showing up in alarmingly elevated levels in rainwater and blood sample tests in every country where these programs are being reported. By the way, these tests are being done on rain water, not ground water. The elements they are finding should not be present, certainly not in these amounts. If you are really interested in arguing that these programs are not real, ongoing, and deadly for the planet, then do your research (and I suggest you use other sources than wikipedia). Start watching the sky. Pay attention. Or we all lose…. Thank you.
September 29th, 2012 at 2:04 pm
Dale Wigington,
It was not my intent to deny the glaring overpopulation issue or the fact that in general the human race has raped, pillaged, and plundered the entire planet.
Well, then, “in general”, do you think that the increasing level of atmospheric carbon dioxide is due to the burning of all types of fossil fuels or due to geo-engineering (the widespread spraying of fine metal and chemical particulates from jet aircraft)? Is an increasing level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere responsible, in any way, for global warming, or global warming due to something else entirely, say, the widespread spraying of fine metal an chemical particulates from jet aircraft?
Do you understand what all the fuss is about? If global warming is not caused by carbon dioxide, but by geo-engineering, we need to know that, because it would mean that we’re mistakenly blaming fossil fuel use as the source of the problem, when the real culprit is metallic aerosols in the atmosphere, which are much, much easier to remove than is carbon dioxide (or methane, for that matter).
So which is it? Fossil fuel burning, or metallic aerosols, that is causing global warming?
September 29th, 2012 at 2:11 pm
The account given by Mr. Wiggington stretches credulity. I expect a higher standard of evidence than that offered by Why In The World Are They Spraying?, which I find incoherent. Furthermore, I politely decline to do any research. If you believe you have a case to make, then make it.
And Lily, aluminum, barium and strontium are not highly toxic to humans. Levels of toxicity are well known. There’s a reason we describe mercury (I) chloride as “violently poisonous”. Mercury and thallium are highly toxic; barium and strontium are benign by comparison. Ever heard of a barium meal?
NBL has jumped the shark with this article.
September 29th, 2012 at 2:12 pm
If geo-engineering is done to cool the planet, does it make global warming worse, and if it does, how/why?
September 29th, 2012 at 2:24 pm
Guy, thank you for posting this, and thank you, Mr Wigington, for writing it. Always feels a bit risky in the ol’ credibility department, to me, to venture onto such turf in an open forum, with civilized minds conditioned to react with pitchforks and nooses to words like “conspiracy” and “chemtrails.” I’ve encountered Doomers™ who assure me, while wearing their “climate scientist” hats, that this whole thing is nonsense. I think we can be assured that they have done little to no independent exploration of the topic, with minds freed from the teachings of what Daniel Quinn calls “Mother Culture.” Had they done so, they would likely have found, as many have, that there is much credible evidence to support the notion that something very strange, and hidden in plain sight, is going on, even if we do not know the complete story.
Like Lily, I did not see Mr WIgington’s article as a refutation of the basics of greenhouse warning at all, but as an important additional factor to consider. To my mind, one of the more convincing answers to the “why are they doing this?” question is that they are, in fact, engaged in the geoengineering Mr Wigington speaks of in order to mitigate climate warming. This answer goes beyond the simple “because they can,” and leads, to my mind, to rich areas for speculation, research, and deduction. If this program is intended to mitigate climate warming by adding to global dimming, it feels likely to me that They™ must know that it will eventually backfire. In which case They™ are merely buying some time. What are They™ buying time FOR? That’s the question that now most interests me.
September 29th, 2012 at 2:25 pm
Robin Datta,
If geo-engineering is done to cool the planet, does it make global warming worse, and if it does, how/why?
I think it all depends on the specific type of geo-engineering method.
September 29th, 2012 at 2:25 pm
Like the lyrics in the Leonard Cohen song, “Everybody Knows”; “everybody knows the war is over, everybody knows the good guys lost”. The good guys have lost and the life on this planet is doomed. Whether I am wrong or not, I believe we are far beyond any fixes for the situation this planet is in.
September 29th, 2012 at 2:42 pm
Timothy Scott Bennett,
If this program is intended to mitigate climate warming by adding to global dimming, it feels likely to me that They™ must know that it will eventually backfire. In which case They™ are merely buying some time. What are They™ buying time FOR? That’s the question that now most interests me.
Recently, DARPA gave $1,000,000 of seed capital to the former astronaut Mae Jemison to fund her 100 Year Starship Initative:
http://www.100yss.org/
Putting 2 + 2 together is left as an exercise for the reader.
September 29th, 2012 at 2:52 pm
Martin,
This is what I mean by pay attention and do the research. “Barium, aluminum, and strontium in TOXIC levels,” meaning levels far exceeding safe amounts. This is quite different from the amount of barium one is exposed to on rare occasions in a “barium meal” for the purposes of an x-ray. These are levels capable of causing serious disruptions of the immune system specifically as well as other functions of the human body. The metallic particles are so microscopically small that they can penetrate your skin and the lining of your lungs. Are you saying that these elevated aluminum, strontium and barium levels found in blood and rain samples are safe? Research the effects of this level of exposure on human physiology and the environment.
If you study the legitimate research, then you can draw your own conclusions. Verify your sources, pay attention and I think you will come to the same disturbing conclusion as I have. If not, I hope you are right and I am wrong. I really do…..
September 29th, 2012 at 3:03 pm
surely the main point is that contrails, whether artificially boosted or not, may be masking the true magnitude of global warming. that is one of the most stupid things we could do, as what happens when the contrail blanket goes away.
September 29th, 2012 at 3:05 pm
Lily,
Well, now that you’ve qualified your statement …
If you can point me to some peer-reviewed studies, I’ll do the research.
September 29th, 2012 at 3:09 pm
If aerosol geo-engineering as described in this post is done to cool the planet, does it make global warming worse, and if it does, how/why?
September 29th, 2012 at 3:19 pm
Arthur, thanks for that link. Hadn’t seen this one. I’m currently playing with such a scenario in my second novel, as a vehicle to explore the deep emotional, psychological, and spiritual questions surrounded the present human predicament on Planet Earth. I find this an intriguing notion, whether there’s some Truth™ to it or not. I’ve certainly encountered others who speculate along these lines, and present evidence in support of it.
Peace. T
September 29th, 2012 at 3:36 pm
andyuk,
surely the main point is that contrails, whether artificially boosted or not, may be masking the true magnitude of global warming. that is one of the most stupid things we could do, as what happens when the contrail blanket goes away.
Not quite, but it takes a close reading to ferret it out.
The main point of the article is that geo-engineering is taking place now, and that this geo-engineering is a key driver, perhaps the only driver, of global warming (it’s also causing other things, like health problems).
Which is the whole point. The article’s claim is that world governments have certain agendas they want to advance, most prominently “turn-on-a-dime” weather control for military and poltical applications. All of the global warming, and the extreme weather events we’re seeing, are a consequence of this widespread usage of geo-engineering to advance these agendas.
But these governments need a cover story that can be used to place blame on for global warming. The rising levels of carbon dioxide (and now methane) due to the extraction and burning of fossil fuels is that cover story. And because everyone hates fossil fuel companies, and fossil fuels are filthy, dirty things with a huge “yuck” factor built into them, the cover story is very, very easy for the public (and even reputable scientists like James Hansen) to believe. But the whole fossil fuel thing is a red herring. It’s there purely to distract attention from the true culprit: geo-engineering via the widespread and continual spraying of fine metallic and chemical particulates into the atmosphere.
This is Dale Wigington’s claim
September 29th, 2012 at 3:41 pm
Martin,
) physiology:
Here are two links to legitimate studies on the effects of toxic levels of barium on human (as well as rat
http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp24-c2.pdf
http://rense.com/general21/tox.htm
Prepared by A. A. Francis, M.S., D.A.B.T., and Carol S. Forsyth, Ph.D., Chemical Hazard Evaluation Group in the Biomedical and Environmental Information Analysis Section, Health Sciences Research Division, *.
Prepared for OAK RIDGE RESERVATION ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION PROGRAM
*Managed by Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc., for the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract No. DE-AC05-84OR21400.
You can find other legitimate studies out there, as well as scientifically documented studies regarding the effects of toxic levels of aluminum and strontium. You can then find compare these findings with the documented levels they are finding in rainwater as well as blood samples.
September 29th, 2012 at 3:46 pm
Timothy Scott Bennett,
Here’s a speculation for you. TPTB understand that, at this point, the momentum of global warming (due to whatever) is now so powerful that initiation of the Venus Syndrome is now a done deal by 2100-2200. The only option for the saving of human and non-human life now is to transplant them to another “M”-class world. Global dimming via geo-engineering is doomed to failure, but it may buy us enough time (100-200 years) for Mae Jemison’s organization to develop the needed technology and engineering to build a starship capable of interstellar travel within that time frame, and the astronomers to find a suitable “M”-class world for colonization.
All purely speculation on my part. I really have no idea why DARPA gave her a million bucks and NASA an additional $100K, to launch this initiative.
September 29th, 2012 at 4:37 pm
From the original essay:
According to the California Air Resources Board (CARB), which has studied aerosols migrating from China and other locations around the globe, elevation in aluminum ratings are NOT due to any aerosols that may be migrating from China due to their industry.
Can you provide a reference for this? I can’t find anything from CARB to verify this claim.
To that end, even if this can be attributed to CARB, on what are they basing their data? Reports from the various industries?
Aluminum is used in hundreds, if not thousands, of industrial processes. Most of those processes give off some sort of atmospheric emission. So, which is easier to believe: industries that can be fined for pollution are “fudging” their data as to how much toxin their releasing into the atmosphere so as to avoid being fined, or contrails are “spraying” us with these toxins? Hint: it’s always about the money.
September 29th, 2012 at 4:44 pm
When the jets were grounded on 911 David Travis used that time to study the temperature changes in that 3 day period. The results were greater than what he expected.
In short David Travis of the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater and two colleagues measured the difference, over those three contrail-free days, between the highest daytime temperature and the lowest nighttime temperature across the continental U.S. They compared those data with the average range in day-night temperatures for the period 1971-2000, again across the contiguous 48 states. Travis’s team discovered that from roughly midday September 11 to midday September 14, the days had become warmer and the nights cooler, with the overall range greater by about two degrees Fahrenheit.
In long http://facstaff.uww.edu/travisd/pdf/jetcontrailsrecentresearch.pdf
September 29th, 2012 at 4:49 pm
Back a few years on another blog I had a discussion with someone who knew the H1N1 flu was engineered and designed to depopulate the planet. An unusual numbers of death in the Ukraine sparked some of the hype and some crazy man that was arrested in the US was also cited. I didn’t disbelieve because I thought our government or some other government wouldn’t do this. I disbelieved because the flu once set loose can mutate too quickly to be stable enough to do the job. The germ of choice would certainly be smallpox as it is more stable, we have a vaccine and enough countries kept some on hand that no one could easily point the finger anywhere.
I don’t dispute that they want to do weather manipulation for war effects, or even selective depopulation. Its just that it is likely to backfire and they know that or they are complete idiots (possible)
September 29th, 2012 at 4:55 pm
Normally, when I find a topic uninteresting to me personally or with which I disagree, I just keep quite for a while until the topic changes. But, for this topic, I’m departing from my usual M.O.
The original essay, while relatively well written sounds like something produced by an uneducated adolescent or a paranoid schizophrenic. According to the biography, the writer is educated and not an adolescent.
I realize that there are lots of ideas and opinions about various events and phenomenon. Many of those ideas I don’t agree with. But, when they’re based in science and fact, they’re hard to argue with. My interpretation of the data may still differ, but the overall concepts remain sound.
Not so with this idea. While the essay notes many changes happening to the planet, virtually everything noted has a plausible scientific explanation that is consistent with chemistry and physics. The author’s conclusions that all of these are better explained as some mass conspiracy of geo-engineering are not founded in any scientific principals, but are merely speculations of a paranoid mind.
A quick google search on this topic returns millions of hits, all with similar themes. With all the very real, easily provable problems facing us, perhaps it’s easier to concern oneself with the mythical boogeyman under the bed than the very real threat coming from all directions.
I say again, contrails, geo-engineering, climate change, peak resources . . . we can argue about whether they are real or how to fix them. But the fact remains, there can be no solution as long as we have too many people on the planet.
September 29th, 2012 at 5:35 pm
The REAL Dr. House,
What you say about overpopulation is dead on.
But about this article specifically, what concerns me is that its author has now, whether by accident or design, placed doubt, in many people minds, about what the source of global warming is. Is it CO2 and methane from fossil fuel burning and melting methane clathrates, or is that all BS, and fine metal aerosols are the problem?
Mark my words. This misrepresentation of the source of global warming has got legs. It’ll take a few months for this toxic meme to spread far enough, but it has the potential to paralyze prospects for climate change mitigation for years to come. You will see.
September 29th, 2012 at 5:51 pm
Arthur Johnson: [This meme] has the potential to paralyze prospects for climate change mitigation for years to come.
Arthur, you make it seem as if somebody is doing something to mitigate for climate change now. If we were to mitigate for climate change before it triggered our extinction, we needed to start about three decades ago. Nobody did anything then, and they aren’t doing anything now. This meme might be toxic. But this culture is toxic beyond doubt, and nobody is trying to stop it.
September 29th, 2012 at 8:01 pm
.
Sociocultural problems were solved
For pre-ag living, where we evolved;
There’s no way to go back,
What we want don’t mean jack—
We left Eden, and all that dissolved.
September 29th, 2012 at 9:46 pm
Lets just confuse the hell out of everyone with mor doubt, its the only thing that Science is good for these days, when Science believes it is about truth.
I’m going for a walk.
Good luck all, we are going to need it and some.
September 29th, 2012 at 10:02 pm
Arthur Johnson,
It was never my intent to distract from the fact that anthropogenic global warming is indeed a fact that can not be rationally disputed. (I tried to make this clear in an earlier post) It was not my intention to declare geoengineering as a sole source of climate change. I will edit this essay for posting on the “geoengineeringwatch.org” site to clarify this, your point is well taken.
My objective was and is to get people to do honest investigation into the dire issue of SAG and SRM. I also believe we may be on track for Venus syndrome . What available data indicates is that the ongoing geoengineering programs are speeding up the process exponentially. Though geoengineering patents state the goal of global warming mitigation, there is far to much evidence and documentation to ignore which points toward many additional agendas relating to the spraying and HAARP.
The evidence is overwhelming in regard to the reality of the SAG and SRM programs. They were put in full deployment a very long time ago. The evidence is also overwhelming in regard to the planetary decimation these programs are causing.
Again, my hope is that sincere people will put aside pre-conceptions and do objective investigation.
September 30th, 2012 at 1:54 am
The physics of the greenhouse effect are well known, and have been for a long time. Without the greenhouse effect we would have “snowball Earth”. The author’s many claimes are for the most but simply that. . . claims. There is more claims made by fallacious reasoning than I care to enumerate.
Intentional geo-engineering to warm the planet is a non-starter. Geo-engineering to offset or slow climate change to buy more time is plausible, and not that big a stretch of the imagination. In 1965 President Eisenhower mentioned in a speech that buring fossil fuels was changing the composition of the atmosphere.
For Tom Bennet (yes, I’ve watched, and I’m a fan) to be dismissive of those who question the article as, paraphrasing here, due to being blinded by Mother Culture is a bit much. I’ve read Daniel Quinn, and admire the his writings enough to own most of the books.
There is a world of difference, literally, between geo-engineering “backfiring” and it being overwhelmed by the exponential atmospheric loading of GHGs.
FWIW, I’m a husband and parent, science educator (ecologist at heart) and a founding member of AMEG, albeit a minor one. All the studies I have read conclude that geo-engineering alone won’t work. It must be accompanied by a significant year-on-year GHG emmissions reduction. My personal opinion from years of reviewing the literature is that SRM amd/or other “tech” types of geo-engineering alone wouldn’t work anyway. Those are solutions that would lead to bigger problems, and I fear would simply be used as an excuse to keep using FF’s just a little bit longer.
One final point; I find it curious that, as far as I’ve read, none of the atmospheric climate studies have noted large increases, or any increases at all in barium aluminum or strontium. If by that you assert that therefore they are all a part of the geo-engineering conspiracy I would point you back to the 20 or more traps of fallacious reasoning.
September 30th, 2012 at 2:54 am
Benjamin, your limerick hit on the points made by Joseph Tainter in his book Collapse of Complex societies. Complex societies keep solving themselves into deeper and deeper problems, with each solution costing more and helping less. Then they collapse. Craig Dilworth in his book Too Smart for our Own Good puts the problem smack dab on our nature – when we moved out of hunter-gatherering we used our big brain to be successful and it was so successful. But too much success means ever increasing populations and requires ever new solutions which open up new worlds, or new ways of obtaining resources that solve the problem and set the stage for the next one.
If we could have realized this early on in our experiment with civilization and willingly returned to hunter-gathering we would not be facing extinction. Some seem to think that to stop trying to fix things is giving up. Giving up is what we should have done 10,000 years ago. We should have given up farming and civilization and just be content to be the animal we were. It is too late now to save us. In order to be saved, before we do anything else we need to decommission 400 plus nuclear plants worldwide. To do that we need to have the current fossil fuel burning civilization remain intact for the time that would take to provide the power to do so. We haven’t safely covered Chernobyl and are still dealing with Fukushima for years to come. If we keep the current fossil fuel civilization going to do this project we certainly doom ourselves to runaway climate change. If we don’t do this project when the grid fails all the nuclear plants will in short order go Fukushima. In all the discussions about climate change, peak oil, geoengineering no one says hey “we need to decommission all the nukes before the grid goes down from solar flare or lack of fuel” All of them in every country that has one needs to be decommissioned. Instead Iran wants to have nuclear power and Israel and the US want to threaten world war over it. We need instead to bury our nuclear weapons, decommission our nuclear power plants, and ask every other country including Israel to do the same.
To accurately see that it is too late to save humanity from itself is not giving up, it is giving in to the knowledge that we are all mortal, will all eventually die at some point anyway and allows us to use our time for useful things such as loving those around us, enjoying what nature is left. When a cancer patient says no more treatment, I know I am about to die, it is not giving up, it is giving space in their last days to be much more peaceful and time to say goodbye rather than being bombarded with ever more radiation or chemo for the sake of a few days more.
At any rate anyone who thinks we need to keep fighting needs to add complete decommissioning of every nuclear power plant on the planet starting now.
The 400 Chernobyls problem is explained here http://www.whentechfails.com/node/1545
September 30th, 2012 at 3:20 am
Kathy C,
Lots of wisdom there.
September 30th, 2012 at 6:10 am
A little humor about a very serious situation – ie food shortages
http://www.mnn.com/food/healthy-eating/blogs/video-colbert-report-explains-how-corn-shortage-will-affect-other-foods
September 30th, 2012 at 6:24 am
That’s the cover story of the New Scientist mag this past week. Their subheading is: We have plans to cool the planet. Will they work?
My opinion is that, after reading about this in detail, as usual, whatever humanity decides to do to bend nature to suit will backfire and make things worse (if that’s even possible at this point). They’re grasping at straws and nowhere do they mention anything about stopping coal fired power plants, all the driving humanity does in polluting vehicles, nor halting the methane geysers that have “popped up.” As one of the commenters in the article says (specifically about earth shading space parasols, but i think it applies to the whole concept): “This is complete science fiction. We ought to stop talking about it.”
How about that 50 foot tsunami of FOAM that flowed down a Chinese river after a chemical spill (and for which the government claimed there was no threat and that maybe one or two fish would die as a result)?:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2210413/Bubble-trouble-50ft-tsunami-foam-sweeps-village-following-chemical-spill.html
Other than that – happy Sunday everyone, and thanks for all your comments and links! i’ll be back later “after ma chores ‘r dun.” Plantin’ some hard neck garlic this morning (that a farmer gave me yesterday out of his truck after a conversation about fall crop planting we had while attending a local Farm Festival. i was manning a community awareness table that had a beautiful bowl of fresh cut flowers free for the taking and a bunch of literature on fracking, GMO foods, mountain-top coal removal, voter i.d., and other info).
September 30th, 2012 at 6:30 am
Kathy, as usual, you are “dead” on.
Thanks for the Colbert humor – always good for a chuckle.
September 30th, 2012 at 7:44 am
“9) Atmospheric conductivity has increased radically, thus leaving the earth more prone to increased lightning strikes.”
Actually it’s just the opposite. IF particulates are increasing the conductivity of the atmosphere, it would tend to dissipate the separation of electric charge, and decrease the occurrence of lightning.
September 30th, 2012 at 8:21 am
Actually it’s just the opposite. IF particulates are increasing the conductivity of the atmosphere, it would tend to dissipate the separation of electric charge, and decrease the occurrence of lightning.
Well observed. Similarly, static discharges are fewer where air humidity is higher.
September 30th, 2012 at 8:44 am
Another chink in the armor of the industrial economy – at least to parents of infants and toddlers:
Chemical plant explosions in Japan kill one, may cripple global diaper output
“Nippon Shokubai is one of the world’s biggest makers of acrylic acid, the main ingredient of a resin called SAP, which is used in diapers.”
http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/09/29/14154759-chemical-plant-explosions-in-japan-kill-one-may-cripple-global-diaper-output?lite&google_editors_picks=true
September 30th, 2012 at 8:45 am
Dale Wigington,
It was never my intent to distract from the fact that anthropogenic global warming is indeed a fact that can not be rationally disputed. (I tried to make this clear in an earlier post) It was not my intention to declare geoengineering as a sole source of climate change
So what are the other source(s) of global warming? Does increasing atmospheric CO2 level caused by the burning of fossil fuels have anything to with global warming or not?
September 30th, 2012 at 9:03 am
Oh my dog Dr. House – no paper diapers – disaster looms. Of course funny to any of us who never used anything but cloth diapers, this dependence on throw away diapers. Also the story points out the fragility of an economy that is so efficient that there is no redundancy in it.
September 30th, 2012 at 9:27 am
.
Arthur, his name is Dane, not Dale. I’m sure you didn’t mean to do that.
It is a good question, and I see where you are heading with it, and I would like the answer as well. For those not following closely, Geo-Engineering can be considered anthropogenic global warming unless specifically stated otherwise, so I think Dane needs to be explicit about what he believes causes AGW. Also, Dane, while you’re at it, can you explain with supporting evidence how spraying of aerosols creates AGW. I’m not following the logic on that. If the atmosphere is being dimmed, it seems logical to me that this would lead to cooling, not warming, especially of you’re inclined to believe that burning fossil fuel doesn’t lead to increased levels of CO2 in the atmosphere.
I’ve mentioned here before that I’m agnostic about the whole Chemtrails thing, meaning I don’t discount it out of hand, but at the same time, I don’t agree with Dane that if it were true, it’s the most important factor affecting our species and all species.
All that being said, and since this is the topic of this thread, Murphy’s video and some of Dane’s contentions do raise some valid questions and avenues of scientific inquiry. This is something that can be validated scientifically, and cannot be invalidated by mere deductive speculation on the internet. Concentrations of aerosols in the atmosphere and in rain and soil samples can be tested, and then, and only then, can this issue be resolved. It would be enough for me. Perhaps it wouldn’t be enough for those who have a lot invested in the Chemtrails hypothesis, and those who refute that hypothesis out of hand would say it would be a waste of time and resources to conduct such a scientific study, and to them I would say, countless absurd studies are being conducted by scientists every day all around the world, so this study would not be any more a waste of time than any of the countless other fruitless studies that are performed.
I think it’s a waste of time to jump to the “why”, if this is indeed taking place. The first step should be the determination of whether or not it is taking place, and that can only be definitively done through scientific studies, imo.
However, after saying all of that, let’s assume this isn’t taking place, I have little doubt that Geo-Engineering in this form is going to be implemented, and it will be disastrous for all the reasons previously stated. We’re all Tuco now.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAULUqmwN04
I wonder if the people at Dark Mountain would be amenable to putting Dane’s essay in their next book offering?
.
September 30th, 2012 at 9:50 am
.
I hear ya, Kathy C, I crapped my pants when TRDH posted that about diapers. Of course, as we know, diapers aren’t just for kids anymore. What will these folks do without their’s.
http://www.hulu.com/watch/279577
.
September 30th, 2012 at 10:48 am
.
Kathy C and any others who may be interested, here’s an excellent documentary about the nuclear waste issue. If even one person watches it, for me it is worth depositing it here. It’s called Into Eternity and it’s extremely well done. It’s shows what’s involved in dealing with the legacy of nuclear power. It’s a monumental task….and for that reason, we know it will not happen. This ensures there will be know chance of survival for our species, and many others, even if there was a chance aside from this.
http://dotsub.com/view/8e40ebda-5966-4212-9b96-6abbce3c6577
Watch all six parts, you won’t be disappointed.
.
September 30th, 2012 at 10:58 am
Thank you! Finally someone who is putting out the straight facts. I’ve seen a lot of negative comments on this site, and I wonder how many of them come from people who have really studied and put in the time to know what is actually going on. I doubt very many, since if you study the information, rather than just trust your favorite media personality, it is obvious that what Mr. Wigington is saying is the truth backed up by facts. As to those who don’t believe in conspiracy theories, keep you head in the sand, of course your butt is going to get awful hot. There are many whistle blowers out there who don’t get media coverage. As to what percent global warming is caused by humans, it doesn’t matter. It’s like going down on a sinking ship only being concerned by what specie of whale you hit
September 30th, 2012 at 11:14 am
.
As to what percent global warming is caused by humans, it doesn’t matter. It’s like going down on a sinking ship only being concerned by what specie of whale you hit
If that’s so, then why bother sounding the alarm about Chemtrails at all? I mean, if the ship is sinking, it’s sinking, right? How does it help to shout “the ship is sinking and this is why” when you’re going down any way? See, that’s where metaphor and analogy fail, as Kathy C adeptly pointed out on the previous thread. Also, I think that last sentence should read “it’s like going down on a sinking ship and being overly focused on whether it was a whale or an iceberg you hit.”
Using the faulty metaphor of the sinking ship, there are no life boats thanks to those nuclear reactors, so we’re all going to drown and/or be eaten by sharks, so you’re right, it’s irrelevant, but still, we have an office pool going on here as to what will get us first, and you’re welcome to join it at any time. You’re reward if you win the pool? Nothing, because Nothing is sometimes a real cool hand.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xVXKOb5EE7Y
.
September 30th, 2012 at 12:20 pm
MB thanks for the Saturday Night Live Clip!
Iraja Siva-Das You have obviously only read this particular thread, not all the comments on other topics. Most of us believe in quite a few things called conspiracy theories, particularly that 911 was a false flag. But since one can create endless conspiracy theories and even the government creates them (but doesn’t call them that) one has to find out if they are valid or not. I could spin you that there is a conspiracy at the highest levels of government to be the first to meet the masters from the planet Nibiru when they return. They and the Israelis are trying to get control of Jerusalem so they can find the Lost Ark of the Covenant in Solomon’s Stables under the Dome of the Rock since it is a communication device to speak to the returning aliens. None of the actions in the Middle East are really about oil, they are all about find the Lost Ark of the Covenant. Also they brought down the twin towers not to create a New Pearl Harbor to use to start wars for oil and dominance. They brought them down to cover the theft of the gold in the basement as an offering for the returning Anunnaki – well someone got part of that conspiracy before I did http://www.darkstar1.co.uk/gold.html
But I will stick with the oil and dominance theory for now because there is a ton of data to back it up. You will find that regular posters on this site are not the least adverse to exploring a conspiracy theory. But we want more than speculation. As I noted before I was told over and over by a poster that H1N1 in 2009 was going to depopulate the world, it was designed for that. They provided what they saw a proof. I never believed it, not because I didn’t think that any PTB would ever want to do that, but because the flu virus is too unstable and they had smallpox which is stable so they could reliably protect themselves if they used smallpox. They could not do that with an flu virus. Here we are in 2012 with not even the Ukraine depopulated by the flu. And no admission by the guy who pushed it that he was wrong. Likewise several years ago I was told that it was certain that the plan was to unite Canada, US and Mexico and in 6 mos we would all be on the Euro. I even calendared that prediction so I could remind the poster when it was wrong – I did and got no acknowledgement that I was right and he was wrong.
I think that it is already clear that attempting to engineer weather is a much harder project than was first envisioned. Further we are not the only country that can produce contrails and have HAARP. Using it in any manner that is less than totally lethal to some enemies might result in payback.
Dane’s 11 points are of interest but they don’t prove his theory. For instance “10) The Arctic Methane Emergency Group (AMEG) has recently called for “emergency war-time-scale geoengineering” to avert a planetary emergency unfolding in the Arctic — an attempt to stop the imploding Ice cap and methane mass expulsion.” To me this is just an admission that the climate situation is so bad that this is all these folks can envision as a solution – caught in the trap that civilizations all get caught in of solving themselves to death.
There is no solution. We are done for. Well unless there are well meaning aliens who plan to whisk us to another planet.
September 30th, 2012 at 12:23 pm
PS the flu and amero conspiracy theories were from a different blog than NBL
September 30th, 2012 at 12:29 pm
MB I had seen the previews for Into Eternity some time back – look forward to watching it when time allows. Thanks. And for the Cool Hand Luke link – great movie. Back to you here is what we are all going to need in the coming days http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kECF4NPkKA
September 30th, 2012 at 1:19 pm
.
You’re welcome, Kathy, and yes, we’ll need that Plastic Jesus…and the Madonna in the front yard.
Who knew Paul Newman could sing so well? My uncle, now deceased, was a Catholic Priest and had the dashboard of his car covered with plastic religious figures…the Madonna, Jesus and many of the Saints. It must have worked, because he was never in an accident, and by virtue of the way this guy drove, that statistic is truly a miracle. He drove like a drunk….and I was terrified to get in the car with him, Saints and all.
Anyway, I noticed that Dane worked for Bechtel. I think that’s past tense, meaning he doesn’t work for this nefarious organization any longer, so I’d be interested in knowing Dane’s thoughts and feelings about his previous employer. Here’s an article about Bechtel’s history. Yeah, the source is conspiratorial, but then, so too is the subject matter of this thread, so fair is fair, right?
http://www.angelfire.com/zine2/DionysianUnderground/bechtel.htm
Today Bechtel (http://www.bechtel.com) is estimated to be the 20th largest corporation in America (smaller only than the its huge banking, oil conglomerates, and other industrial giants such as GEC and IBM, many of whom are Bechtel dependent clients), and the Bechtel family which still owns it, one of its richest clans (exact figures are hard to get though as the Bechtel family refuses to divulge its profits and wealth, as other corporations do, and refuses to be listed in any top 100 corporations list). When its many international subsidiaries, supported ‘ally companies’ and ‘breakaway’ businesses (still often run by Bechtel family members) are taken into consideration it is probably even bigger. However if this wasn’t enough it is more powerful institution than even this ranking suggests. Where as most of today’s corporations are owned by shareholders, Bechtel is still an entirely private company (possibly the world’s largest private company) and is entire under the control of the Bechtel family and their top employees. This makes it a highly directional and powerful entity. It is thus sometimes refereed to as *The* Corporation.
In the International arena, Bechtel is certainly one of the world’s largest construction companies, and when combined with its partner companies (such as bin Laden Construction, the Bechtel family are very tight with the bin Laden clan) far outstrips competitors. Some do try to compete of course, though when one company did so in Boston, for a particularly lucrative contract, they were allegedly threatened in an anonymous phone call, “If you want to work in this state again, don’t play games with Bechtel!”
A ruthlessly capitalistic enterprise (also the centre of years of allegations of racial prejudice towards and exploitation of its work force) Bechtel is in the forefront of the drive for deregulation and privatisation. Currently Bechtel is a leading player in the World Bank’s project for the privatisation of water. To the point that, in 1999, small farmers in Cochambamba, Bolivia, had to buy permits (and pay Bechtel) to gather rainwater on their own property! Some have suggested the ‘evil corporation’ that privatised Martian air in the film Total Recall was based on Bechtel……
Bechtel is also highly security conscious. Even before September 11 cast a spotlight on national security, Bechtel’s Nevada Test Site north of Las Vegas was taking aim at terrorism. Managed by Bechtel Nevada for the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration, the site supports national security and U.S. intelligence and defence efforts, designs emergency response programs, monitors consequences of terrorist acts, and develops technologies to fight terrorism. At the Weapons of Mass Destruction Training Program, for example, police, fire-fighters, and other “first responders” from across the United States learn how to react quickly to terrorist attacks in populated areas. Technologies developed by site researchers include equipment for detecting and predicting the path of airborne hazardous material, as well as new ways to protect buildings from biological and chemical weapons. The site also operates Remote Sensing and Special Technologies laboratories. Immediately following September 11, officials from Bechtel Nevada and the National Nuclear Security Administration proposed creating a National Centre for Combating Terrorism. Based at the Nevada Test Site, the centre is expected to build on the programs already in place there.
Due to its involvement in these areas it should not be a surprise to discover the number of military and intelligence personal who have been senior Bechtel directors. The most famous being CIA directors John McCone (in charge of the CIA at the time of the JFK assassination and invasion of Chile. And also Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission (1958-1961), and a director of ITT), and William Casey (Reagan’s CIA chief, and earlier the OSS officer in charge of operation Paper Clip and the rescue of Nazi scientists). Most recently former Chief of Staff Colin Powell is the most prominent military figure to be associated with Bechtel’s. The majority of the Defence Policy Board (formerly led by Richard Perle) which was the force behind the Pentagon’s push for the invasion of Iraq have also been Bechtelites. It is thus not surprising that in San Francisco, a city that has become a centre for U.S. anti-war protests, the international construction giant has found its headquarters there a main destination for protesters — because it is competing for lucrative contracts to rebuild Iraq and role in fermenting the war.
.
September 30th, 2012 at 1:19 pm
Thank you, Guy McPherson for having the courage to address this most dire of all planetary issues. Thank you Dane for your ceaseless and tireless efforts to raise public awareness in spite of overwhelming resistance on the part of the general public to investigate or accept the facts and documented reality of SAG.
Awareness is growing daily however thanks to people like you and the internet community of geoengineering activists. A Swedish Politician recently came out and publically acknowledged the program, the fact that it was a global agenda and the duplicity of governments through out the world. An act of conscience rarely observed in the body politic in the western world.
To those that doubt the validity of Danes assertions I wonder if you have given any serious effort to an examination of the data referred to or even spent any time looking up. Geoengineering is patently in our faces day after day.
It is easier to find a score of men wise enough to discover the truth than to find one intrepid enough, in the face of opposition, to stand up for it. –A.A. Hodge Thanks Dane and Guy.
September 30th, 2012 at 1:19 pm
Morocco Bama Says: why bother sounding the alarm … at all?”
Why bother sound the alarm
When nothing will save us from harm?
Do the math—you’ll conclude:
We’re totally screwed,
It’s over; we’ve all bought the farm.
September 30th, 2012 at 2:23 pm
Doubts will linger as this issue is so very hard to digest. Please view the link below. Very short, but very shocking.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=118AoVzxVOo&feature=share
This was just mailed to me. I have never seen it before today.
September 30th, 2012 at 2:55 pm
This is by far the most cogent and convincing discussion of geoengineering I’ve seen (others have been somewhat hysterical and short on even purported facts) but the author is no professionally qualifieId on the subject, and though he references many sources of supporting facts, they are not the sort that are readily available to readers such as myself, nor am I available to embark on such a complex research project. If we are to follow the author’s advice and start spreading the word to our cyber connections I fear we will sound just as hysterical and ill-informed as the other assertions I’ve seen, and not at all persuasive.
I’m somewhat dubious about this article precisely because of the Arctic Methane Emergency Group to which the author refers. They are qualified scientists actively urging immediately undertaking a program of spraying aerosols to alleviate global warming, and I wonder why this knowledgeable group doesn’t know that extensive spraying has been going on for years. I would like to hear more from someone with the credentials and the facts and statistics to make a more persuasive case.
Bottom line, though, even if completely true, why do we think public outcry would achieve any better results than the public outcry demanding labeling gmo foods, for example. Surveys show that 90% of the public wants labeling, yet the powers that be are stonily unresponsive. Even if the labeling initiative wins in California, I won’t be holding my breath.
September 30th, 2012 at 3:53 pm
Global warming is the ultimate crime
That is the theme of my rhyme
Its really to late
To avoid our fate
All that is left is time
And not much of it
September 30th, 2012 at 4:54 pm
Here is the HAARP segment of military geoengineering, in an overview by Michael Chossudovsky, which is well researched, but you can find vastly more than this about “owning the weather” if you look just a little bit.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-ultimate-weapon-of-mass-destruction-owning-the-weather-for-military-use-2/
September 30th, 2012 at 5:34 pm
Question for those that think this is deliberet. How could those responsible avoid the results??
September 30th, 2012 at 6:17 pm
Dane Wigington,
I watched the video you uploaded (2:23 pm).
You’re joking right? It was a video of two jets flying the same direction at different altitudes both leaving contrails. What’s so shocking about that? Sheesh! Next you’ll be telling us that since it was Sunday, this morning you went to the church of the flying spaghetti monster.
September 30th, 2012 at 6:51 pm
I’m not sure how people can be thanking Dane for his “cogent” and “tireless” research when the obvious errors in his essay have been pointed out by several posters.
September 30th, 2012 at 7:00 pm
When I lived in Southwest Colorado, Durango area, usually I would wake up to skies that were bluest-of-blue. I was at 7,000 feet and circled all around me were fourteeners (14K-foot mountains), bedecked in pure white snow, gorgeous against the deep blue sky. Then would come the streaks. Gray streaks. They would start thin, going parallel to each other. By the end of the day, they would have spread and the entire sky would be gray, although the streaks could still be seen, with perpendicular ones making a checkerboard pattern. I had never heard of chemtrails. I just loved the blue sky and hated to see the gray, horrible stuff appear. Then I moved to Hawaii, a long-planned move. Wow!!!! I was in love with the sky again!!!! It was bluer-than-blue!!! It had pure white, fluffy clouds to bring sweet rain, and rainbows virtually daily. I took many photos. And the night sky!!!! Blacker-than-black, with a dazzling array of uncountable stars and the streak of Milky Way of the galaxy. One year. Thatʻs all I got. In 2008, the spraying started here. Blue Hawaii? No more. The sky is silver-blue at best, and usually has a sickly yellow look, with random streaks of dirty gray. The ocean is gray. There are no rainbows! Not for weeks or months on-end!!!! The areas that get lots of rain (“windward”) have managed to retain green plants. The dryer areas, with occasional rain, are filled with struggling plants, yellow and brown leaves everywhere, dead branches. In some areas, many of the largest trees are are completely dead — the trees that would be the LAST to die if it were a natural drought. We have no coal-fired plants. The spraying can be seen in the mornings, many miles off-shore, with the prevailing winds likely to bring the gray streaks toward the island as the day goes on. Also, the military base in the middle of the island apparently sends up spray planes, as sometimes the streaks fan out vertically from the base. In driving through an area with heavy spray coming down to the ground, I have wept at the white death. I choke up and cry when I think of not being able to see the pure blue, the white, the rainbows, the flowers. This is Hawaii, for Heavenʻs sake!!!!
September 30th, 2012 at 8:13 pm
To Arthur Johnson:
In addition to stopping grain shipments to any nations that can’t grow enough food to feed their own people (such as India, Japan, and the United Kingdom), we’ve got to stop the Developed nations from purchasing oil, metals, and other natural resource commodities from the Developing nations. International commerce is neither green nor sustainable. Breathing produces CO2, and it should be illegal.
September 30th, 2012 at 8:20 pm
to HawaiiSkies:
from what I know (and of course, what do I know?), I am aware of a French blog from France where Jacques Fabry at http://www.eauseccours.com/ has been particularly and deeply investigating the air traffic (global circulation of planes) mostly in regard to its effects on the bees, because the changing light (white veiled skies) impairs their orientation abilities. He says that the global air traffic reached a point of creating those veiled skies in 2007 all over the world because of the condensation trails left by millions of planes crisscrossing the planet at every hour of the day and night, 365 days/year. It does not have to be chemtrails, condensation trails from all the planes in circulation seem to suffice. They release tremendous amounts of water vapor, particles and whatnot at an altitude where there used to be no human intervention. But, with cars, planes are the most valued product of this society and any announcement of anybody saying that they are travelling anywhere by plane is always welcomed with awe and envy as it is an extremely strong status symbol. Has it not always been a dream? To fly?
+, it costs nothing to travel by plane, for a few hundred dollars, you can go almost anywhere, annoy the people where you go, and boast about it when you return. How to resist such a treat that is valued and encouraged by almost everybody? When I say that I do not use cars or do not travel in planes, ever, even if I have enough money to go around the world and back, people get immediately angry and feel threatened by that choice. All this to say that when that sky will be clear again, the climate should INSTANTLY jump to extremes.
September 30th, 2012 at 8:23 pm
I believe it is being done to control the jet stream and deliberately melt the arctic for the “untold riches” minerals and oil to be obtained; and year-round passage through the northwest territories.
And in doing so will, and have created climate disasters to frighten the people into a carbon tax to forever fund this evil scheme in the atmosphere. The question is who is funding, ivesting the seed money for these sag and solar radiation management climate change at this time, and really who will benefit the most for melting the artic and laying claim to those untold riches?
It is terrible and I see it ongoing all the time in the skies and am sorely missing our oh beautiful spacious skies and natural clouds. I don’t want the filthy oil if it means trading off our heavenly blue skies and starry nights.
I don’t believe the reasons we are given in that the common people using energy are causing climate change. i.e tax you for your carbon footprint. I think that is what Gore’s inconvenient truth propaganda was about, to lead the people into thinking climate disasters are your fault. Now National Geographic and the Economist are writing about the melting arctic. Leading the people into what has been going on. For those who are too busy on their electronics to notice what is happening to our skies.
I think what the people need to do is turn away from consumption of oil based energy and it’s products like plastic and turn to alternative energy like solar and renewable fiber products. I believe big oil is a cause of many of our problems.
Old enough to know our skies aren’t right and the unpleasant changes began with the advent of the incessant flights overhead creating “persistant contrails” as they like to tell us that’s all they are.
Stop the atmosphere tampering and let nature be.
September 30th, 2012 at 8:33 pm
Since Global Warming will soon exterminate all life on earth and it’s humanity’s fault, it’s disgusting to see how few people do the right thing and kill their children, and then themselves.
I am far less guilty for exterminating life on earth than most people, because I never had any children. Those of you who did have children should be ashamed of yourselves. Do the right thing for the planet and commit suicide. By doing so, you will free up more “carbon credits” for Al Gore to run his limosine with; Al and his progeny deserve to live better than you or your pogeny because Al is a smart swindler who wrote a book. With a lot of help.
September 30th, 2012 at 8:57 pm
How would one know who is doing all this geo-buccaneering?
Planes, trains, automobiles, we are all geo-buccaneering, aren’t we?
Pointing the finger, own backyard stuff here IMO.
However industrial scale is not limited to a industry like a factory, we are the industrial scale, if we all have a washing machine powered by electricity from the grid, we are the industrial scale movers also.
I get a bit suspicious when posters chime in to give support for a poster, or essayist, getting challenged by regulars, or at least properly asked for citation evidence etc. The support is great, in and of itself, but it smacks of collusion when there is only rhetorical buddy support, rather than some researched evidence put up.
Some people have been frustrated by the emergence of the contrails phenomena in their own locations, and have found only fringe explainations, and no civic disclodure. They welcome any explaination, and some ideas are helpful, but I’m at a loss as to how this essay is worthy of incumbancy at NBL.
For the moment, out of respect for Professor McPherson I won’t bag it, but only for now.
Some concerns, however, I put her below:
I’ve seen some time ago the video doco mentioned, “Why In The World Are They Spraying”, and carefully read the PDF titled “Owning The Weather By 2025″.
None of this is evidence of an actual program to do a specific task by spraying “something” over land.
I can understand the speculation in the doco about ‘agribusiness’ depositing Aluminum salts, Bariem salts, and other salinity modifiers to change the PH of small scale farmers and eco self-sustainers, to render them unable to feed themselves, and thus become reliant on supermarket chains. That could make sense,(insane sense??) but where is the actual evidence, apart from water and soil readings. Maybe that is enough?
As for the US military wanting to get weather control, well wake up, where do you think (your) US 42% of GDP has been going, not to health care and education, but to assurence of control processes to maintain and promote world Hegemony perhaps?
As for Dane Wigington being a previous employee of Bechtel Power Corp., well, I mean… what does that actually mean?
It could mean:
1.A search of the name ‘Dane Wigington’ will reveal a connection to Bechtel, so why not disclose it to begin with?
2.Bechtel is clearly a player in something big, so it could bring doubt as to the motives of writing such an essay.
3.Dane Wigington is ashamed of such a previous association, and is disclosing in some loose contrast to the interests of Bechtel.
4.Dane Wigington is ashamed,(or not), of past associations with Bechtel, and is contributing without reference to the interests of Bechtel
5.Dane Wigington is not ashamed of past associations with Bechtel, and it is unclear that that previous association is still not informing his stated claims in the essay
6.Dane Wigington is not ashamed of past associations with Bechtel and his essay is as far as he can go without getting into hot water with Bechtel’s interests.
There are so many more problems here.
I think it is clear that previous employment with a big player like Bechtel should not be an impediment to engaging in debate and having an essay put on the subject of ‘geo-engineering’, but in my view, there needs to be some significant first person account of the present state of play about all of that (previous) association, such that readers can assess a clear motivation and rationale.
To conclude, just suppose it was Monsanto, and not Bechtel, on the previous work history.
Readers would need a very convincing and claer disclosure so as not to generate servere doubt in their minds about the motivations to write and publish here on that subject.
In such a small world of ‘players’ I can think of no act that has not the stamp of either the ‘with us’ or ‘against us’ creed. In that light it must be clear which camp one comes from. If the essay was strewn with links to cited studies, and articles, so readers could do the math themselves,and respond from that basis, then such reputational doubt would be of less importance.
If you are going to offer support, apart from ‘I thnk the same’, it might be better to cite somthing we can all refer to, and ADD, rather than just add to the post.
Again we come the sricking point at NBL of “What is evidence?”
Good luck with that.
September 30th, 2012 at 9:20 pm
For those who liked the entree, here is some dessert:
Chemtrails: Proof From An Insider
September 30th, 2012 at 9:50 pm
Real Dr House,
If you watched the link below, apparently you turned it off before it was done, or possibly you did not look very closely. If you did watch all 4 minutes, possibly you could give an explanation as to the trail from one of the two jets clearly being turned off, and then a few moments later, back on again. You neglected to make any mention of this in your comment.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=118AoVzxVOo&feature=share
September 30th, 2012 at 10:22 pm
Robin Datta
The link has text from:
‘Allan Buckman is the President and co-founder of Microbetech, a Nevada-based bioremediation company.’
He is quoted as saying…
“The only way that could happen is from air application, but no explanations are available.”
So he is saying no explainations are available. That’s a bit different to “They are, or are not, attempting to geo-engineer the planet toward, or away from global warming.No one even can attest to who or what company is paying for this spraying to be organised. It could be the Chineese and Indian or African governmants so as to destroy US hegemony on wheat and grain export. I’m not saying it is them, but it is just as plausable it is the US government/business complex, without any reciepts or testemony from a direct insider,how could one “Know” without evidence?
September 30th, 2012 at 10:45 pm
Dane Wigington
The 4 min video is troubling, and the point you make about the turning on of the aerosol is equally troubling, but conclusive of what exactly?
It is conclusive of something being sprayed, for sure. But what, by whom and why? Without some clear evidence I put forward an equally plausable hypothesis.
“TPTB are going to need to kill millions of Americans very fast very soon. Just when is not yet set, but will be assessed as to the collapse protocals of “The Council of Whatever Remains After”, COWRA.
COWRA have implemented a precursor program so as to be able to learn with 98% certainty how an aerosol dispersant will operate over USA territories with respect to weather patterns, wind speed and direction, humidity and solar radiation etc. The use of Chemtrail aerosols like salts of Aluminum, Barium, Boron, Strontium, etc are used to map various layers of atmospheric movements, and also to determine what actual sized particles are needed for the effect desired. Satelite readings can trace these movements in realtime, and can be backed up by ground bases water and air measurements and sampling.
At the specific time, a lethal agent will be added to the Chemtrail mixture and will kill all human life in the dispersal zone.
This capability can be also deployed if USA and its territories are taken over by a foreign power….”
How would anyone like us know if such things are even close to the truth?
Put up something convincing, please.
Perhaps you feel to warn is the next best thing to having a culprit red handed. In principle I agree with that, especially if it is a public health and food saftey issue. But warn of what? A ghost that moves objects on a table spelling:
“C…O…N…S…P…I…R…A…C…Y”,
is not going to cut it.
Not here.
September 30th, 2012 at 11:02 pm
Better than chemtrails –
afterburners!
(FA-18 Hornet Swiss Air Force take off – night time – Sion airport 23.01.2012)
October 1st, 2012 at 2:55 am
Hawaiiskys – not only are they messing up the skies in Hawaii our government is also taking away the clear skies in Bejing. This has absolutely nothing to do with the pollution from their factories and surely must all be from contrails we generate over their skies. Surely they will have to go to war with us over contrails and not over the way we are attempting to cut off supplies of fossil fuels by taking over middle eastern countries. Must be that the barium and aluminum we are using for contrails are in the Middle East and that is why we are starting wars there – gotta keep up supplies so we can continue to fake global warming.
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/07/a-stunning-visualization-of-chinas-air-pollution/259455/
Or perhaps all who are sure the contrails are fake global warming to install carbon tax and take over the world just really are terrified of a world without all the goodies fossil fuels supply and are desperately thinking up theories, any theory, that will mean our extravagant lifestyle in the west is not threatened. Well if this is a scheme to force us into carbon tax, it has already gone wrong. With the methane being released from permafrost and the oceans and the arctic almost ice free in the summer the feedbacks are in place and it is all over. If they did this on purpose they doomed themselves. Oh wait no…..the aliens that are coming want human flesh so they are building the FEMA camps to house dinner for the aliens…its not our gold they are coming for but our flesh.
In fact I think TPTB might be seeding various ideas as a way of keeping people from knowing the truth, fossil fuel emissions are the cause of warming and are not about to run out. Hah I have a theory for you Ozman. The COWRA are in fact using the contrails to spark conspiracy theories that will deflect anyone from the real truth about GW and Peak Oil. It is a conspiracy, a conspiracy to occupy minds so they don’t see what is REALLY going on. Oil, it is the one ring that rules them all. BTW for a short fun read pick up Kalki by Gore Vidal.
October 1st, 2012 at 3:58 am
.
it costs nothing to travel by plane, for a few hundred dollars, you can go almost anywhere, annoy the people where you go, and boast about it when you return. How to resist such a treat that is valued and encouraged by almost everybody? When I say that I do not use cars or do not travel in planes, ever, even if I have enough money to go around the world and back, people get immediately angry and feel threatened by that choice. All this to say that when that sky will be clear again, the climate should INSTANTLY jump to extremes.
This leads to an interesting angle of inquiry, imo, in addition to the rest of your post. Air Travel is obviously one of those extreme things Humankind is doing that is ridiculously unsustainable given the limitations of that phrase, not only from a physical resource standpoint, but also from a financial perspective. It is not financially feasible for this many people to be flying at this point in time for these ridiculously low rates. As such, as is the case with most business models these days, the airline industry is a failed business model. The PTB know this, and therefore do everything in their power to ensure the planes still fill the skies. One of benchmarks for when this so far, slow-motion collapse really kicks into high gear is the planes stop flying. What this implies though, is the PTB know that the atmosphere is being saturated with persistent contrails and those semi-permanent contrails have mitigated the effects of AGW. As Kathy C’s article about 911 and the grounded air traffic concluded, when the planes aren’t soaring, the temperature is, so the planes must fly until close to the very end, and the PTB have raked in all the remaining chips. I’m not hanging my hat on this, but it is a line of thought worth exploring that doesn’t discount the ubiquity of contrails. American Airlines is the most recent example. The PTB will not let it go out of business, even though it is a failed business that should not be resurrected, but you watch, it will be resurrected, just as Delta was…because the planes must fly so that a little extra time can be bought in order for the Special People to be fully prepared….for what? That’s the part I’m stuck on. If the above has any validity, and some of it obviously does, what’s the deferment about? Any ideas anyone, aside from “they’re just greedy bastards and think they’re invincible and immune?” American Airlines will be bailed out. The planes will keep flying. Here’s a link that underscores that the airline industry is really not a viable business model, and is in fact, pretty much a quasi-governmental organization at this point that still provides spoils to the Plutocracy at the taxpayer’s expense. I suppose if you think about it this way, you pay an exorbitant fare in the end, because the taxpayer, yes, us Plebes, pick up the tab on the loans when an airline goes into bankruptcy…which one, or another, seems to do every several years or so these days .
http://www.aviationbusiness.com.au/news/airlines-will-survive-despite-failed-business-model
Airlines ‘will’survive’ despite ‘failed business model’
“Essentially, so far as the airlines are concerned, investors are placing their faith in a failed business model,” Drysdale told his audience. “But it is an industry that is critical to the world’s economic well-being…
“So the airlines will survive. They will evolve, merge, change, some will cost their shareholders and governments enormous amounts of money. But they will survive.”
.
October 1st, 2012 at 5:32 am
Dane Wigington,
If you watched the link below, apparently you turned it off before it was done, or possibly you did not look very closely. If you did watch all 4 minutes, possibly you could give an explanation as to the trail from one of the two jets clearly being turned off, and then a few moments later, back on again. You neglected to make any mention of this in your comment.
I didn’t mention it simply because I didn’t realize that I was addressing someone with the science education of a 4 year old. But, obviously, I am, so I’ll expound on my earlier comment.
The following is from wikipedia (and for those who somehow think that’s not a trusted source, the actual information comes from [1]Encyclopedia Britannica and a [2]scholarly paper from NASA):
Contrails ( /ˈkɒntreɪlz/; short for “condensation trails”) or vapor trails are long thin artificial clouds that sometimes form behind aircraft. Their formation is most often triggered by the water vapour in the exhaust of aircraft engines, but can also be triggered by the changes in air pressure in wingtip vortices or in the air over the entire wing surface.[1] Like all clouds, contrails are made of water, in the form of a suspension of billions of liquid droplets or ice crystals.
Depending on the temperature and humidity at the altitude the contrail forms, they may be visible for only a few seconds or minutes, Persistent contrails are thought to have a significant effect on global climate.[2]
In short, the contrails appear to shut on and off and the plane passes through areas of higher humidity or warmer temperatures. This happened to only one of the jets instead of both because one was actually flying at a much higher altitude – at least 1,000 feet higher and possibly more. I know that sometimes it’s hard to understand, but not all air has the same temperature nor pressure. And jets, when they fly, pass through those areas very quickly causing their contrails to appear to turn on and off. If you’ve been on a jet, you have probably felt bumping that might have been a little bit scary. That was one of those areas.
The first time I remember seeing a contrail was when I was 4 or 5 years old – the early 60′s. I asked my father the very same question you are asking of me: “Why do they turn on and off?”
His response was pretty much what I’ve included here . . . almost 50 years ago.
So, we have two choices to make when faced with such information:
1) either we accept the simple laws of chemistry and physics and realize that what we are seeing is as natural as smoke from a flame, or
2) we come up with an incredibly outlandish and far flung conspiracy that involves virtually every government, every military, and every commercial airline on the planet for more than 60 years, despite numerous regime changes, vastly improved understanding of climate and weather, and dramatically changing technology.
I’ll take door number one, thanks.
Dane, I have no doubt you’re well meaning and see this as a real problem, but you are substituting very simple real world science with magic and nefarious deeds.
Make no mistake, there are many nefarious deeds in this world. A great number of them are perpetrated by various governments, the U.S. included. But you are seeing ghosts in shadows.
October 1st, 2012 at 6:00 am
.
So, TRDH, just to be clear about this, whereas you do not accept the hypothesis that contrails are purposeful aerosol spraying, you do agree that inundated air traffic has led to skies full of persistent contrails that are altering the climate and weather patterns, and have a pursuant effect on AGW. Is that a fair assessment?
Also, you have stated once again that global population overshoot is the root of our problem. I thought we had covered this before in another thread, but you’re asserting it again. If we adhere to Guy’s insightful notion of being radical, population overshoot is not the root, it’s the result of the root, and that root is the creation of Civilization that stems from a motivation to control. We can argue whether that motivation to control is innate, or whether it is environmental, but I don’t think it’s a prudent argument to claim it’s not the root.
Also, do you agree with Arthur’s implication concerning population overshoot….that we should cut off grain shipments to developing and undeveloped countries, and in effect, starving its inhabitants after years, decades and centuries even of colonialism, and now neocolonialism, have made the indigenous populations dependent upon the colonizers for sustenance?
.
October 1st, 2012 at 7:55 am
Morocco Bama
I follow your reasoning regarding TPTB may have a vested interest in keeping the planes flying beyond the broken business model.
You wrote:
“One of benchmarks for when this so far, slow-motion collapse really kicks into high gear is the planes stop flying. What this implies though, is the PTB know that the atmosphere is being saturated with persistent contrails and those semi-permanent contrails have mitigated the effects of AGW. As Kathy C’s article about 911 and the grounded air traffic concluded, when the planes aren’t soaring, the temperature is, so the planes must fly until close to the very end, and the PTB have raked in all the remaining chips.”
Look all that is ok but surely there is two bigger elephants here.
1.Oil
2.Take any major economic pillar out of the world economy and a rapid collapse will occur.
If air travel is so cheep, being subsidised by fly-by points etc, then it must be propping up the consumption of oil, and therefore, keeping the price of oil higher than otherwise.
If something gets cheaper, more people can afford it. That also is a factor on economic activity, from business-class travel, tourism, and general air freight. All that activity elevates both the need for oil, and economic ‘growth’, (through higher volume per day).
In some wierd economic way if all other factors stay in equilibrium, to achieve economic ‘growth’ the activity must become cheaper by unit activity to stimulate more use. There is a limit to this, as the planes will need to have some minimum guage matal skins, lift capacity and systems integrity, and the wages and maintinence costs have been skeleton crewed for a decade now, outsourced to Pakistan and other low cost countries.
So the cheeze is created when the rubber hits the road, to mix metaphores, and the government subsidies cut in when market capitalism fails.
It seems pretty clear, with my wheeties box economics degree, that when market capitalism begins a systemic failure, as per 2004-2005 peak oil, then to keep the system chugging along, governments will nationalise sectors of their economy, and keep doing so, along with selling public assets, to keep balancing the books year to year.
The juice has run out in the front end of the world economy, and is ‘simply’/'complexly’ making it’s way through the economic intestinal tract.
I could easily here be making a case for the INTENSIONAL financial collapse of 2007-to date, so that the financial sectors and governmants could have an event to legitimise the nationalising of some banks, and the bailouts of some big companies, which would otherwise have gone into non-viability in their own sweet time, but not get access to taxpayers trillions.
Because that is what it was all about, the wholesale robbery by the Business sectors of public money held in trust, (both senses of the term intended), for the common good.
Many can now see the reaper for what it was, but too late.
The issue of contrails is one I can’t comment on much except to write anything is possible, but it is a worthy line of speculation and discussion IMHO to considder that the ordinary forces of market economics, applied on a large scale to the airline industry may also be at work here in leading to so much air traffic, that another effect presents itself, i.e. excessive contrails and clouds, composed of…?
Good to have you back too MO.
October 1st, 2012 at 8:07 am
MB, I do not agree that Civilization comes out of certain people’s desire to control others. Please read Craig Dilworth’s Too Smart for Our Own Good. It is a result of us being what we are, very smart apes with the ability to create solutions to population pressures that are good enough that they let our populations increase to the point where we again have population pressures that require ever more complex solutions including civilization. Unfortunately since by its very nature civilization allows some to gain power and some to be used by them. We have evolved memes that make us look more like ant colonies than humans. We are a failed branch on the evolutionary tree.
Saying that population is the problem does not require the person who says it to propose a solution. You think rules are the problem – so would you propose that you and all like that refuse to follow any rules of civilization? Come on…. Population is a problem we could have licked with enforced family size, but you with your aversion to anyone applying rules to you would probably, like so many others, reject that. It is in fact the problem created by people the world over who refuse to limit family size – NO ONE GONNA TELL ME HOW MANY KIDS I CAN HAVE. It is too late to solve it the humane way that China with its rules attempted to do. We are solving it with climate change, nuclear proliferation and pollution, the inhumane way – because no one wants the UN to solve it for the world – NO OTHER COUNTRY IS GONNA MAKE RULES TO TELL THE US WHAT TO DO. We desperately needed enforced population control to prevent the horror that is coming – the children starving in the US as well as the rest of the world or the bodies blown to pieces in a nuclear war or the tumors and genetic abnormalities that will come with the power plants going Fukushima.
We solved ourselves into civilization and we got with it rulers, but from a biological perspective that was good as we increased our population and spread our genes. Our problem is really not the rulers, it is a collective problem that we will not, like the yeast, see that the petri dish is not endless, we will not see that the oil is finite, that the photosynthesis potential is limited, that we have the power to poison ourselves and ruin the climate that allowed us to propser, that we are animals that are limited by the rules of nature. We in essence made ourselves into a model found in nature – the hive – and damn if it didn’t work well for passing our genes over the planet. We are too smart for our own good and too damn dumb (or hubristic, or short sighted, or whatever) to do any thing about it.
I hate the PTB as much as anyone, but we did this to ourselves as a species, unconsciously, despite our much touted consciousness. We humans created the masters because they let us spread our genes much farther than the H-G’s ever did. We are a failed branch on the evolutionary tree and may well bring down the tree with us
Or if you like the Anunnaki did it to us by gene manipulation. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e01GlAawkOY&feature=related Maybe all the power elite are really aliens after all. Perhaps always seeing an enemy that is causing our problems is an easier way to accept our extinction than that we are a failed species – nice try evolution but too much brain power turns out in the end to be maladaptive.
RIP
October 1st, 2012 at 8:26 am
I have a new theory. A conspiracy theory in fact. It is the False Flag Conspiracy Conspiracy theory – FFCCT for short. It is a conspiracy created by TPTB to direct people’s attention away from real problems such as Global Warming caused by burning fossil fuels by creating competing conspiracy theories. This pulls people away from the real problems and but by being not well documented, proven by loose association of assertions, it sheds doubts on other conspiracy theories that have been well documented by facts, such as 911. People think they are nobly opposing TPTB by spreading the FFCCT far and wide when in fact they are just helping TPTB direct attention away from what people really need to understand.
Doesn’t matter – its too late anyway – this summer proved that.
October 1st, 2012 at 8:33 am
This is off topic but….
This looks awfully like a map of neural dendrites in a brain, but in fact is a representation of internet connectivity.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d2/Internet_map_1024.jpg
Seeing it makes me wonder if we arent getting smarter, well at least much more interconnected. That may not really be more intellegent, but it allows individuals to rapidly self direct learning, and also rapid response to world events, and to communicate faster,( thanks Sherlock for the heads up…?).
But then I think of Kathy C’s earthiness, and find myself wondering what happens to the said intellegence, and rapid connection so facilitated when the grid stops sending electricity, and for good?
We can only imagine, and wait and see.
Board games will be more popular in housholds with children I suppose. That will likely not change much in Germany, the world leader in board game manufacture and play:
“Monopoly Killer: Perfect German Board Game Redefines Genre”
http://www.wired.com/gaming/gamingreviews/magazine/17-04/mf_settlers
“Winning some obscure German award may not sound impressive, but in the board game world the ‘Spiel des Jahres’ is, in fact, a very, very big deal. Germans, it turns out, are absolutely nuts about board games. More are sold per capita in Germany than anywhere else on Earth. The country’s mainstream newspapers review board games alongside movies and books, and the annual Spiel board game convention in Essen draws more than 150,000 fans from all walks of life.
…. board game design has become high art—and big business—in Germany. Any game aficionado will tell you that the best-designed titles in the world come from this country. In fact, the phrase German-style game is now shorthand for a breed of tight, well-designed games that resemble Monopoly the way a Porsche 911 resembles a Chevy Cobalt.”
Whatever the car analogy actually alludes to it is clear Germans love board games.
Does this make Germans more collaborative or more competative, one may speculate? It may make them equally good at both, and also better able to shift according to the best interests of what will allow one to win. Or it may mean Germans don’t mind doing face to face activities with their kids, which is edifying in some ways, that some humans in a highly industrialised country still play with their kids, albeit in a highly structured context of a game activity.
Someone could try and make a game called:
“Collapse: the end of cheep oil”, made from some substance 100% derived from oil byproducts.
Huh…Oh, yeah, that game is already being played worlwide by 5 Billion or so people, on a very big spherical board.
October 1st, 2012 at 8:52 am
Morocco Bama, I don’t have enough information personally to state that contrails are affecting AGW but simple deduction of the concept of light reflectivity and the brief post-9/11 period seem to suggest it. Conversely, perhaps the sheer number of jet engines spewing hot exhaust are contributing enormous amounts of heat in the upper atmosphere which is raising the overall temperature of the planet. Like I said, I don’t have enough data to say either way at this point.
Ecological overshoot, defined simply, is a species outgrowing its available resources. It is not unique to humans, nor does it require civilization. In fact, virtually every life form on the planet experiences overshoot, generally often. Humans are no different. We have gone through overshoot many times in our history – long before civilization appeared on the scene. As Kathy noted, civilization merely allowed up to postpone overshoot for the time being. But it continued to happen. Industrialization has allowed us to postpone overshoot to the point that now it will be global and the collapse of the trappings of civilization (nuclear reactors, chemical plants, etc.) will likely lead to our extinction.
The reason that I keep reminding readers about this is because it is central to all of our problems and no matter what “solution” someone suggests, it invariably ignores the core reality that there is simply no way to sustain the ever growing human population no matter how much consciousness raising, resource conserving, or letter writing we do. A crash of epic proportions is imminent and unavoidable – as history has proven time and time again. Sure, we might be able to push it a few more years – even decades – down the road just to allow even more humans to be born increasing exponentially the likelihood of catastrophic collapse.
As to your final question of whether we should restrict grain shipments to third world countries, etc. as a way to reduce population, we don’t have to worry about that. Drought, peak oil, peak resources, etc., will take care of restricting food to poor countries (even wealthy ones) soon enough.
October 1st, 2012 at 8:54 am
Oiligarchy.
Play it here:
http://www.molleindustria.org/en/oiligarchy/
A brief description explains it all:
“Now you can be the protagonist of the petroleum era: explore and drill around the world, corrupt politicians, stop alternative energies and increase the oil addiction. Be sure to have fun before the resources begin to deplete.”
If you take the time to play, you will quickly realise it is hard work to suck all the value out of the world.
A good site for pictures and explaination of how to play at the Big Boys level is here:
http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/energy/blogs/play-oiligarchy-and-drill-baby-drill
Sweet (crude) dreams.
October 1st, 2012 at 9:14 am
.
MB, I do not agree that Civilization comes out of certain people’s desire to control others. Please read Craig Dilworth’s Too Smart for Our Own Good. It is a result of us being what we are, very smart apes with the ability to create solutions to population pressures that are good enough that they let our populations increase to the point where we again have population pressures that require ever more complex solutions including civilization.
I never said “to control others.” I said “to control.” What you paraphrased from Dilworth is a form of control, so we’re not in disagreement here. I know you and House are buds, but let me duke it out alone with him on this one. He needs to separate himself from Arthur’s implication, and he needs to either specifically agree or disagree with Guy’s analysis of what radical means. I say this, because there are still Eugenicists out there, and if you set foot in that arena, it’s prudent to distinguish yourself from those who are. Someone could infer from House’s assertion that if we just rid ourselves of 7 billion plus useless eaters, we can reach a point of sustainability with the ecosystem…once again. I don’t like that for two reasons, one it sets the stage for Eugenic Genocide, and two it doesn’t address the root, so even if you did manage to reduce the population, since the root is not addressed, you risk the very probable chance that the whole process starts anew, and 7 billion plus were murdered in vain. Of course, yes, I agree, this all irrelevant. The natural and unnatural mechanisms that will ultimately destroy Humans and most life on the planet are already set in motion and there’s no turning back, but that doesn’t mean that Humans can’t, and won’t, eliminate themselves and most life before the aforementioned does, so parsing this with that in mind is still important, imo.
.
October 1st, 2012 at 9:24 am
Anthony, I don’t feel like I’m dismissing those who question this article on its own merits. I feel like I’m countering those who might dismiss it simply by virtue of labeling it a “conspiracy theory.” That’s the whispering of Mother Culture that I see… the one that tells us that any attempt to understand hidden actors or motives as a conspiracy theory, and that all conspiracy theories are nonsense.
My thanks to Dane and Guy reflect my appreciation of attempting to hold a real dialogue about these matters inside of a culture that considers it nonsense. Most of the time, when I look at things that the dominant mainstream culture labels “nonsense,” I find at least some germ of important truth, some baby in the bathwater, even if the water is mostly pretty foul.
October 1st, 2012 at 9:35 am
.
Morocco Bama, I don’t have enough information personally to state that contrails are affecting AGW but simple deduction of the concept of light reflectivity and the brief post-9/11 period seem to suggest it. Conversely, perhaps the sheer number of jet engines spewing hot exhaust are contributing enormous amounts of heat in the upper atmosphere which is raising the overall temperature of the planet. Like I said, I don’t have enough data to say either way at this point.
That’s a fair enough statement, but you also don’t have enough data to say that what we’re seeing in the sky is a contrail, or a Chemtrail as defined by Dane, do you? I agree that Dane has not proven his case, but just because he hasn’t, it doesn’t mean the converse is true either.
However, aside from that, and assuming that there is no merit to the hypothesis of purposeful aerosol spraying of the stratosphere for whatever reason(s), you have to admit that a contrail is more than just water vapor turned to ice crystals. Unless, of course, you believe that modern jets somehow use only water for the combustion process….something a 4th grader might assume. Yes, that was a nasty innuendo, but I thought I would throw it back at you since you leveled it at Dane unnecessarily, imo. Amongst other byproducts of the combustion process in jet engines, is SO2, and, coincidentally, this also happens to be similar to what they plan to spray as an aerosol when Geo-Engineering is implemented. Considering that, what comes out of that jet exhaust and ultimately crystallizes into ice to form cirrus clouds, is a chemical concoction, so it could adequately be referred to as a Chemtrail….sure, a serendipitous one that’s not part of an overt spraying program, but if those in high places know it has the same effect, and do everything they can in their power to make sure the planes keep spewing the shit into the atmosphere, than it becomes a de facto spraying program, and this conspiracy pig suddenly has a new fresh coat of lipstick….a much more credible one, imo. I’m just thinking out loud here, so my typical disclaimer applies, meaning I have no vested interest in this theory, but it’s worth consideration as much as anything else.
And, for anyone who doesn’t think jet exhaust is a nasty noxious dirty mix of chemical byproducts, head down to your local airport and watch these polluting beasts taking off…especially on a summer day. It’s sickening….as watching most polluting events is, seen or unseen (nuclear).
.
October 1st, 2012 at 9:41 am
Because I was already familiar with the notion that geoengineering, if that is indeed what we are seeing here (as with many topics, I remain open, intrigued, but unwilling to commit to any certain explanation) has been going on for some time as a response to climate change (it’s the explanation that has made the most sense to me, and which aligns with my own intuitive sense that there are layers of control that have been aware of climate change far longer than we might think) I read the essay with that subtext, and so did not pick up the confusion regarding whether this article questions the basics of anthropogenic climate change. Upon re-reading, I can see how many read differently than I did, so am glad to hear that Dane is editing before publishing elsewhere.
Arthur, thank you for your further speculations. Of course, even if there is some truth to such speculations, that doesn’t necessarily mean what we might think it means. I’m with Terence McKenna: all claims to being in control are illusions! They™ might be up to such things. That doesn’t mean any of it will Work™. Peace…
October 1st, 2012 at 9:53 am
.
Ecological overshoot, defined simply, is a species outgrowing its available resources. It is not unique to humans, nor does it require civilization. In fact, virtually every life form on the planet experiences overshoot, generally often. Humans are no different.
You’re conflating here. If we use Venn Diagrams, yes, there is overlap with population overshoot for other species, but that doesn’t mean that modern human overshoot, what we’re experiencing right now, is precisely the same. Yes, there are similarities, but no other species is conscious of their overshoot predicament, nor did they plan it, so the overshoot we are experiencing right now is more than just the result of basic survival instincts that can’t be shut off…it’s much more than that. It has to do with a mindset that developed that promulgated the need to control. When Humans left the metaphorical Eden, and took conscious control of our destiny, we purposely created a societal structure based on control that has brought us to this day…and this predicament.
.
October 1st, 2012 at 10:04 am
.
Most of the time, when I look at things that the dominant mainstream culture labels “nonsense,” I find at least some germ of important truth, some baby in the bathwater, even if the water is mostly pretty foul.
Timothy, that is my philosophy, as well. Separating the whaet from the chaff is a worthwhile task.
.
October 1st, 2012 at 10:10 am
Neither Chemtrails, nor Global Warming, nor increased atmospheric CO2 are causing “increased plant wasting and death.” In fact, during the past three decades, the earth’s total biomass has increased substantially.
Global Garden Gets Greener — NASA Earth Observatory, June 5, 2003. Leaving aside for a moment the deforestation and other land cover changes that continue to accompany an ever-growing human population, the last two decades of the twentieth century were a good time to be a plant on planet Earth. In many parts of the global garden, the climate grew warmer, wetter, and sunnier, and despite a few El Niño-related setbacks, plants flourished for the most part. “Between 1982 and 1999, 25 percent of the Earth’s vegetated area experienced increasing plant productivity—a total increase of about 6 percent,” says Ramakrishna Nemani, the study’s lead scientist. http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/GlobalGarden/
Apr 10, 2012. The aboveground live biomass of Arctic tundra vegetation has increased by 19.8%, on average, throughout the circumpolar North since 1982, according to a study by researchers from the University of Virginia and the University of Alaska Fairbanks, US (Environmental Research Letters (ERL)). environmentalresearchweb.org/cws/article/news/49229Apr 10, 2012
October 1st, 2012 at 10:19 am
The one theme I most resonate with here is that the Problems™ are insoluble and an unraveling of current systems inevitable and imminent. That has been my working assessment for a very long time. And it’s the reason I’m as open as I am to considering what seem to be “fringe” or even “ridiculous” ideas and analyses (as usually judged by the mainstream dominant culture). In the face of the fatal diagnosis, I’m going to follow my intuitions, study what intrigues and delights me, look for new ideas and experiences and viewpoints, and see where that leads me. I don’t see that it’ll make any real difference, on the ground, whether we discover the “truth” or “falsity” of this geoengineering claim. (Why bother to sound the alarm? feels, to me, a real and sensible question to consider.) But I do find that it makes a difference for me in my life right now, to think on such things, to ponder the evidences and the meanings, and to search for what there is to be learned from all of this. To my feeling senses, whether we’re talking about the life of an individual or the life of a species, there’s something deeply important, maybe even “human,” in learning what there is to be learned even as we know that we will one day die. That’s how it feels to me. Others’ mileage may vary.
October 1st, 2012 at 10:47 am
Morocco Bama,
A chemical is any substance used in or produced by a chemical reaction. Therefore, yes, the exhaust “trail” left by jets is a chemical trail in much the same way that our cars leave a trail of exhaust and our human bodies leave a trail of gases as we exhale, fart, perspire, etc.
But, while there are multiple chemicals expelled in jet exhaust, including some heavy metals, the predominant, visible portion of a condensation trail left by a jet is exactly that: a water condensation trail.
October 1st, 2012 at 11:05 am
Morocco Bama, You’re conflating here. If we use Venn Diagrams, yes, there is overlap with population overshoot for other species, but that doesn’t mean that modern human overshoot, what we’re experiencing right now, is precisely the same. Yes, there are similarities, but no other species is conscious of their overshoot predicament, nor did they plan it, so the overshoot we are experiencing right now is more than just the result of basic survival instincts that can’t be shut off…it’s much more than that. It has to do with a mindset that developed that promulgated the need to control. When Humans left the metaphorical Eden, and took conscious control of our destiny, we purposely created a societal structure based on control that has brought us to this day…and this predicament.
While I stated that I was simplifying (not being precise), I disagree that I’m conflating (actually, it appears you are). I was not discussing motivation, rather reporting the certain outcome of a species outstripping its resources. In my opinion, it doesn’t matter what the motivations are, nor whether a species is aware of its predicament. The simple, repeatedly observed phenomenon remains that a species which reproduces beyond the ability of the biosphere to keep pace, will experience die-off. That is the position that the entire human species now finds itself. Contrary to what you propose, I believe it really is “nothing more than the result of basic survival instincts which can’t be shut off”. (BTW, you seem to be introducing a new concept here, namely that humans “planned” their overshoot.)
As to our attempts to “control” things, I observe many of the same types of behaviors in my farm animals. My chickens routinely chase away other birds and even other species of animals in order to control how much food they can consume. My goats and cats push each other out of the way so that they can get more for themselves. I know that I’m really simplifying now, but the basic principals are the same: do whatever is possible to ensure that the available resources are available to me and mine.
So, back to my original point, which I continue to repeat: we are in overshoot and since industrialization has allowed us to extend that overshoot exponentially beyond what we would have been able to do otherwise, as the industrial economy begins to collapse, we will experience die-off. On a grand scale. Sooner rather than later. Nothing we can do can change that.
October 1st, 2012 at 11:09 am
.
Extinction appears to be fact,
Though it means we’re all going to get whacked;
To deny that it’s true,
Any nonsense will do—
As long as it serves to distract.
October 1st, 2012 at 11:22 am
.
BTW, you seem to be introducing a new concept here, namely that humans “planned” their overshoot
Oh My God, shoot me where I stand!! I’ve proposed a new concept!! How dare I do such a thing! Who am I to propose new concepts?? Please, forgive my presumptive arrogance, and I will do my best not to propose a new concept ever again.
Actually, I’m pretty sure it’s not a new concept. I’m certain someone has articulated it before, maybe it’s just that you’ve never been exposed to it heretofore. I mean, I know you’re a physician, and physicians are generally intelligent, but they’re not omniscient by any means, although quite a few believe they are.
.
October 1st, 2012 at 11:31 am
.
So, back to my original point, which I continue to repeat: we are in overshoot and since industrialization has allowed us to extend that overshoot exponentially beyond what we would have been able to do otherwise, as the industrial economy begins to collapse, we will experience die-off. On a grand scale. Sooner rather than later. Nothing we can do can change that.
I’m in agreement with this statement, and it now resonates with me, because you didn’t say overshoot was the problem. It was the result of the problem. And let’s not forget, unlike the other life forms, Humans have managed to pretty much ensure not only our own extinction, but the extinction of all other life on this living planet, but hey, we’re all the same, aren’t we, when you simplify things? I mean, chickens would do the same thing if they were in our shoes.
.
October 1st, 2012 at 11:41 am
.
TRDH, I am curious about your assessment of the events of 9/11. Do you believe the 9/11 Commission Report is a fabrication? Do you believe it was a False Flag Event that served as the New Pearl Harbor for the War On Terror? Do you have the data you need to determine it was a conspiracy?
.
October 1st, 2012 at 11:53 am
.
Chickens and humans are the same
The need to control is their game
When it’s lights out
There’s no need to flout
That humans are chickens gone insane
.
October 1st, 2012 at 11:56 am
To Timothy Scott Bennet:
CO2-caused Climate Change, or Anthropogenic Global Warming, is a hoax that is massively supported by the elitist Oligarchs who lead the Military/Industrial/Academic Complex, because CO2/AGW provides a marvelous vehicle for social engineering, via carbon credits that empower established corporations and austerity measures that restrict the freedom, mobility, and purchasing power of the lower classes.
Since the hurdle of Peak Oil may be already past and the era of declining oil may be under way, the ruling Oligarchs want to be sure that they have the masses firmly under their control via austerity measures such as restrictions on travel, property ownership, personal wealth, and energy use.
The elitist ruling Oligarchs are preparing for a post-fossil fuel, feudalistic, international New World Order which supports their position at the top of the hierarchy of power, wealth, and privilege. As enforcers of the new religion of “Green and Sustainable,” the ruling Oligarchs will be well-positioned to control who gets what of the earth’s resources. Large corporations and financiers will be given income-generating “carbon credits,” while ordinary workers will be highly restricted. This process is already under way.
Global temperatures and CO2 levels have been much higher in the past than the “catastrophic levels” that are now predicted by the CO2/Global Warming alarmists. When global temperatures and CO2 levels were high in the past, both plant and animal life on the earth flourished. Increased earth temperatures cause increased rainfall, which more than compensates for any local droughts. Global Warming will cause global greening, creating vast new regions for agriculture, which will more than compensate for any lands or cities that are inundated by rising sea levels. The driest periods in earth’s history occured during Ice Ages, and the wettest periods occured during Interglacials. For life on earth, warm and wet is good.
Several major Ice Ages occured during times when the earth’s atmospheric CO2 levels were far higher than today — and the high CO2 levels did not prevent the development of those Ice Ages. Given the known record of the earth’s ancient climate history, it appears that high atmospheric CO2 levels cannot prevent the onset of an Ice Age. Nor is it likely that high atmospheric CO2 levels can cause the “runaway Global Warming” which the CO2 alarmists are predicting.
The public’s trust in government is at an historic low — as it should be, because most governments serve the wealthy at the expense of the workers and the poor. The Chemtrails Conspiracy Theory is a product of the widespread public distrust of governments. Like the CO2/AGW hoax, the Chemtrails Conspiracy Theory is maintained by the public’s ignorance of science history and science fact. So now we have the government telling lies (the CO2/AGW hoax) to fool and manipulate the masses, while the masses tell lies about the government (the Chemtrails Conspiracy Theory) to further dscredit the government. As human civilization moves into a new Era of feudalism, false mythologies based on junk science are the order of the day.
October 1st, 2012 at 12:12 pm
Morocco Bama Says: …the sinking ship, there are no life boats….
The ship’s going down, it’s true:
There’s no way we’re going to pull through;
In our situation,
There’s no lifeboat station,
And not a thing that we can do.
October 1st, 2012 at 12:15 pm
Anthony,
FWIW, I’m a husband and parent, science educator (ecologist at heart) and a founding member of AMEG, albeit a minor one. All the studies I have read conclude that geo-engineering alone won’t work. It must be accompanied by a significant year-on-year GHG emmissions reduction.
If there must be geo-engineering, then it seems to me that something like that described in the Johnson proposal (“Paint the Arctic Ocean White”) should be seriously considered.
October 1st, 2012 at 12:18 pm
BenjaminTheDonkey,
The ship’s going down, it’s true:
There’s no way we’re going to pull through;
In our situation,
There’s no lifeboat station,
And not a thing that we can do.
Sure there is. Get involved with Mae Jemison’s 100 Year Starship Initiative.
http://100yss.org
October 1st, 2012 at 12:31 pm
.
Or, Arthur, there’s this:
http://www.alcor.org/
You could be immortalized with the likes of Ted Williams and Larry King. Talk about starting anew!
.
October 1st, 2012 at 12:48 pm
Morocco Bama,
Work with me. I’m trying to give the dye-in-the-wool, imminent extinctionists something constructive to do in the meantime. Mae Jemison’s initiative actually has a teeny-tiny chance of working. She needs people with deep understanding of Earth ecology and biology to think about the kinds of ecosystems might be transplantable to another “M”-class planet.
So what kind(s) of plants, animals, fungi, bacteria, algae, etc. would you take with you on an interstellar starship? Bear in mind that there’s only limited space available on the starship, so you can’t samples of everything.
October 1st, 2012 at 12:53 pm
Cryonics and interstellar travel require a lot of cheap energy. We’ve no more of that. Interstellar travel is ludicrous for other reasons, too, as I pointed out in this space more than three years ago.
October 1st, 2012 at 1:08 pm
Morocco Bama, Oh My God, shoot me where I stand!! I’ve proposed a new concept!! How dare I do such a thing! Who am I to propose new concepts?? Please, forgive my presumptive arrogance, and I will do my best not to propose a new concept ever again.
I could really care less if you introduce a new concept – knock yourself out with them. I was merely pointing out that you were doing what you were accusing me of.
October 1st, 2012 at 1:19 pm
Benjamin I think you have the most cogent comments to date. This is a distraction
However apparently it is a distraction that has encouraged someone to create a whole web site to debunking the contrails theory
http://contrailscience.com/how-to-debunk-chemtrails/#more-948
MB – I wasn’t trying to interfere with your discussion with Dr. House and he needs no help from me. It is usual on discussion sites for people to see something in a comment someone makes to someone else that they agree with or take issue with and take that up themselves. UNLESS you want a RULE that we can only have two people in any discussion at any time and no one may comment on a reply to another person only on replies to themselves. But I know you wouldn’t want any rules on this site about who can respond to who about what would you?
October 1st, 2012 at 1:21 pm
Cue “Hijack the Starship.” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUT1xvdrlDA
A hippy fantasy, now a sci-fi fantasy. God forbid that it become a government fantasy. Reality check: since it takes a massive industrial output to launch a Starship, your Starship would likewise need the makings of a massive industrial output in order to reestablish human civilization in another star system. To accomplish that would require such a large expenditure of resources from the earth that the earth people who don’t participate in the project might understandably be very unenthusiastic about the resource depletion and the pollution caused by it. Why should the people of earth — the people who want to stay here — tolerate some discontents trashing the earth in order to escape it?
I wouldn’t trade any or all of the gizmos developed by NASA for clean air to breathe. I don’t like Tang; make mine real orange juice, please.
BTW, most of NASA’s space program has served the purpose of establishing Full Spectrum (military) Dominance over the earth for the USA.
October 1st, 2012 at 1:46 pm
.
Cryonics and interstellar travel require a lot of cheap energy.
I was being sarcastic!
.
October 1st, 2012 at 1:51 pm
.
So what kind(s) of plants, animals, fungi, bacteria, algae, etc. would you take with you on an interstellar starship? Bear in mind that there’s only limited space available on the starship, so you can’t samples of everything.
Well, right off the bat, I think we should take the recipe for Kraft Miracle Whip and ensure that the ingredients to make it are readily available on our new planet.
.
October 1st, 2012 at 1:55 pm
Guy McPherson,
Cryonics and interstellar travel require a lot of cheap energy. We’ve no more of that.
You might be right. But that’s an issue for Propulsion to grapple with, not Life Sciences, Ecosystems and Ecology.
Interstellar travel is ludicrous for other reasons, too, as I pointed out in this space more than three years ago.
No more ludicrous than the AMEG’s proposal for immediate, large-scale drilling of the entire Arctic seabed to elicit a “controlled release” of subsurface methane reservoirs for capture and subsequent use as a “green fuel” to safely power a global industrial economy for the next 500 years.
Let’s deal with the issue of Arctic methane as a greenhouse gas by BURNING IT to convert it to carbon dioxide, another greenhouse gas. A truly BRILLIANT solution to our climate change predicament.
Not.
October 1st, 2012 at 1:55 pm
M5.2 offshore Fukushima
Posted by Mochizuki on October 1st, 2012 · No Comments
The earthquake of M5.2 hit Fukushima
http://fukushima-diary.com/2012/10/m5-2-offshore-fukushima-2/
October 1st, 2012 at 2:01 pm
.
I could really care less if you introduce a new concept
Well, if you could care less, why don’t you care less? By the way, I don’t remember asserting that you proposed a new concept, so I’m not sure where you are getting this:
I was merely pointing out that you were doing what you were accusing me of.
I observed that you were conflating….and you were, regardless of your denial, but that has nothing whatsoever to do with asserting that you were proposing a new concept.
Either way, it’s all a distraction anyway…from what exactly? Oh yeah, a distraction from concentrating on our imminent demise. Okay. Let’s get back to the regularly scheduled program, Help, The Sky Is Falling, And I Can’t Get Up.
You know, there’s nothing wrong with distractions. Maybe if we had more of them, we wouldn’t be in this predicament. Then again, perhaps because we’ve had too many of them, we’re in this predicament. And maybe, both statements are true. Could be. Who am I to argue?
.
October 1st, 2012 at 2:23 pm
Morocco Bama,
Well, right off the bat, I think we should take the recipe for Kraft Miracle Whip and ensure that the ingredients to make it are readily available on our new planet.
Good choice, but Food & Nutrition will have to give the final approval on that before we in Life Sciences, Ecosystems and Ecology can move forward on it.
Don’t forget, because it would be immoral–not to mention extremely dangerous–to colonize a planet that already contained life on it (“Mars for Martians, etc.”), the choices of which species to take, and which to leave behind, is of extreme importance. For example, all humans originating from Northern and Northwestern Europe will have to be left behind, I’m afraid, for obvious reasons.
October 1st, 2012 at 3:17 pm
USA/… While I’m a fan of Guy’s, I’m not usually a fan of comment sections, and visit this one irregularly. While I know many names here, I don’t know yours. Are you a regular here? If so, may I assume you’ve already hashed this out with McPherson et al.? If so, it seems more productive to just go look at past hashes, rather than do a re-hash. I don’t particularly like hash.
October 1st, 2012 at 3:21 pm
Control is a basic feature of life. The (external) cell membrane serves to control the environment inside the cell; likewise the membranes of organelles for the interior of those organelles. Antibiotics in nature are chemical warfare agents used by cells against cells; a delicate fungus can “”eat” away strong wood by controlling its external environment – secreting powerful enzymes.
Consciousness is all to frequently confounded with intelligence. Intelligence and intellect are properties of the physical universe, albeit wetware-based. The words themselves come from Latin meaning “to perceive” or “to understand”. The ability to discern the distinction between consciousness and the rest of cognition is one of the characteristics of the “enlightened”.
Moreover intelligence is seen in the driver’s seat and therefore presumed to be the king of the road. Intelligence is actually the chauffeur who obeys the master, the non-rational, non-verbal “reptilian” brain, the basis of instincts, emotions (which have a short timescale) and values (of a much longer timescale). Consciousness is the witness, like a spectator at a cinema: it imbues the “individual” with a sense of “I” and of being an “individual”. Even “individuality” is misnomer, since there is no single component that bears the identity attributed to the whole individual – nothing that gives identity to the individual is indivisible. When intelligence rationalises and speaks, it is the minister of propaganda.
Intelligence is another modality of control, aiding in adaptation to the environment. It has helped us escape the feedback loops of Nature that exercise control. “Weeds” and soil depletion exercise control on the growth of useful plants; we have found ways to escape these controls by a variety of methods, both “natural” (low-tech – i.e. less disruptive) and industrial (high-tech – i.e. more disruptive, such as agrochemicals and bioengineering). Pathogens control human population when there are sufficient numbers of humans to facilitate transmission. We escape the controls through sanitation, public health, etc. But in no way does this imply that I (or anyone else) likes to starve or get sick because that is the “natural” thing to do. It is natural to try to escape the controls of nature: that is what makes life life.
October 1st, 2012 at 4:09 pm
MB, I observed that you were conflating….and you were, regardless of your denial . . . Okay. Let’s get back to the regularly scheduled program, Help, The Sky Is Falling, And I Can’t Get Up.
Morocco, Morocco, where have you been all my life? I hadn’t realized just how deficient I am in critical thinking and reasoning skills. But praise the dogs, I’ve finally found someone who can keep me on the “straight” and narrow!
When you’re ready to have an actual discussion, as opposed to nit picking each others words while being coyly condescending, let me know. Maybe then we can “duke” it out. Until then, peace out brother.
October 1st, 2012 at 4:31 pm
.
Focus People, this is The End!
Is Chemtrails the message to send?
When the skies turn white
And there’s less light
There’ll be no more reason to pretend
.
October 1st, 2012 at 4:37 pm
.
When you’re ready to have an actual discussion, as opposed to nit picking each others words while being coyly condescending, let me know. Maybe then we can “duke” it out. Until then, peace out brother.
Exactly. My response to you was a mirror of your response to just about everything in this thread thus far, and that was my point. Nobody has the right answer here….we’re trying to figure it out, so you can drop the teacher act and discuss it with that in mind, because I’m sorry, House, you don’t have all the answers…none of us do, and Dane wasn’t acting like a 4th grader, and since I have a 5th grader, I take umbrage with leveling that comment as a slight or insult. My 5th grader has an infinitely more open mind than you could ever hope to retrieve if you were so inclined, so you can take your slight of him and shove it.
.
October 1st, 2012 at 4:45 pm
.
For example, all humans originating from Northern and Northwestern Europe will have to be left behind, I’m afraid, for obvious reasons.
I thought all Humans originated in Africa and then migrated. If so, no one will be left behind according to your statement.
.
October 1st, 2012 at 4:48 pm
.
It is natural to try to escape the controls of nature: that is what makes life life.
It should read:
It is unnatural to try to control nature: that is what will make all life dead.
Unless, of course, you’re in disagreement with the sentiment and assertions of this blog, in which case, you will admit that.
.
October 1st, 2012 at 5:19 pm
Anthony,
I’m not sure how people can be thanking Dane for his “cogent” and “tireless” research when the obvious errors in his essay have been pointed out by several posters.
It should be clear by now that Dane Wigington does not believe that climate change is caused by greenhouse gas emissions or the burning of fossil fuels in any significant way. In its place, Dane posits a completely different cause, fine metal aerosol particulates, specifically barium, strontium and aluminum, continually being sprayed into the atmosphere from jet aircraft. These metal particulates interact with infrared radiation by some as yet unknown absorptive or reflective mechanism to (rapidly) warm the atmosphere. He’s even made an attempt to include a kind of control (checking to see if aluminum aerosols are drifting this way from Chinese factories) as a check.
I think it’s fair to say that Dane sees himself as something of a maverick scientist, one with a deeply contrarian streak, similar to Richard Lindzen and Henrik Svensmark. As I said before, and as many of the responses here bear out, his alternative theory has got legs, and it’s now up on its feet and going out for a walk.
October 1st, 2012 at 5:26 pm
To Timothy Scott Bennett:
I apologize for disturbing your bubble. In conversations such as this, I consider ideas to be more important than personal identities, so I always use a pseudonym. As for McPherson et al, I’m not familiar with that group. If you consider this forum to be a private club, did you know that someone left the door open? Since I found the door open, I assumed this to be a public conversation. If you want it to be closed, someone should close the door.
October 1st, 2012 at 5:32 pm
To Timothy Scott Bennett — P.S.:
Have you hashed out your concerns with McPherson et al.? If they are dictating the discourse for you, perhaps you should.
October 1st, 2012 at 5:38 pm
Morocco Bama,
I thought all Humans originated in Africa and then migrated. If so, no one will be left behind according to your statement.
C’mon, Morocco, you know who I’m talkin’ about. White folks. Anglo-Saxons et al. They have to be left behind, because they’re the ones responsible for inventing industrial civilization and destroying the living planet. If humanity is to have any hope of a “new start” on a new planet, this is the way it has to be. A toxic culture, and its source, has to be left behind.
For colonizing the new planet, the couple who is the subject of this MV would be OK, though:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WnLmvqFlGs&NR=1&feature=endscreen
October 1st, 2012 at 5:52 pm
Arthur you wrote “As I said before, and as many of the responses here bear out, his alternative theory has got legs, and it’s now up on its feet and going out for a walk.”
As I posted before, someone else has already countered his theory in great detail at http://contrailscience.com/
But supposing we accept the story hook line and sinker. Then what – oh year raise awareness and the people will rise an stop the contrails per Dane. Yeah right.
October 1st, 2012 at 5:56 pm
Dane Wigington, one of the other commenters has pointed out to me that I have slighted you. On reviewing my posts, as much as it pains me, I think I have to agree with him. It is not my habit to insult or degrade anyone on this site, whether I agree with the person or not. So, please accept my apology for being disrespectful.
That doesn’t mean that I have changed my opinion nor assessment of the ideas you presented in your essay, but I will do my best to respect you and your ideas, even as I challenge them.
October 1st, 2012 at 5:57 pm
There is not a geoengineering project going on all over the world this is disinformation. I was abducted in 1996 by cold-bloodied Beings with super technology. I have been tortured by them for 16 years because I will not keep my mouth shut about their existence. The world is in denial of their existence. While the world is in denial of their existence they are in the process of taking over our world and it them who is laying the Chemtrails. Three days ago they laid a ton of Chemicals in the Chemtrails over my house and the entire city of Phoenix. For two days I have seen chemical rings being reflected by the moon, street lights and headlights. I have hundreds of photos of Chemtrails that were lain over my house and none of the Jets make any noise and most of the trails were laid without any aircraft alone. I believe the Jets we see laying the Chemtrails are Holograms made to look like real Jets. I learned on the news during a forest fire in Arizona we only have ten tankers or Jets fitted with appratus to spray forest fires so where are all the other tanker Jets located. Please do not say Evergreen or Pinal Air Park. I know someone who works there and they are not located there. The Aliens are the Masters of Deception they lay the Chemtrails to either hide their crafts or their trails.
October 1st, 2012 at 6:19 pm
Global temperatures and CO2 levels have been much higher in the past than the “catastrophic levels” that are now predicted by the CO2/Global Warming alarmists. When global temperatures and CO2 levels were high in the past, both plant and animal life on the earth flourished. Increased earth temperatures cause increased rainfall, which more than compensates for any local droughts. Global Warming will cause global greening, creating vast new regions for agriculture, which will more than compensate for any lands or cities that are inundated by rising sea levels. The driest periods in earth’s history occured during Ice Ages, and the wettest periods occured during Interglacials. For life on earth, warm and wet is good.
Indeed. And it is a good thing that we still have a few vascular cryptogams (ferns) and a goodly helping of Squamata, Testudina, Crocodilia and even some Sphenodontia (all extant reptilian orders). They might be adequate seed stock for future wondrous radiations in the tree of life: “Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth…” (Genesis, 1:28) – after weathering the 400+ Fukes, of course. Most folks are unaware that this is the first commandment (not the bit about the Fukes). It didn’t have to be a commandment. It is hard-wired into all of life. But 400+ Fukes weren’t.
Sure there is. Get involved with Mae Jemison’s 100 Year Starship Initiative.
Excellente! As an introduction, one might start by reading<a href="http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/2011/10/why-not-space/ Tom Murphy, an astrophysicist, university faculty, and NASA scientist.
I’m trying to give the dye-in-the-wool, imminent extinctionists something constructive to do in the meantime.
Not to worry. It is the idle mind that is the devil’s workshop. They should be advised “Don’t just do something, stand there”. For the average NBLer, no one has to tell them to chop wood or carry water.
Food & Nutrition will have to give the final approval on that
A whole hierarchy of emmeffs!
Are you a regular here?
The number of flies attracted might be construed to reflect adversely on the nature of the stuff that holds their attraction.
October 1st, 2012 at 6:35 pm
.
Robin, that was pretty damn good! Bravo!
.
October 1st, 2012 at 6:53 pm
Guy McPherson,
Arthur, you make it seem as if somebody is doing something to mitigate for climate change now. If we were to mitigate for climate change before it triggered our extinction, we needed to start about three decades ago. Nobody did anything then, and they aren’t doing anything now.
Well, not a lot of people in the U.S. are doing anything to mitigate for climate change. The U.S. seems to have become a country that is uniquely unresponsive to anything beyond it’s own avaricious appetites over the last 30 years. While we could go back-and-forth on the reasons why that happened, I think it would a mistake to assume that what is true of the U.S. is also true of other civilizations.
This meme [Wigington's alternative theory] might be toxic. But this culture is toxic beyond doubt, and nobody is trying to stop it.
No doubt this culture is quite toxic, and the meme in question is but one product of that toxicity. There are people who are trying to stop it, as best they can, under the circumstances. Part of the problem is that it’s currently all-but-impossible to truly “walk away from the empire”. You can exchange your job for a different one, of course, but in the end, you still end up serving the empire, just in a different capacity. There’s no way to be truly oppositional right now, to think a thought or perform an action that is…pure. Authenticity is impossible.
Naomi Klein recently talked about what it’s like to protest in the U.S. She said something to the effect that there’s no oxygen here compared to Europe or the Middle East or even East Asia. As soon as a few Americans (think Occupy) start to agitate, the flame goes out because there’s no place to go with your grievances. No one allows you any space. You’re either ignored or the propaganda machine cranks up to make you look like a subversive, or you get arrested. And with everyone under non-obvious, but pervasive surveillence, the political and social environment is so damp that even if sufficient oxygen were present, nothing can catch fire.
Unfortunately, Wigington’s meme just adds more water to this. But we don’t need more water. We need a blow dryer.
October 1st, 2012 at 6:55 pm
.
Fukes….I love it!! That’s a keeper. And as an added bonus, emmeffs. What an eloquent way to put such an otherwise ugly term. Have you been hitting the O’Doul’s again, Robin?
.
October 1st, 2012 at 7:02 pm
.
We need a blow dryer.
Sorry, all out of blow dryers, but this will do the job…and some.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PbZnZy1qr8&feature=related
.
October 1st, 2012 at 7:18 pm
If the radiance of a thousand suns
were to burst into the sky,
that would be like
the splendor of the Mighty One–Bhagvad Gita
October 1st, 2012 at 7:26 pm
It is unnatural to try to control nature: that is what will make all life dead.
Keeping one eye and one ear open in biology class would inform one enough to understand the mention of cell membranes, enzymes, etc. and that life from the earliest biomolecules to the largest ecosystems only exists because it exercises some control on nature. Otherwise nothing would have progressed beyond a soup of biomolecules.
It is natural to try to escape the controls of nature: that is what makes life life.
More assertive than a soup of biomolecules: “Unless, of course, you’re in disagreement with the sentiment and assertions of this blog, in which case, you will admit that.” Only because of controlling nature.
Arthur Johnson:
“C’mon, Morocco, you know who I’m talkin’ about.
A presumption or an assertion?
If you consider this forum to be a private club, did you know that someone left the door open?
That someone is Dr. McPherson. An open door is one way of quality control and consensus-building. The regulars all use flyswatters. Of course the flies don’t find it agreeable, but then the door is open both ways.
October 1st, 2012 at 7:29 pm
.
and the people will rise an stop the contrails per Dane. Yeah right.
I hear ya. People don’t even rise up from the couch to take a leak anymore. Have you seen all these adds lately for catheters? What in thee hell?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iyXIne9LKA8
Wall-E is a documentary.
.
October 1st, 2012 at 7:33 pm
Hold on Robin, hold on. Your experiments with science must now give way for something more human!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1B3q5pioevM
October 1st, 2012 at 7:44 pm
.
and that life from the earliest biomolecules to the largest ecosystems only exists because it exercises some control on nature. Otherwise nothing would have progressed beyond a soup of biomolecules.
I’m not sure I would label that control, Robin. But either way, the ability of organisms to coalesce and replicate from the primordial soup of biomolecules is part of nature’s control. When Human became conscious of the process, and saw itself as separate from it, is when Human crossed the Rubicon from Eden and sought to control what should have been left to nature. IMO, that’s Civilization, and the implication is that all life could very well be dead as a result.
Or, maybe life always had a self-destruct button, and we’re it. Human is the Tsar Bomba that evolved to end all life. Nature’s using Human as a reset button. Nature’s in control, and any delusions that Human has that it’s in control, are just that…delusions…provided by Human’s progenitor, Nature, so that Human can fulfill its destiny as the life self-destruct.
.
October 1st, 2012 at 7:50 pm
Robin Datta Says: 400+ Fukes
If people knew more about nukes,
They wouldn’t think doomer are kooks;
But they might change their mind
When they see they’re entwined
In a future with 400 Fukes.
October 1st, 2012 at 7:50 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1B3q5pioevM
The iPhone 3G YouTube app states “Not available on this platform”
October 1st, 2012 at 8:11 pm
Consciousness does not control human actions. The intellect appears to, but it is the chauffeur and butler to the non-rational, non-verbal part of the brain, and is a part of the physical world, a part of nature. The “I” is an appearance from consciousness witnessing the intellect. Consciousness like the sun, does not do anything, but its light allows much to be done.
The processes of abiotic nature tend towards entropy. It is the exercise of control over those processes and processes that life is possible.
October 1st, 2012 at 9:17 pm
This is a scientist doing many measurements (over 600) inch-thick binder, telescope observations, etc. and absolutely convinced that geoengineering is taking place, and also convinced that the military is the jet sprayer, as most observed jeets are military, and we have seen them knock apart thunderheads several times, various sprays, etc.
We have seen two engine jets with three trails, the middle being from a belly nozzle. WITWATS has video pictures of a jet spraying from wingtips, leaving no contrail.
I personally measure the fallout in a NWS rain guage, snow etc, and find direct correlations to the sprayibng, pH, and the contrail density before the rain, snow, or fiber fall.
This data is summarized in 3 pages of geo what we know at the website. The debunkers are to be thanked for providing data and helping us discover more facts in the case besides what we measure and observe. All that were not ad homineum attacks were answered by me on John Whyte facebook video of the LA conference August 2012. Skeptics check that out.
In fairness to debunkers, yes there is a truth based on simple Romneyite beliefs. However, belief does not refute the hard data we present that geoengineering is real and indeed poses a serious threat to human health, agriculture, and ecosystems. The Church said they would burn Columbus, and believed the world was flat, but that did not change any facts that the world was round. Debunkers can shout they don’t believe in Chemtrails, but that does not change our data that they exist. Read those three pages and debunk EVERY item.
Finally, I hope to God I am wrong! But then, what is it there aint?
October 1st, 2012 at 9:29 pm
I was a real disbeliever in chemtrails, which I heard about on the radio show Coast to Coast. I laughed at the reports on the show, considered them equal to the alien thing. Then one day I really looked up at the hundred chemtrails lacing the sky over northern California, watched them morph into a silver covering over the sky from horizon to horizon. I am 67, watched CONtrails laying on the lawn with my kid friends here. They NEVER lasted, faded quickly.
Now, I have listened to and read the evidence, I am a partner to Francis Mangels and have myself transported many samples to Basic Labs in Redding, CA. Those samples were carefully and properly handled. I am a nurse, had heavy biology classes, and the results were really scary. We face the confluence of past peak oil, climate collapse, and human-caused disasters. This is the worst of them, and can end it all.
October 1st, 2012 at 9:34 pm
Nice description of the difference between consciousness and intellect, Robin.
October 1st, 2012 at 9:56 pm
I knew this would happen. The funnies have come to spoil a great site. All teh agents are now directed to intervene because the internet activity radar shows Professor McPhereson’s blog and other postings are getting higher coverage and wider market penetration. See the Sharks, killer whales and Barracudas arrive as snails and shrimp and muddy the waters. Breaking out in infighting is all too easily playing into the hand of spoilers.
Show me an alien and I’ll show you a Rhinos arshole full of bullfrogs.!!
Get a grip all.
The spooks have arrived. Keep the discussion on track to whatever YOU want.
October 1st, 2012 at 11:38 pm
Nice description of the difference between consciousness and intellect, Robin.
Better and more detailed descriptions date back a few millennia to before the time of the Buddha.
See the Sharks, killer whales and Barracudas arrive as snails and shrimp and muddy the waters.
To the regular NBLers, they are flies. Swatting them is customary.
October 2nd, 2012 at 1:45 am
I have read all the comments, there’s not a single one where I find myself in complete agreement… but rather than heap scorn and derision upon sloppy thinking, as I am often tempted to do, today, I think ‘What’s the point ?’.
Every commenter has their own story, which they believe to be correct, and they reject other alternative stories. Mythos stories, logos stories….
If you are happy with the story you are telling yourself, well, why should I care, or want to change it ?
I mean, if you are satisfied and comfortable, inside that cocoon of relative insanity that you have convinced yourself is ‘real’, well, good luck to you. Like seeing an alcoholic snoring on a park bench, I can just walk on by and not disturb their peace.
DO WE make reality, or does it make us? Probe the existence of the universe’s supposed building blocks – quarks, electrons, neutrinos and the rest – and you eventually end up back in your own mind. Alternatively, discount everything human and settle for “a world without us” – a reality that might also be unknowable by us (see “Reality: The bedrock of it all”).
These options are as viscerally unsettling as they are intellectually challenging. Other possibilities – that we live inside a video game, say, or a hologram – are hardly any more comfortable.
But forsaking the notion of reality is not an option, either. Quantum mechanics may be ineffable, but it still makes electronics work. Wars may not “exist”, but they still kill people. The wonder of the human condition is that to us, quarks are real. And so is compassion.
New Scientist : What is reality ?
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21528842.300-reality-ineffable-but-impossible-to-forsake.html
October 2nd, 2012 at 2:04 am
What is reality ?
The answer one gets is a description of an image in the perception of the answerer.
October 2nd, 2012 at 2:57 am
While we debate whether or not geoengineering is taking place with chemtrails, methane is still being added to the atmosphere. Whether the initial warming was caused by CO2 (well documented by scientists from countries all over the world) or by contrails, the glaciers are melting, the arctic ice is thin and likely to disappear in a few years and the methane keeps coming.
Meanwhile if you want a conspiracy, how about the conspiracy of silence about Fukushima (and the fact that Chernobyl’s sarcophagus is leaking and the new one not yet finished). After you read this and realize that no one is going to decommission any nukes before the power goes off, you will realize that despite years of supposed nasty chemicals from chemtrails most Americans go on with their lives unaffected, but when the 400 nukes go the whole world will be poisoned. BtD said it more concisely as usual but here are some details on what is going on.
Arnie Gundersen is usually pretty cautious about what he claims, but the ever pushy Helen Caldicott gets him to reveal just what a pickle we are in – full transcript and program at http://fairewinds.com/content/ongoing-damage-and-danger-fukushima
snip below:
HC: Oh, so they are still pouring water over the molten fuel?
AG: Yes.
HC: Seawater?
AG: It is probably not molten, Helen. It is probably a solid lump that is very hot. But yes, they are still pouring water over it, to the tune of tens of tons a day for each reactor. And that water is coming back out incredibly radioactive and rather than pump it right back in, they are cleaning it with the mineralizer system that is very sophisticated, and very expensive. But in the process now, they are creating hundreds of demineralizer residues. Think of like a Brita filter, hundreds of those, but of course those are the size of a car, that are highly radioactive with cesium that has got a 300 year lifetime, that they are putting out on a field behind the plant. And still the concentration of radioactivity in the water is not going down because it is in direct contact with nuclear fuel.
HC: Yes.
AG: So they have contaminated the reactor, the bottom of the containment, the torus, which is that donut-shaped thing, the reactor building which is outside that, the thing that blew up, the floor of that is contaminated, and the building next to it, the turbine hall, should be the least radioactive and it is still a million disintegrations per second per every liter. So my thought is now, considering the extent of this contamination, that it is not fair to the workers to have them going in and clean this. And I think if I were Tokyo Electric’s management, a couple of more years out after the cooling is completely done, I would consider filling up those containment buildings with concrete and walking away for 300 years. You know, obviously monitoring it, but I do not think it is fair to the workers to expose them to the extraordinary levels they will receive if they were to try to turn that site back into a green field.
HC: They could not turn it back into a green field. That is ridiculous. But anyway . . .
AG: Yes, you are right. And of course the big concern would be you have got to make sure you have got it all captured and it is not going down into the water table.
HC: But it will, and if you put concrete on it, you know it is going to keep going down into the water table and you know it is going to keep contaminating the Pacific Ocean for the rest of time.
AG: Right. So there is no good solution.
HC: No there is none.
AG: Absolutely no good solution. But the solution would be to bore holes underneath and constantly pull water out from under the building so that whatever leaks down gets treated. So we are still back with these big de-mineralizers again. But to my mind, I could not, as a manager, order a couple of thousand workers to pick up extraordinarily high exposures to dismantle these plants at this point in time.
October 2nd, 2012 at 3:03 am
Anyone aware that three earthquakes just hit Japan off shore from Fukushima, one quite close http://fukushima-diary.com/2012/10/m5-2-offshore-fukushima-2/ check the main page of fukushima diary to see the others as well as ongoing problems – nucleotides in Okasa water for instance after the recent typhoon.
Contrail folks get out of your little world of sky staring and wake up. There are actually things going on in the rest of the world that are about to impact you big time.
October 2nd, 2012 at 3:08 am
Robin Datta
Look, it seems everyone is at liberty to post,( short of promoting some mass violence or racial or eugenic hatered.)
That’s really cool.
It’s the old freedom and responsibility line. I don’t wish to be associated with swatting flies. If thats how we are to deal with trick bloggery, then Professor McPhereson is entirely correct, we are done.
Everyone gets a go.
But maybe these fixers are just way too practiced at on line text based foolery?
That’s why I have raised the issue many times concerning what constitutes admissable ‘evidence’ at NBL?
I don’t suppose it is easily defined, and is close to the rubrik of scientific journal admissability.However, Science has been a topic for discussion because it is the main language of modern culture and institutional dialogue, but falls short of covering all views on the reality of our predicament.
All
This is not a court of law, and some try to use it as such with demands of others, and it is likewise not a pulpit to preach sermons without listening to everyone elses and truly giving due considderation.
It is a discussion page on one little blog on the net.
I only use the adjective descriptor ‘little’ to denote that it is one site, not that it is insignificant to me.
Its not a guugle, nor a yarhuu nor any of that size, so can we dispense with the ‘my opinion is the most sacred cow in the world’ shit.
A fucking good site just starts to go down the gurgler, because people still seem to be stuck in the playground, like overeducated monkeys.
Some nice comments go a long way, which are there but posters often get distracted by the wrangling about whose strap on is bigger.
Professor McPhereson is kind enough to put some controversial material here for discussion, and it all too often moves to head butting, or is it butthead(ing)s. Some people didn’t get enough home attention from mum and dad, or the school teacher, and they got to demand it here?
I won’t be delivering any more sermons about the spiritual roots of our ecological predicament, because it has been the sum of some very hard won understandings on my part to come to the awareness that it is our spiritual situation, individually and collectively, that is at the root of our problems.
I have to disagree with Professor McPhereson on that point, however, as Civilisation is a manifestation of a relationship to the Biosphere, and beyond, that is a at heart profoundly misinformed about our true situation, our true circumstance. It seems to me there has only been a very few in time who have lived in concert with the biosphere. We now refer t them as the sharmans, or avatars. They have always kept to the background, informing the powerful leaders of thier biases and misunderstandings. When times are very hard people look for answers to more basic issues, like ‘who am I’ and ‘what am I doing with my life?’ The Shamans and Avatars were always present to help genuine aspirants to move beyond their present limitations. Now it is too many to handle, perhaps, with the old methods. New mwthods will be needed.
We have variously lauded Hunter Gatherer existance, and posited a general view that this mode of human occupation was and could be more conducive to ecologically sound planet dwelling model, with concommitamt vastly lower numbers of humans due to the real carrying capacity of the Planet.
I have been partial to that view but have discarded it now.
The simple reason is that we did get here from there, so it is not the case something happened to change us from one mode to another, IMO.
A dramatic example of this simple logic is demonstrated by the character of Anton Chigurh, the Assassin, in Cormac McCarthy’s 2005 novel, ‘No Country for Old Men’, asking of his victims, and the readers, before he kills them: “If the rule you followed, brought you to this, of what use was the rule?”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dRQtjVzj1bo&list=PL0871E80F80989E56
So we got here from there.
That implies to me we were always headed ‘here’, and not
anywhere ‘else’, in terms of overpopulation and biosphere destruction.
We are simply following a very indirect path of self-understanding and self-realisation as a group.
The axiom is thus: ‘It is the most basic human preoccupation to be conscious of our true nature. If something of an inner capacity or content remains unconscious, it will attempt integration from the outside.’
We are stuck in all the projections of meaningless desires, aversions and fears.
I am horrified I have brought up children in this world of today, and I will admitt I have done an abysmal job of mittigating all the crap. How could one?
Shakespeare is good for the curtain call here.
“It is in our selves that we are thus or thus”
Blameing the particular sociological make up of ancestral living arrangements is week indeed IMO.
Only individuals get to become truely happy.
Groups are bound to fake it for a time,
but go up and down like a yo yo with the prevailing conditions of life.
Save yourself, and love others as you do.
By all.
October 2nd, 2012 at 3:09 am
To Robin Datta:
The environmental threat from “400+ Fukes” should not be conflated with an increase in atmospheric CO2. Life on earth evolved with high atmospheric CO2 levels, and during periods of both high and low global temperatures — not with high levels of nuclear radiation, which is a new and unique danger.
It wasn’t just reptilians and amphibians that evolved under conditions of high atmospheric CO2 and both high and low global temperatures; birds, mammals, and marsupials evolved during many millions of years when atmospheric CO2 exceeded 2,000 ppm, and they all endured long periods of Hothouse Earth conditions and also Ice Ages. Plants thrive on high CO2 and warm weather, as long as rainfall is sufficient.
Most species should be able to adjust to an atmospheric CO2 in excess of 2,000 ppm and a global temperature up to 6 degrees Celsius higher than today. Corals evolved when the atmospheric CO2 was above 2,000 ppm and during many millions of years of a Hothouse Earth, when the global temperature was as much as 6 degrees Celsius higher than today, so it seems unlikely that an atmospheric CO2 from 400 to 2,000 ppm would acidify the ocean sufficiently to threaten the world’s corals with extinction. The oceans have a tremendous buffering capacity for CO2.
The paleoclimate record shows that even when the global climate changed rapidly, most species usually survived and recovered rapidly.
It is noteworthy that all of the Big Five Extinction events coincided with major Glacial (cold) periods — not with Hothouse Earth periods. The possibility that increasing atmospheric CO2 could cause a Sixth Extinction event seems very unlikely to me. There are numerous man-made toxic threats to the environment, including nuclear radiation, pesticides, heavy metals, CFCs, and population override, but I do not believe that CO2 ranks as a serious threat.
For graphs of earth’s paleoclimate, including global temperature and CO2 levels, see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:All_palaeotemps and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Phanerozoic_Carbon_Dioxide.png
Arthur Johnson wrote: “Nice description of the difference between consciousness and intellect, Robin.”
I say “Amen” to that.
As for flyswatters, to imagine oneself as a fly or as a flyswatter may be an illusion, or perhaps hubris. I think it better to dispense with derogatory remarks and address ideas as one might imagine evolved beings would do.
October 2nd, 2012 at 4:03 am
.
Alright, I’m working on a fiction about collapse, and here’s a snippet. Tell me what you think, if you care.
Every breath is a struggle, and laying here, too weak to move very much, I can’t avoid being cognizant of that struggle. Nothing I do mentally is effective at mitigating the labor of my every breath. It all seems so vividly clear to me now, as though it were yesterday, even though it was twenty-five years, or so, prior. I was so convinced that collapse was imminent, that it quite literally structured my life. Ah, but that was then, and this is now. The collapse didn’t quite unfold like a thought it would. It let me down, and I had such high hopes. I anticipated it like Evangelicals anticipated the Rapture but it never did materialize, at least not the way I envisioned it, and now that I can be truly honest with myself, I’m greatly disappointed that it didn’t, and greatly disappointed in myself that I allowed myself to be enticed by the power of prognostication. Nothing ever goes according to plan, well, not for me at least, not even collapse, and yeah, I know, I couldn’t plan a collapse, but the energy I devoted to its imminence was surely worthy of a plan, so in that sense, I may as well have planned it, because ultimately it’s had the same effect.
James has since passed on, and I miss him so. I didn’t appreciate him enough when he was here, and I regret that now. I remember my granmother telling me when I was in my twenties that I should take the time to smell the roses because there will come a time when you will regret not doing so, and you know what, she was right…she was pretty much right about everything, and this is no exception. James was so understanding and patient with me, especially when it came to my obsession with collapse. He had similar worries, but unlike me, he didn’t let those worries consume him. He had the ability to put it in context and hold the powerful foreboding at bay. I envy him for that, and I’m eternally grateful for his endless well of patience with me, but I can’t help thinking, what if he hadn’t been so patient. What if, instead, he had challenged me a bit more and assertively confronted my obsession. What would I have done? Would our relationship have deteriorated to the point of divorce, or would our bond have grown stronger because his challenge would have shaken me from my stupor? It’s hard to say, but I suppose it’s all water under the bridge now, and what I’m left with is regret in not cherishing him more than I did. He was one of the roses of which my wonderful grandmother spoke, and I didn’t smell that rose nearly enough…………….
.
October 2nd, 2012 at 4:12 am
.
The answer one gets is a description of an image in the perception of the answerer.
Precisely why I take your dogma about nature and control with a grain of salt. You don’t have the answer, only ideas, just like me.
.
October 2nd, 2012 at 4:19 am
Guy,
If you are ever in Sydney, Australia, and need some place to stay you and your partner are welcome here. It may be sleeping bags and a pot of stew, and some pretty grand views, but you are welcome to stay and rest up. It’s a 2 hour train ride from Sydney, or 23 hour walk, (unloaded).
October 2nd, 2012 at 4:22 am
Robin : What is reality ?
The answer one gets is a description of an image in the perception of the answerer.
That’s true, however, not all descriptions or answerers carry the same weight, or depth of insight.
My dispute with Kathy C. on the previous thread centres around the difference between what our senses tell us and what science tells us.
If I look out of my window, it’s quite obvious that the Sun rises in the East and sets in the West, and from the common-sense evidence of my own eyes, it’s reasonable to surmise that the Sun goes around the Earth. Or even that the Earth is flat.
However, science has established that what appears ‘correct’ is in actuality, ‘incorrect’.
Same goes for Kathy’s notion of ‘mass’ and ‘material’.
What appear to be solid lumps of stuff, when inspected by science, turn out to be nothing of the kind. There is ‘nothing there’. Or, ‘mostly nothing there’. And what is there, is of a totally counter-intuitive mind-boggling weirdness.
People are free to ‘disbelieve’ what science tells us, just as some ‘disbelieve’ what climate scientists are telling us about man-made global warming, but the problem those people have, if they are reading this, is that these computers only work because the science has got it right. All this internet technology has come about by following and applying the discoveries made by physicists.
And what the physicists say ( although there is not a consensus, I think there at least a dozen interpretations ) is that all that solid ‘stuff’ that appears to be ‘out there’ is nothing like what you think it is like. Basically, the materialism avowed by Kathy and others is just plain wrong. Obsolete. A deceased parrot. Flat Earth thinking.
Werner Heisenberg observed that: “the ontology of materialism rested upon the illusion that the kind of existence, the direct ‘actuality’ of the world around us, can be extrapolated into the atomic range. This extrapolation, however, is impossible… Atoms are not things.”
http://www.monsangelorum.net/?topic=what-is-really-real
October 2nd, 2012 at 4:31 am
I disagree that the U.S. is the only place where there’s no oxygen.
Japan also qualifies, because their entire culture revolves around maintaining “harmony” at all costs.
To even HAVE grievances, to the Japanese, is to not be demonstrating sufficient fighting spirit or “hope”.
Have you ever actually watched their “anime” or read their “manga?” It’s always the same goddamn plotline: the villain always turns out to be a “well-intentioned extremist” who tries to solve problems in the world but is corrupted by his own “bitterness” or “hatred.” For not being sufficiently pure, the “heroes” then have to defeat him, because his intentions always go too far and he always wants to “destroy the world”.
Then, cue ending hopeful message about how we CAN change our futures, or there IS good in the world, ending credits, happy ending (or semi-happy ending, if it ends with the heroes cheerfully accepting injustice), la la la la la la!
The U.S. isn’t alone, it’s just that in the U.S. you are AGGRESSIVELY crushed, while in Japan, you are PASSIVE-AGGRESSIVELY crushed under the weight of smiles and hopeful messages.
October 2nd, 2012 at 4:53 am
RE: “There are also countless compelling photos and extensive film footage that clearly indicate spraying from separate nozzles on the plane.”
I actually fly jets and make contrails, and I hold an Airline Transport Pilot certificate. I’d love for anyone to show me the “nozzles” when I pre-flight the aircraft, because I surely cannot find this equipment. Neither can any other of the many jet pilots I know.
October 2nd, 2012 at 4:54 am
MB, I’m giving you a C– grade. Clear all that Latin and Greek out of your writing (cognizant, anticipate) and watch your use of idiom. Phrases like “put it in context” don’t belong in fiction and idioms like “water under the bridge” are painfully hackneyed.
October 2nd, 2012 at 4:54 am
The fact that biological processes exercise control through chemical and physical means on matter and energy flows, and that this is what distinguishes biological systems from the abiotic, may remain outside the range of comprehension in some instances.
And of course, just because each description of reality is of an image in the perception of the describer, it does not follow that all of them are of equal value.
October 2nd, 2012 at 5:20 am
USA/… Nope. That doesn’t resonate. If there’s a private club here (and there likely is, as regulars usually create a culture… here it seems to have something to do with swatting flies!), I’m not a member of it. As I said, I do not often visit these comments, and almost never participate. I was asking whether YOU were a regular here. If so, I assumed that you had already discussed your position with the people who ARE regulars here (McPherson et al.). My assumption was based on two observations: first, that your views re AGW seem at odds with what I know about Guy’s views (such that, had you stated your views here before, they’d have provoked discussion), and second, that I didn’t see anyone else respond to your comment (which left me wondering if that was a sign that you’d already been through that here before). If you’d already “hashed this out” in this space, I saw/see little reason to do that again. As a newbie here, and as someone who has participated in and moderated comment sections elsewhere, I feel reticent to make assumptions about the culture of this comment section. Which is why, before even entering into dialogue about the content of your comment, I asked whether you are a regular, and whether you’d discussed your position before, in a place I could go back and read about.
Re hashing out my own concerns with McPherson et al., as I said, I’ve rarely been here. I don’t really do much “hashing out”, especially online, as things like argument, sniping, banter, and oneupmanship (which so often, in my experience, describe the tone of comment sections) hold little interest for me. There are probably some deep and real differences between the way I see the world and the way some others here see the world. I have little faith that we can explore those differences in a way that will actually help anything in a forum such as this. Were we to have three or four days together, face to face, that would be a different matter. In the meantime, I think I’m managing quite well to say what I feel called to say in the media I employ. Thanks!
As a more general observation, I can see, having read through this thread, that my disinterest with comment sections (and my generally disenchanted assessment of my fellow civilized humans) DOES prevent me from receiving the gifts to be found here. I see many really good people doing their best to express their wisdom and analysis, and to understand each other. I love the heart and passion I see here, the call back to the Earth situation, the caring, the horror, the anger, the love. I particularly like the comments about consciousness, intellect, and control, the “spiritual roots” and foundations of Our™ collective journey, the “end” of materialism, and the “end” of it all (400 Fukes). These topics fascinate me, and I’d love to spend long hours face to face exploring them with ya’ll. I find myself thinking that perhaps I should stop in for a visit here more often…
October 2nd, 2012 at 5:58 am
.
And of course, just because each description of reality is of an image in the perception of the describer, it does not follow that all of them are of equal value.
Jesus, sometimes you are so full of it, do you know that? Who gets to determine that value? Why, you of course, or a group of like-minded, so in that sense, it’s not any more objective. The value you place upon your perceptions is just as subjective as the perception itself, so your disclaimer doesn’t wash.
What you call control, I call unconscious stimulus/response. If you want to appeal to authority to support your case, go right on ahead, knock yourself out, flout in my face that you and your’s own the Franchise on what is described and how, and that without the proper homage and respect to the Franchisors, and lacking any merited status, no one has any business challenging the established orthodoxy of explanation established by the Emmeffen Franchisors.
.
October 2nd, 2012 at 6:00 am
.
Thanks, Martin, I’ll take your suggestions under advisement, although I’m really not serious about the book….at least, I don’t think so, but one never knows.
.
October 2nd, 2012 at 6:13 am
.
Ivy Mike, that’s an excellent point. Can we see the photos that show that, Dane? These will have to be close up photos that make it clear that there is a nozzle and that something is definitively coming from that nozzle. It cannot be a photo like some that have been shown that zoom in but not nearly close enough and you can see contrails form from parts of the plane that are not the engines….because, as House has indicated, and science underscores, contrails can form from any part of the wing, not just from the engine exhaust, so until we see the direct and explicit evidence of what you say, conjecturing on a quasi-zoomed photo is not evidence in and of itself.
Not to mention, Dane, and something you should consider, if an aerosol spraying program were in effect, and it was being done with separate nozzles, it doesn’t hold that the spraying would be evidenced by contrails. In fact, I would think that much of the time, the particulate matter would be so fine, and considering it would not crystallize into ice necessarily, much of the spraying would be invisible to the naked eye. Only the later effect of a whiter sky would be the telltale sign. We’ll know soon enough, though, because if I were a betting man, which I’m not, I’m betting that this form of Geo-Engineering is going to happen within the decade, maybe sooner.
.
October 2nd, 2012 at 6:17 am
“Jesus, sometimes you are so full of it, do you know that? Who gets to determine that value? Why, you of course, or a group of like-minded, so in that sense, it’s not any more objective. The value you place upon your perceptions is just as subjective as the perception itself, so your disclaimer doesn’t wash.”
That’s a remarkably dumb criticism.
Why does it have to be, in any sense, ‘objective’ ? Or subjective, for that matter ? People can choose from whatever choices are on offer by any number of criteria, utility, aesthetics, profit, cultural prejudice, whatever. Which is what people do, all the time.
However, there is a reality which is not an idea.
October 2nd, 2012 at 6:26 am
Is this proof that you have to be stupid to be in the military ?
These are some warning signs that that you have turned into a terrorist who will soon kill your co-workers, according to the U.S. military. You’ve recently changed your “choices in entertainment.” You have “peculiar discussions.” You “complain about bias,” you’re “socially withdrawn” and you’re frustrated with “mainstream ideologies.” Your “Risk Factors for Radicalization” include “Social Networks” and “Youth.”
These are some other signs that one of your co-workers has become a terrorist, according to the U.S. military. He “shows a sudden shift from radical to ‘normal’ behavior to conceal radical behavior.” He “inquires about weapons of mass effects.” He “stores or collects mass weapons or hazardous materials.”
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/10/insider-threat/
October 2nd, 2012 at 6:27 am
Jesus, sometimes you are so full of it,
There are some people who have that opinion of him.
Who gets to determine that value?
The value is determined by what proves more consistent with subsequent observations. A round earth. A heliocentric solar system. Gravitational bending of light.
What you call control, I call unconscious stimulus/response. If you want to appeal to authority to support your case, go right on ahead, knock yourself out, flout in my face that you and your’s own the Franchise on what is described and how, and that without the proper homage and respect to the Franchisors, and lacking any merited status, no one has any business challenging the established orthodoxy of explanation established by the Emmeffen Franchisors.
Quite an explosion. A lack of control? Or a lack of “unconscious stimulus/response?
October 2nd, 2012 at 6:38 am
.
that I didn’t see anyone else respond to your comment (which left me wondering if that was a sign that you’d already been through that here before).
I won’t speak for anyone, or everyone, but the reason I didn’t respond was because to do so at this point would be regressive, imo. I’ve been down that road of arguing that ad nauseum. I reached the point of either I accept it, or I don’t, and I’ve accepted it, and as such, don’t want to spend any more time convincing myself or others. There’s other more interesting wheat and chaff to occupy my time. I will say this, though, my door is always open to revision, but it has to be a convincing case, and that breaking down the front door approach isn’t going to make me revise my position. To my thinking, everything is falsifiable, so it’s important to allow for that.
.
October 2nd, 2012 at 6:45 am
“To my thinking, everything is falsifiable, so it’s important to allow for that.
Including your own existence ?
October 2nd, 2012 at 6:45 am
Timothy Scott Bennett
I was unaware you were the same writer/director of the film “What A Way To Go – Life at the end of Empire.”
I got to say thanks for the movie, and to your producer Sally Erickson. Although I was aware of many aspects in your film, I found it inspiring to be taken on the journey, and often recommend it to many uninitiated folk who wish to know something more.
Thanks.
October 2nd, 2012 at 6:50 am
.
However, there is a reality which is not an idea.
That’s just your idea. There is no way for you to know otherwise, so you’re speculating, just as religious people speculate about there being a God.
The so-called Laws of Physics and Science are changing all the time, and yes, some say that it’s because we’re gaining greater clarity and the current “Laws” reflect that progress of clarity. I would posit that the more we seem to understand, the less we actually understand. The Rabbit Hole of understanding is just that…an endless Rabbit Hole of fractals folding out in front of us into infinity…never reaching the end because there is no end. We are practically nothing in this scheme of things and unthings, and yet, via perception, and some would say delusion, we think we’re much more and we have all the answers. We have nothing, you have nothing…but pretense.
.
October 2nd, 2012 at 6:51 am
.
Including your own existence ?
Sure, why not?
.
October 2nd, 2012 at 7:00 am
.
Excellent point, Librarian, and what’s of equal interest is that Japan did not always have that culture, historically. It’s rather a modern advent for them.
.
October 2nd, 2012 at 7:08 am
Timothy Scott Bennett
Just thought I would post your comments from your website here, they make entirely grave sense to me:
http://www.whatawaytogomovie.com/the-movie/filmmakers/
“Something happens when you read four hundred articles on climate change. And half a dozen books on oil depletion. Something happens when you spend a day Googling “mass extinction”, or ” oceans”, or “depleted uranium”. Something happens when you spend three long years delving deeply into the present global predicament, and into the economic, political, spiritual, psychological and cultural forces that have brought us to a point in history where we can seriously ponder the extinction of the human species, and the mass extinction of much of the life on this planet. Something happens when you not only look at it, but also allow yourself to feel it – the grief, the outrage, the loneliness, and the fear.
Something happens. Denial fades away. Denial cannot endure in the face of that much information, and that depth of feeling…”
October 2nd, 2012 at 7:10 am
Including your own existence ?
Sure, why not?
As in Descartes, ‘I think, therefore I am’, radical scepticism, which gave us the dualistic Cartesian paradigm and so much woe and unfortunate results… ?
Perhaps you’d like to begin your possible novel from that point, and explore what other options were available to Descartes, which would have given Western civilisation a different trajectory….
October 2nd, 2012 at 7:23 am
However, there is a reality which is not an idea.
That’s just your idea. There is no way for you to know otherwise, so you’re speculating, just as religious people speculate about there being a God.
The so-called Laws of Physics and Science are changing all the time, and yes, some say that it’s because we’re gaining greater clarity and the current “Laws” reflect that progress of clarity. I would posit that the more we seem to understand, the less we actually understand. The Rabbit Hole of understanding is just that…an endless Rabbit Hole of fractals folding out in front of us into infinity…never reaching the end because there is no end. We are practically nothing in this scheme of things and unthings, and yet, via perception, and some would say delusion, we think we’re much more and we have all the answers. We have nothing, you have nothing…but pretense.
No, you are very mistaken. There is ‘something’. Anybody alive can verify that, by direct experience. All living things have senses that they use to connect to that ‘something’. It is not any sort of idea. Of course, we, as humans can have ideas about that ‘something’. But to deny it’s existence is mere perversity.
Plenty of religious people base their belief upon an experience of the divine. That’s not the same thing as a speculation or an idea.
The laws of physics and science are NOT changing all the time. Science is a methodology and a project to explore and record and try to explain and understand. Newton’s laws of gravity, etc, are as valid today, as when he discovered them. Sure, Einstein and others found that they cease being useful as the scale being considered is enlarged or reduced, but for the everyday matters of engineering a bridge, whatever, they are as close to a constant truth as one could hope to find.
I can see that YOU have nothing, but speak for yourself, and please don’t insult ME with your foolish ‘pretense’. I found what I was looking for. As I said, there is reality that is not an idea.
October 2nd, 2012 at 7:23 am
Morocco Bama
You wrote:
“To my thinking, everything is falsifiable…..”
Can you clarify what you mean here specifically.
Do you mean to include others subjective experiences, and /or their conclusions based on those experiences?
Do you simply refer to any evidence put up as backing a theory. Or is it any proposition whatsoever? Please refer not just to the very specific context you used it in, but in a more general way.
October 2nd, 2012 at 7:26 am
.
As in Descartes, ‘I think, therefore I am’, radical scepticism, which gave us the dualistic Cartesian paradigm and so much woe and unfortunate results… ?
Nope, that’s not saying that at all. It’s saying that anything’s possible, and allowing for that possibility. I’m not the one with the answers. You and Robin appear to be the ones. My notions/ideas are always temporary, in a sense, even the idea of my existence and who and what I am, if anything.
You really have a thing for Descartes, though, don’t you? It’s this box you’ve created, or shall we say a trashcan, and if you disfavor another idea, you just toss it in your convenient Descartes trashcan and call it a day. Hey, if it works for you to get through the day, have at it, but don’t consider yourself superior and all-knowing because you’ve developed a comfortable coping construct.
.
October 2nd, 2012 at 7:27 am
Robin : “The value is determined by what proves more consistent with subsequent observations. A round earth. A heliocentric solar system. Gravitational bending of light.”
Why ? People have had satisfactory and fulfilled lives without requiring any confirmation of the practical utility or empirical accuracy of their beliefs.
October 2nd, 2012 at 7:30 am
.
No, you are very mistaken.
No, it’s not correct or incorrect. Obviously, Descartes still has a hold on you more than you care to admit. You may not agree with me, and that’s fine, but that doesn’t mean I’m mistaken, it just means you don’t agree.
.
October 2nd, 2012 at 7:30 am
You obviously know very little about Descartes and his scepticism. I’ll just have to wait for you to catch up on some proper education some day, MB. Pity, though.
October 2nd, 2012 at 7:34 am
Oh for CRYING OUT LOUD, people!
We’re attempting to have a discussion about geoengineering, about chem trails, about the possibility or lack thereof of the previous two, and about Naomi Klein’s comment that there’s no oxygen for protest in the U.S.
And you’re seriously getting into personal attacks on each other? If we don’t come up with solutions we’re all going to be screwed and you people are focusing on proving which one of you is more foolish?!
Enough, I’m changing the subject and cutting the argument short.
Morocco Bama, thank you for responding to my argument about Japan. I wasn’t aware this culture is a modern advent for them. Will you please explain to me what kind of culture Japan used to have? Was there any oxygen for protest in Japan before the modern era, or was there not?
October 2nd, 2012 at 7:35 am
No, you are very mistaken.
No, it’s not correct or incorrect. Obviously, Descartes still has a hold on you more than you care to admit. You may not agree with me, and that’s fine, but that doesn’t mean I’m mistaken, it just means you don’t agree.
The point I am making has absolutely no connection to Descartes. I am not responsible for you ignorance and lack of insight, MB.
If you cannot tell that you are involved with ‘something’, whatever you may call it, then you must be already dead. You said you have children, I suppose now you’ll claim they are an illusion, a fantasy, figments of imagination, don’t really exist at all.
October 2nd, 2012 at 7:39 am
ulvfugl
Your link to the “warning signs that that you have turned into a terrorist ” is bizzare. They are fucking with weakminded folk who will not be able to tell the difference between a critically thinking Introvert, and someone with an ideological or spychopathic tendencies. That’s really going too far.
“Susan Cain: The power of Introverts”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0KYU2j0TM4&feature=related
A quote:
“In a culture where being social and outgoing are prized above all else, it can be difficult, even shameful, to be an introvert. But, as Susan Cain argues in this passionate talk, introverts bring extraordinary talents and abilities to the world, and should be encouraged and celebrated.”
Never mind catching a real terrorist, ( few and far between?) it is more important to render clear critical thinking useless, and let paranoia and fear be justifications for shutting down any democratic processes.
I feel a MaCarthy era coming on.
October 2nd, 2012 at 7:39 am
Librarian, seemed to me that the chemtrail discussion had run its course. Has anybody got anything significant to add ?
If we don’t come up with solutions we’re all going to be screwed and you people are focusing on proving which one of you is more foolish?!
Has it not yet dawned upon you that there ARE NO SOLUTIONS and that WE ARE completely screwed ? If you think otherwise, I suggest it is you who are foolish.
October 2nd, 2012 at 7:47 am
.
You obviously know very little about Descartes and his scepticism.
What little I do know about Descartes is enough for me, thank you. To know more than I know is mere wanking. What I do know is that his theory is the result of binary thinking, as are the critiques of his theory. Correct/Incorrect. With Us/Against Us. Us/Them. You/Me. Alive/Dead. Better/Worse.
.
October 2nd, 2012 at 7:53 am
As I’ve said before, MB, you seem to take a pride in being ignorant. I suppose you are just one more victim/casualty of American dumbing down. Wanking is no substitute for intelligence.
October 2nd, 2012 at 7:58 am
Barry Commoner died yesterday.
Three minutes of silence in honor of his memory, please.
October 2nd, 2012 at 8:15 am
.
Wanking is no substitute for intelligence.
Exactly, so quit wanking, will ya? You can read Descartes everyday until you draw your last perceived breath and not be any more, or any less, intelligent. Who would be the judge of that, anyway? You?
.
October 2nd, 2012 at 8:18 am
Enough! Stop FIGHTING!
Right, let’s change the subject.
Morocco Bama, did Japan always have a culture that demonized grievances? You said it didn’t, that it’s a modern invention. How did they USED to handle grievances?
Thanks in advance for at least reading this question.
October 2nd, 2012 at 8:28 am
.
Librarian, I’m searching for the book, or article, I read about this, but so far, no luck. I remember it, because it was eye-opening for me and enlightening. It was presented as an argument to the popular notion that the Japanese acted the way they did in World War II because of their historical culture, and the book/article, through historical accounts, showed that Japanese culture changed, and changed rather radically over time…as do many cultures, and so, it was fallacious to claim that what we know today as Japanese culture was always Japanese culture. I’ll keep looking, but if you’re interested and have the time, and have access to nexus/lexus, perhaps you can find it, as well. Of course, it won’t invalidate what you’ve asserted about contemporary Japanese culture, although it is difficult to understand other cultures given our own cultural bias. This article does an excellent job of helping me see through that bias.
http://www.immi.se/intercultural/nr4/rosen.htm
.
October 2nd, 2012 at 8:33 am
MB : “What little I do know about Descartes is enough for me, thank you. To know more than I know is mere wanking. What I do know is that his theory is the result of binary thinking, as are the critiques of his theory. Correct/Incorrect. With Us/Against Us. Us/Them. You/Me. Alive/Dead. Better/Worse.
If you had any self-respect, MB, you’d be embarrassed and ashamed of such blatant foolishness.
Those binary polarities have nothing to do with Cartesian dualism. They date back at least 5000 years in the recorded Chinese civilisation, and presumably back to the earliest languages, in Western civilisation, certainly since Zarathustra, 3,500 years ago.
Descartes ‘I think, therefore I am’ separated mind from body, in the Western culture that produced what we have today. There are reasons why people feel alienated and separate from the world they live in. Descartes is one of those reasons.
Ozman touched on this earlier, as if there was some sort of pre-ordained fate that we had no option but to get into this mess, contemplating our extinction. That’s not correct. Other cultures loved and cherished the world around them. There are clear reasons why this destructive dominant Western culture is as it is, with it’s attitude of total contempt, even hatred, for the biosphere.
October 2nd, 2012 at 8:38 am
ulvfugl:
One can deny everything but the denier: denying the denier voids the denial. (“Including your own existence ?”
“Sure, why not?”)
I’m not the one with the answers. You and Robin appear to be the ones.
The operative word is “appear”. To others, it may not “appear” so.
ulvfugl Says:
People have had satisfactory and fulfilled lives without requiring any confirmation of the practical utility or empirical accuracy of their beliefs.
Those who have had such lives will understand that statement. Sadly, not everyone.
If we don’t come up with solutions we’re all going to be screwed and you people are focusing on proving which one of you is more foolish?!
The window for solutions, according to our host, has closed. Many NBLers agree. And as always, the “other person” is more foolish.
October 2nd, 2012 at 8:41 am
The Japanese learned what the Europeans had done to the Native Americans in North America, and what the Spanish and Portugese had done to the Indians of South America,
centuries of genocide, and, understandably, wanted no part of it, and tried to be self-contained, until American imperialism was brutally forced upon them. The trauma of WW2 plus American capitalism produced much of the culture they have today.
October 2nd, 2012 at 8:43 am
.
I will honor your request, Librarian, and not indulge you-know-who’s provocations any longer in this thread. There’s nothing to be gained or lost by it. It’s just killing time, and I’d rather kill time in other ways, like discussing the complexity of Japanese culture.
.
October 2nd, 2012 at 8:44 am
Morocco Bama, I studied anthropology and sociology in college. I’m aware of the impact of cultural biases.
But that doesn’t automatically invalidate criticism, just as the bias of the Japanese does not invalidate their criticisms of our own society.
October 2nd, 2012 at 8:46 am
Addendum:
My sympathies always lie with the underdogs, the people who try so hard to speak and get blocked by conditioned responses, like beating on steel walls.
In my opinion, Japanese culture is just as guilty of teaching people to refuse to sympathize with those who suffer as our own culture is.
Cultures such as that of Mexico, or Sweden, or France, are a bit better about this.
October 2nd, 2012 at 8:48 am
.
But that doesn’t automatically invalidate criticism, just as the bias of the Japanese does not invalidate their criticisms of our own society.
Where did I state it did? But while we’re on it, did the atrocities of the Nazis during WWII invalidate criticism of the Jews?
.
October 2nd, 2012 at 8:50 am
Speaking as a Jew myself, no it does not validate criticism of the Jews.
Again, my sympathies always lie with the underdogs, the people whom “are not allowed to judge their own situations”.
During the Holocaust, that was the Jews. Now, it’s the Palestinians and the Jews haven’t learned.
October 2nd, 2012 at 8:54 am
Wait, crap, that was a typo. I meant to type “does not invalidate”, not “does not validate.” I meant to agree with the analogy you brought up, not shut it down, but also argue that the analogy is nuanced.
Sorry for the typo.
October 2nd, 2012 at 8:56 am
.
Again, my sympathies always lie with the underdogs, the people whom “are not allowed to judge their own situations”.
You may need to clarify this further. Suppose you are indoctrinated into a culture where you are quite literally stripped of your capacity to judge your own situation? Do you feel no sympathy for those underdogs, or are they not underdogs, and instead Psychical Eunuchs?
.
October 2nd, 2012 at 9:04 am
Robin : The window for solutions, according to our host, has closed. Many NBLers agree. And as always, the “other person” is more foolish.
I agree with Dr House, re population. We can argue about the precise numbers, but a rough calculation gives a SUSTAINABLE global population as around 0.5 billion, without degrading the biosphere.
That means we are 6.5 billion in excess, with another 2 billion ( = 2 x China ) on the way in the next couple of decades.
Anybody got a solution for that problem ?
We are acidifying the oceans 10 times faster than at any time in the last X 100 million years ( I forget the exact figure. Does it even matter ? ) which will mean most ocean life dies. We’ve already removed 90% of the large fish. The geological record shows clearly that similar rapid changes in the past have been cataclysmic for life on Earth.
Anybody got a solution for that problem ?
We’ve wrecked the global climate which enabled civilisation to develop. That era is now over. From now onward we get something much less hospitable. How can anyone grow crops when they have no idea what the weather will be like, other than it will probably be unlike anything they have ever known in their lifetime ?
Anybody got a solution for that problem ?
Most of the humans alive don’t even understand this situation and what has caused it, and many are actively obstructing any moves to try and fix it, and have been doing so for decades. THEY are responsible for this disaster.
Anybody got a solution for that problem ?
The disasters we have today, like vanishing Arctic ice and glaciers, are the result of CO2 emitted thirty odd years ago, we still have not stopped increasing emissions, and what we are doing today will not have it’s effect for another 30 years or so.
Along with the burning forests, melting permafrost, methane emissions, etc, etc.
Anybody got a solution for that problem ?
This list can go on for pages, the Fukes, nuclear and chemical and biological war, etc, etc, etc…..
We are upon the brink of a Permian-type Mass Extinction Event. Most living things on Earth are about to vanish forever. Including us.
Nobody wants to face up to this.
Who can blame them ? It is too horrible to contemplate without feeling ill.
The WORST thing that could possibly happen, is happening….
The only reason I am here on this blog is because there’s a handful of folk HERE who are not in denial about all this stuff… I cannot find anywhere else where that is the case.
October 2nd, 2012 at 9:04 am
It depends on whether or not the indoctrinated leave other people alone and live their own lives, or whether or not the indoctrinated choose to obstruct and distort the struggles and words of those who are not indoctrinated.
I have no quarrel with people who live in the Matrix. But the Cyphers of the world who would kill (or in real life, at least dominate) others to maintain his illusion…those people I do not sympathize with.
Have I clarified myself further, sir?
October 2nd, 2012 at 9:09 am
.
Have I clarified myself further, sir?
That works for me…but please, don’t call me sir…or Johnson!!
.
October 2nd, 2012 at 9:13 am
Descartes walks into a bar and has a drink. Bartender asks if he’ll have another; he replies, “I think not,” and disappears.
October 2nd, 2012 at 9:14 am
Any examples …of those who are not indoctrinated. to offer ?
October 2nd, 2012 at 9:16 am
Other than the Mahayana, I know little about Japanese culture. And Mahayana itself is a vast realm, with a major part of its traditions from China and a substantial part from Korea.
My father served as a regimental medical officer in the Royal Indian Army in Burma/Malaya/Singapore during the Second World War, and in spite of several close calls, had deep respect for the enemy, even though in his stories he always referred to them as the “Japs”. He related how conscientious they were, as prisoners of war, when assigned the tasks of constructing temporary buildings that were not even for their own use. And the highest temperature he ever recorded was in a freshly dead “Jap”: 110°F.
I spent only one night in Japan, in a hotel near Tokyo’s airport en route to my duty station in Korea. Didn’t know about Mahayana at that time.
October 2nd, 2012 at 9:22 am
.
An alcoholic walks into a bar and orders a drink. The bartender tells the lush he needs to see some id. The lush tells the bartender he doesn’t have an id, and he doesn’t need one to prove that he exists. He tells the bartender “I drink, therefore I am.” The bartender kicks the lush’s ass out on the curb, and the lush heads to the next bar.
.
October 2nd, 2012 at 9:24 am
I think it is very interesting to compare Britain and Japan, both islands off the continental land mass, both with cultural continuity beginning with hunter gatherers, both with long periods of violent strife, as rival groups fought to dominate, and so forth. A lot that is similar, whilst lots that is extraordinarily different…. wonderful cultural samples from opposite sides of the world, to tell us something about human nature…
October 2nd, 2012 at 9:27 am
Librarian,
Japan also qualifies [as a country with no oxygen to support protest], because their entire culture revolves around maintaining “harmony” at all costs.
There is some truth to this, though “at all costs” is hyperbole. Maintenance of harmony IS important to the Japanese, though. This is largely (though not exclusively) a consequence of their psychology, which is grounded in Buddhism and Shinto, religions that explicitly deny the reality of an independent self, in favor of the view that everything is intimately connected to everything else.
To even HAVE grievances, to the Japanese, is to not be demonstrating sufficient fighting spirit or “hope”.
Partly true. Japanese have plenty of grievances, but the importance of harmony means you have to put serious thought into the nature of your grievance, and how serious it is, before deciding whether or not to air it publicly. This can lead to problems, of course, when serious grievances that need to be heard do not get aired.
Still, if you DO step forward in Japan, and are tenacious (“have fighting spirit”) it is still possible to get a reasonable fair hearing and a redress of grievance.
Have you ever actually watched their “anime” or read their “manga?” It’s always the same goddamn plotline: the villain always turns out to be a “well-intentioned extremist” who tries to solve problems in the world but is corrupted by his own “bitterness” or “hatred.” For not being sufficiently pure, the “heroes” then have to defeat him, because his intentions always go too far and he always wants to “destroy the world”.
Then, cue ending hopeful message about how we CAN change our futures, or there IS good in the world, ending credits, happy ending (or semi-happy ending, if it ends with the heroes cheerfully accepting injustice), la la la la la la!
Sure, and not particularly surprising. Japanese on the whole reject the idea that sentient beings, human and non-human, are fundamentally selfish and corrupt by nature. Noone is born evil, though you can become evil through abuse, or improper training, or lack of discipline, etc. To the Japanese, everyone is born straight, and while you may become twisted by circumstances, you can also become untwisted by counter-circumstances. Putting it another way, in Japan, there is noone so twisted that they cannot be made straight again, and broken harmony restored. This outlook is completely different than that of Americans, whose view is very much in accord with that expressed by Immanuel Kant: “From such crooked wood as that which man is made of, nothing straight can be fashioned.”
As you have correctly observed, the Japanese perspective expresses itself very clearly in art forms like manga and anime. And it does likewise in the comparable American forms. In American anime and manga, BOTH the villians AND the heroes are made of the same crooked wood, and only random chance makes one a “hero” and the other a “villian”. Batman is the Joker, and the Joker is Batman.
The U.S. isn’t alone, it’s just that in the U.S. you are AGGRESSIVELY crushed, while in Japan, you are PASSIVE-AGGRESSIVELY crushed under the weight of smiles and hopeful messages.
Japan does need to seriously reflect on much that is wrong about the internal operation of its society. But it also has a lot to proud of. In many ways, it is light-years ahead of American society.
October 2nd, 2012 at 9:29 am
ulvfugl
You wrote:
“….Ozman touched on this earlier, as if there was some sort of pre-ordained fate that we had no option but to get into this mess, contemplating our extinction.”
I would like to clarify this earlier offering.
I was not posing that we had a preordained anything, fate destiny whatever.
My point was I thought clear.
We got here from there. Yes you have just pointed out many groups of people have loved thier bit of the biosphere, and kept some populations within limits, but a greater cycle of ego has take precedence over all that earlier adaptation.
The key is what is unconscious in our selves. It will manifest, and is doing so. The idea we got here from there is just to posit that there is no earlier stage of human incarnation that was better adapted to the world. We are just what we are.
As I posted, Hunter Gatherers were our previous ancestors, and that way of life has given way to this.
I am proposing that an unenlightened group of Hunter Gatherers, by and large, do far less ecological damage than a group of unenlightened industrial age capitalists/contractors. Not because they are necessarily better, but because they simply cant.
On Easter Island they managed to destroy all the trees, and that was a game changer for their way of life, but only because of the restrictions of the island range.
The ordinary destiny of ‘mankind’ is death. That is what the character Anton Chigurh, the Assassin, I mentioned, is talking about broardly. He is asking a spiritual question, and because he represents Death in the novel, he has a legitimate right to ask. I at the first reading took his question to be pointed at players in the oil/drug/military covert world, but now I hear it more broardly to humanity.
“If the rule you followed, brought you to this, of what use was the rule?”
So death is asking us to considder that how we have lived has not solved the most fundamental terror in our lives, mortality.
The only way to beat death is to die consciously, which means to self realise. Not a head trip, nor an illusion, self realisation is the antidote to the considderation of mortality. And it is not engaged because of fear, but because of what is arising when fear subsides.
We are headed for this very difficult and devastating period, because we are living out the ordinary life expectation. Death.
Does anyone without servere pain and suffering want to die? Mostly we do not. But accepting we will die some day is not enough to shake the tree to its roots.
Something like hearing Sarah Conner shouting “Were all Dead” gets some attention, but actually spending time reflecting on the absolute certainty you are going to die is a life changing event.
We are headed for the extinction protocal only because death is the common fate of mankind. Self realisation is the extrordinary fate of Mankind.
Anton Chigurh is just giving us the heads up before we go.
October 2nd, 2012 at 9:35 am
A lot of the history of Britain is reflected in the English language. Germanic from the Saxons, Nordic from the Vikings, Latin from the Roman occupation, French from the Normans, and even a pinch of Indian from the British Raj. And now even a substantial population of the flotsam and jetsam of the Empire.
October 2nd, 2012 at 9:39 am
“This outlook is completely different than that of Americans, whose view is very much in accord with that expressed by Immanuel Kant: “From such crooked wood as that which man is made of, nothing straight can be fashioned.””
Isn’t the root of that far more ancient, Arthur ? Christian doctrine of Original Sin, we are all born sinners, fallen beings, and from which fate only Christian redemption can save us ?
Which can again be traced right back to Zarathustra, who is the first known thinker to have divided the world up into good and evil.
October 2nd, 2012 at 9:48 am
Robin : A lot of the history of Britain is reflected in the English language. Germanic from the Saxons, Nordic from the Vikings, Latin from the Roman occupation, French from the Normans, and even a pinch of Indian from the British Raj. And now even a substantial population of the flotsam and jetsam of the Empire.
Yes, indeed. And a lot of Japanese culture came across from China and Korea.
You forgot the pre-Roman celtic languages, Welsh, Irish, Cornish, Manx, which have close connections to Indo-European diaspora… India and Iran and elsewhere…
For example Punjab, five rivers, in welsh, five, pump, estuary, out-flowing, aber… there are very many similar examples, although as yet no complete agreement on the origin…
My favourite is the bird, red kite, in Welsh, Barcud, in Iranian, Barqut.
October 2nd, 2012 at 9:53 am
As I posted, Hunter Gatherers were our previous ancestors, and that way of life has given way to this.
Not quite sure whether we are agreeing or disagreeing on this, Ozman.
Surely the question is, why did some hunter gatherers remain content for scores of thousands of years, whilst others, elsewhere, developed a culture which eventually produced the destruction of us all ?
Something happened at Gobekli Tepe and at Sumer, which changed our fate.
October 2nd, 2012 at 10:16 am
.
Back to the thread topic, I found this site that has provided a counter to Dane’s points in his article. There’s some convincing rebuttal. For example:
http://metabunk.org/threads/615-Debunked-Dane-Wigington-s-10-quot-bullet-quot-points-regarding-geoengineering
Thus, it is shown that Wigington has only determined perfectly ordinary levels of aluminum in rain, and has never determined any quantification of bioavailability at all.
Of interest here is the fact that the organization to which Dane Wigington belongs actually suggests consuming aluminum oxide on a daily basis.
They know.
They know that aluminum oxide is a harmless substance.
But what of his claim that Monsanto is “engaged in the production of “aluminum resistant” seeds”?
Aluminum resistant seeds are indeed being developed, because many tropical soils are low enough in ph for the natural aluminum found in those soils to become soluble.
However, Monsanto is not engaged in producing such seeds, no seed company is offering such seeds, and the only patent for such seeds is held by the Brazilian and US governments, not by Monsanto.
.
October 2nd, 2012 at 10:21 am
.
As you have correctly observed, the Japanese perspective expresses itself very clearly in art forms like manga and anime.
But isn’t this a bit too simplistic? Would it be accurate to say that the American perspective expresses itself clearly in Rap and Hip Hop? It seems to me that when attempting to describe other cultures, there’s a tendency to view it monolithically.
.
October 2nd, 2012 at 11:42 am
Morocco Bama,
But isn’t this [clear expression of cultural perspective in art] a bit too simplistic? Would it be accurate to say that the American perspective expresses itself clearly in Rap and Hip Hop? It seems to me that when attempting to describe other cultures, there’s a tendency to view it monolithically.
It is simplistic, as most things forcefully stated are. Japanese manga and anime are not exclusively one form. For Americans, whose tastes often involve…darker subjects, the appropriate materials are no doubt available and can be provided. Even so, broader cultural themes and assumptions very often can be observed in the arts, specific to the particular culture.
FWIW, I do think that the American perspective: “From such crooked wood as that which man is made of, nothing straight can be fashioned”, does clearly express itself in much of American Rap and Hip Hop. Those art forms are very much “in your face” about it. Of course, Rap and Hip Hop are more than that, but there’s no doubt that that broad, and very American, jaded and cynical perspective on the world is there. In one way or another, we’re all part of the Hip Hop Nation now, eh?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VqjB_31IQKA
October 2nd, 2012 at 12:03 pm
.
This book looks like a good read about the System in Japan. I’m not sure it’s all that much better, Arthur. There’s much evidence to prove otherwise. You’re going to have to mark the Japanese off the list of the Starship Initiative. If we keep this up, that Ark won’t have any Human passengers.
http://www.amazon.com/Enigma-Japanese-Power-Politics-Stateless/dp/0679728023
I found this review interesting:
Van Wolferen does an excellent job of exploring the basis of power in Japanese society. As you read the book, you’ll learn that Japanese power is a very collective and amorphous thing. There is no one person or one group in charge of everything. There is no strong political leader, such as America has in its president. Power flows almost like water.
Another interesting thing that Van Wolferen covers in his book is that the way that Japanese people are today is not due to culture. The Japanese character has been molded by political decisions made in the past. It’s interesting to see how he comes at this idea. Read the book and check it out for yourself.
.
October 2nd, 2012 at 12:13 pm
To Timothy Scott Bennett:
I can see that I misunderstood the intent of your words, and I do apologize for that. I am also a newbie here, and I have not previously “hashed out” any topics with anyone here. My attitude toward you is cordial. I will watch your film “What A Way To Go – Life at the end of Empire.”
The data from the earth’s paleoclimate shows that life (including mammals) thrived in abundance during periods of high CO2 and high temperatures; therefore I cannot see an increase of atmospheric CO2 to 2,000 ppm, or an increase of global temperatures of 6 degrees Celsius, as a catastrophic threat.
Speaking of “denial,” the advocates of the CO2-caused Climate Change theory almost never mention the evidence from paleoclimatology in their alarmist reports and predictions of a fast-approaching CO2-caused catastrophe. I suggest that the reason they avoid discussing the evidence from paleoclimatology is because much of that evidence profoundly contradicts their theory. Instead, the advocates of the CO2-caused Climate Change theory present data from the past few hundred years (which is not a sufficient time frame on which to construct a climate theory) and computer models based on cherry-picked data (which was admitted in the Climategate emails).
Certainly Depleted Uranium, nuclear waste and fallout, various industrial pollutants, and population overshoot are threats to the environment. CO2 has been falsely identified as the most serious threat to the environment, with the potential to cause a Sixth Extinction. Yet it has not been proved that CO2 caused any previous extinctions.
Some prominent advocates of the CO2-caused Climate Change theory are promoting nuclear energy as a “green alternative” to CO2-producing fossil fuel and biomass-burning power plants. Some also recommend massive aerosol spraying of sulfer compounds in the stratosphere to increase albedo and mitigate the putative CO2-caused Global Warming. These are very dangerous solutions for a problem that probably does not exist.
Most people are not aware that the Arctic polar bear population has increased from less than 10,000 during the 1960s to about 20,000 to 25,000 today. The increase in the polar bear population has been reported by the international agencies that count polar bears, but the Mainstream Media and many environmentalist NGOs are promoting the myth of declining and endangered polar bears. See: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/no-decline-polar-bear-population and also: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/p-j-gladnick/2009/06/28/polar-bear-testimony-suppressed-due-inconvenient-truths
October 2nd, 2012 at 12:14 pm
.
Arthur, you’re going to have a hard time separating the wheat from the chaff in deciding who gets to go on the Starship. Afterall, we’re all Stardust. Sure, you can try to use culture to convince that there are differences, but are those differences large enough to warrant exclusion? Is that Dualism at play? Binary thinking? Come on, Arthur, why not take me…..All Of Me?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1ZSZUSrXc8&feature=related
.
October 2nd, 2012 at 12:18 pm
Morocco Bama,
Morris Berman blog may be what you’re thinking of RE: you recent reading about changes in Japan. It’s in his latest post.
October 2nd, 2012 at 12:19 pm
.
For Americans, whose tastes often involve…darker subjects, the appropriate materials are no doubt available and can be provided.
Like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__VQX2Xn7tI
Or are The Carpenters not part of American Culture and its artistic expression?
.
October 2nd, 2012 at 12:21 pm
.
I’ll take a look-see, goritsas. Thanks for the heads up.
.
October 2nd, 2012 at 1:11 pm
Due to the success of human survival technologies, the human population will tend toward overshoot, even when hunter-gatherer societies are the norm. The hunter-gatherer lifestyle often requires more land than the agricultural lifestyle, and in ancient times the problem of overcrowding was solved by migrations into unsettled territories. Some observers think that the extinctions of the megafauna at the end of the Ice Age 10,000 years ago stimulated the Neolithic shift to agriculture, animal husbandry, and towns in the Near East.
According to the UN, 50% of India’s population is undernourished. 50% of India’s land is arable (farmable), but there is only 11,000 square feet of farmland for each person in India. You can grow a lot of vegetables on 11,000 square feet, but it’s barely enough land to grow sufficient starches and proteins for an adult. By forty years from now, India’s population is expected to double, and there will be only 5,500 square feet of arable land for each person. Human infringement on wildlife preserves is a problem which may become worse due to population overshoot. Without restrictions placed on population growth, it is inevitable that overpopulation will eventually result in a chronically overcrowded and underfed human society.
October 2nd, 2012 at 1:26 pm
Another sobering thought: since 50% of India’s land is arable, and there is only 11,000 square feet of arable land per person, that leaves only 11,000 square feet of non-arable land per person. That includes all non-agricultural land — National Parks, cities and towns, roadways, deserts, and steep, rocky hill country. One person for every 22,000 square feet (half an acre) of land. The word “saturation” comes to mind.
October 2nd, 2012 at 1:34 pm
M.O. says: “…if an aerosol spraying program were in effect, and it was being done with separate nozzles, it doesn’t hold that the spraying would be evidenced by contrails.”
Correct.
The conspiracists call any contrails they observe “chemtrails.”
Then they back-pedal and say that the chemicals aren’t in the fuel or in the contrails, but are being sprayed by “separate nozzles” (that wouldn’t necessarily be observed as contrails.)
Within 2 seconds, they’ll abandon what they just said, point up to the sky, and again call a contrail a “chemtrail.”
So much for keeping even a modicum of internal logic.
I have yet to meet a fellow Airline Transport Pilot who has found the mystical “nozzles” and tanks of chemicals to spray on their jet during a pre-flight inspection. And unless those mysterious chemicals are weightless, their addition on the aircraft would have to be known to the pilots, as gross take off weight is a considerable safety concern, and so is the location of that weight when calculating weight-and-balance.
If there is indeed any deliberate geo-engineering, the pilots would be WELL AWARE of the weight of chemicals carried at take-off, and calculate the change in weight-and-balance in the air as weight is dumped.
I’ve been in aviation for decades, and have heard the weirdest stories of freaky stuff being flown into Af-Pak-raq-rica and nuclear drill mistakes and tanker crews and seeding for rain and spraying for insects, but never ever seen hide nor hair of any chemical spraying at Flight Level altitudes (Class A airspace) where contrails are most often generated. That’s not to say geo-engineering couldn’t be happening in some secret program…
…but don’t call every contrail in the sky a “chemtrail.” I guarantee that isn’t true.
I lament that an effective environmental voice like Guy McPherson’s has got involved in a conspiracy theory below the intellectual level of the Kentucky creation museum.
October 2nd, 2012 at 1:41 pm
Ivy Mike, if you’re calling mine an effective voice for environmentalism, you’re ignoring the 200 species driven to extinction every day, the fouling of the air and despoiling of the water, the erosion of the world’s soil into the world’s oceans, the ongoing and accelerating climate change, human-population overshoot, and many other components of environmental collapse. If the state of the world indicates effectiveness on my part, I’m certainly glad I haven’t failed. And, by the way, I’m agnostic about the topic of this essay.
October 2nd, 2012 at 1:47 pm
Morocco Bama,
Or are The Carpenters not part of American Culture and its artistic expression?
They are. From a very experimental time in American history, when Americans were seriously considering the option of taking a fundamentally different cultural path. But the traditional meme, the traditional American way of looking at the world, succinctly expressed by the I.K. quote, could not be shaken off. Instead of passing into history, it reasserted itself with a vengeance and a ferocity that has now brought America to this place.
And so the Carpenters, in fact, that passed into history. And a way of life that might have been, but wasn’t. In its place:
There’s a hole in the world like a great black pit
and the vermin of the world inhabit it
and its morals aren’t worth what a pin can spit
and it goes by the name of America…
At the top of the hole sit the privileged few
Making mock of the vermin in the lonely zoo
turning beauty to filth and greed…
I too have sailed the world and seen its wonders,
for the cruelty of men is as wondrous as Peru
but there’s no place like America!
And the Carpenters, sir? What happened to them?
Ah, that was many years ago…
I doubt if anyone would know.
October 2nd, 2012 at 1:58 pm
@”USA/NATO/Israel Axis of Evil”:
Could you stop parroting denialist lies long ago debunked?
Climate myths: CO2 isn’t the most important greenhouse gas
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11652
Climate myths: Polar bear numbers are increasing
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11656
October 2nd, 2012 at 2:12 pm
@Guy McPherson, re: “effective voice for environmentalism”:
I meant my remark as a compliment to you, even if you’re correct that nothing much seems effective to stop the juggernaut of the Sixth Great Extinction, which will probably swallow up us humans as well.
Ouroboros finally consumes itself.
I appreciate your open-mindedness in allowing different voices (such as chemtrail conspiricists) onto your blog, but on the other hand, I hope you don’t include tomorrow a conservative fundamentalist who says destroying the earth is ok because “it’s all gonna burn anyway.”
Although, tragically, that might be one of their vaunted prophecies that turn out to be true.
October 2nd, 2012 at 2:39 pm
Morocco Bama,
Arthur, you’re going to have a hard time separating the wheat from the chaff in deciding who gets to go on the Starship. Afterall, we’re all Stardust. Sure, you can try to use culture to convince that there are differences, but are those differences large enough to warrant exclusion? Is that Dualism at play? Binary thinking? Come on, Arthur, why not take me…..All Of Me?
Tell you what. I might be able to do something for you and this woman:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WA4iX5D9Z64
I can’t promise anything. I don’t know, maybe the two of you can be stowaways in one of the cargo bays in the lower decks…
October 2nd, 2012 at 3:10 pm
Ivy Mike,
I hope you [Guy] don’t include tomorrow a conservative fundamentalist who says destroying the earth is ok because “it’s all gonna burn anyway.”
Although, tragically, that might be one of their vaunted prophecies that turn out to be true.
“But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.”–2 Peter 3:10
This Christian prophecy from the New Testament is a perfect description of what will happen to Earth if catastrophic climate change initiates the Venus Syndrome.
Hmmm. You don’t think…? Nah. It can’t be.
October 2nd, 2012 at 3:38 pm
@Arthur Johnson, re: biblical prophecy:
My take on the Bible parallels Thomas Jefferson’s view: the Bible is mostly a pile of immoral bullshit. Or more circumspectly, a “dunghill,” as Jefferson described it in a letter to John Adams, January 24, 1814.
Christian abhorrence of Nature, as exemplified by the “its all gonna burn anyway” teaching, is responsible for the destruction of the mother earth.
As Lynn White wrote, “we shall continue to have a worsening ecologic crisis until we reject the Christian axiom that nature has no reason for existence save to serve man.”
________
White, Lynn, Jr. (March 10, 1967). “The Historical Roots of Our Ecologic Crisis.” Science. Vol 155, No. 3767, pp 1203–1207. DOI: 10.1126/science.155.3767.1203
October 2nd, 2012 at 3:39 pm
Thanks to MB for finding the Metabunk.org rebuttal.
October 2nd, 2012 at 4:00 pm
Barry Commoner, RIP.
http://www.nytimes.com/video/2012/10/01/us/1194834005471/last-word-barry-commoner.html
October 2nd, 2012 at 4:03 pm
Ozman, thanks for your kind words. Your comment about how we Civilized™ have not solved “the fundamental terror of our lives, mortality” aligns with my own observations. Well put. I have been contemplating death – my own and my species’ – and the cultural fear of, and longing for, death for a long time and in a variety of ways. It has changed me. “We are the dead.” -Winston Smith and David Bowie.
Re existence, something, nothing, natural laws, etc, I’m have long found the holographic model of the universe to resonate most fully with my experience and my internal truthsense. In that model, much is possible that seems impossible in the standard materialist paradigm. All assumptions get picked up, looked at, questioned, and assessed. If there truly are NO SOLUTIONS (and I see that this is so – ulvfugl, your list resonates as accurate.), I choose to spend my last year (in the fatal diagnosis metaphor) questioning every single thing the dominant mainstream culture has ever told me, in a search for possible new ways to see reality, and to learn from our collective experience. I don’t know if that will Help™ in any way. I do know that I’m having a blast.
ulvfugl – “Something happened at Gobleki Tepe and at Sumer, which changed our fate.” Yes!
General question: for the “old timers” here, is this thread typical of a comment discussion for an NBL post? Atypical? Stupid question? I see how participation in a forum such as this could work for me, now, as training for my own spiritual growth, if I let it. Already, I note that my earlier comment came out of being triggered, and that, in my defensiveness, I overstated the case for what I actually experience and think. Putting oneself in the presence of others who call bullshit is a great way to hone skills.
Also, how do you include italicized portions of previous comments in a response? I haven’t figured that out yet.
USA/… I’m glad I found words that better expressed myself. Apologies for not doing that the first time. Glad to be cordial. Re your comments, I resonate with MB’s response above. I accept the anthropogenic/GHG-driven nature of climate change, but try to keep my door open to revision when convincing new data and analysis comes my way. I’ve spent some time with various “hoax” or “denial” claims, trying to understand them, looking for what truth there is in them, and then finding rebuttals to them. So far, the rebuttals to the “hoax” arguments have felt far more convincing. I do see much hoaxing in our world, much disinformation and distraction, much conspiracy, much that is hidden and deliberately distorted. It has just never made much sense to me that AGW is one of those hoaxes, for a number of reasons.. If you have a few really good links that support your claims, I’ll be happy to look at them, but my expectation is that I will find their claims quite well rebutted. If not, then I’ll be surprised. I can handle that. Pax. T
October 2nd, 2012 at 4:06 pm
As climate change continues to accelerate, geoengineering proposals get wilder and wilder. There’s a certain sense of real desperation in this one:
http://news.yahoo.com/scientists-propose-asteroid-dust-shield-combat-global-warming-165900660.html
October 2nd, 2012 at 4:37 pm
.
Holy Shit, Arthur! Hey, I have a better idea. Why don’t we throw a couple of nukes into the Yellowstone Caldera….that ought to do the trick, don’t you think? I mean, what could go wrong, right?
.
October 2nd, 2012 at 4:52 pm
Hi Timothy Scott Bennett
Also, how do you include italicized portions of previous comments in a response? I haven’t figured that out yet.
Precede quote with this , end quote with
October 2nd, 2012 at 4:54 pm
Haha, sorry about that, my attempt to demonstrate the html became invisible… not so clever after all… how does one make html visible ?
October 2nd, 2012 at 5:03 pm
Try again < em > quote here < /em >
October 2nd, 2012 at 5:18 pm
Hi Ivy Mike,
Thanks for the reminder of Lynn White, 0nline here
It all seems quite simple to me. Humans were produced by natural evolution. Then they got big brains, language, and culture, which meant they could pass information, stories, from one generation to the next. That was a recipe for great success.
However, culture can be almost anything, the scope is vast. Unfortunately, we ended up with a malignant culture which will cause our demise and extinction.
There were three major deadly strands. First, the Judaeo-Christian Biblical influence, which puts the Creator faraway in some imaginary domain, whilst the Creation is just a de-sanctified resource over which people have entitled dominion, ‘go forth and mutliply’.
The second deadly strand was Enlightenment materialist science, Descartes, where the world is seen as de-vitalised inert ‘stuff’, which can be manipulated in any way we wish, regardless of consequences.
Both these strands mean that people have no respect for the Earth, it’s just a useful place where we can find whatever we want and treat it in any way we want.
Third deadly strand is capitalism, which is basically a philosophy which says ‘Grab whatever you can for yourself, disregarding the effect on anything or anyone else’, so all compete against all, in a headlong rush into final oblivion.
Join those three strands into one combined dominant cultural dynamic, and the result is death of most of life on Earth. Extinction.
It could easily have been very different. It was not ordained or fated that it should be so. But the most ignorant, the deluded, the most greedy, the most ruthless, they prevailed and won the culture wars. And now we get the result. Everyone loses. Most of life on Earth dies out, to be replaced in a few million years, maybe 10 or 20, with some new flourishing forms unlike anything around today.
That’s the story of ‘us’, in a nutshell. A flash in the pan, relative to geological time. Morally and ethically, a disgusting shameful disgrace, of which I want no part. But there you go.
Like I said above, there’s a handful of people on the internet who have grasped what I have outlined here. The rest will eventually catch on, but as usual, it will by then be far too late.
I feel like the guy who says ‘Fire !’ in the proverbial crowded theatre, and everybody thinks it’s a joke or a hoax or part of the show… well, I can see the flames, and I’ll be out of here…. as for the rest of you, well, it’s your problem, deal with it in whatever way you can….
October 2nd, 2012 at 5:39 pm
To Ivy Mike:
The two New Scientist links you posted aren’t working — “web site unavailable.” I’ll try them again later.
I don’t parrot anyone; I do my own research.
IQALUIT September 17, 2007 – Climate change is not hurting polar bear populations in the Davis Strait area of Nunavut, according to Dr. Mitch Taylor, manager of wildlife research and a polar bear biologist with the GN’s Department of Environment. In fact, polar bear populations along the Davis Strait are healthy and their numbers increasing, an ongoing study is indicating. Canada has two thirds of the world’s polar bears. Nunavut is home to 12 of Canada’s 13 polar bear populations, totalling an estimated 14,780. http://www.nnsl.com/northern-news-services/stories/papers/sep17_07bear.html
October 2nd, 2012 at 5:40 pm
USA/NATO/Israel Axis of Evil
The data from the earth’s paleoclimate shows that life (including mammals) thrived in abundance during periods of high CO2 and high temperatures; therefore I cannot see an increase of atmospheric CO2 to 2,000 ppm, or an increase of global temperatures of 6 degrees Celsius, as a catastrophic threat.
The only counter to this I’ve read is that due to the higher output of the sun at present, levels of CO2 that did not cause runaway greenhouse in the past will now.
Does high levels of CO2 in the past contradict the warming effect of CO2?
Timothy Scott Bennett
Also, how do you include italicized portions of previous comments in a response? I haven’t figured that out yet.
HTML italics tag
October 2nd, 2012 at 5:59 pm
@ USA/NATO/Israel Axis of Evil:
Oh, Forbes magazine and the Koch-Exxon axis of climate denial are all parroting your personal research. Gotcha! (My apologies.)
Anyway, researcher, you have your “facts wrong” about the polar bear numbers.
New Polar Bear Counting Method Creates Confusion
By John R. Platt | May 10, 2012
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/extinction-countdown/2012/05/10/new-polar-bear-counting-method-creates-confusion/
October 2nd, 2012 at 6:00 pm
USA/NATO/Israel Axis of Evil : “I don’t parrot anyone; I do my own research.”
Yes, well, it seems your research has lead you into major misconceptions. Most of what you have said is wildly erroneous, and as Ivy Mike pointed out, has been repeatedly debunked and shown to be nonsense.
Your claim that climate scientists have not looked at the palaeo climate is simply a lie, they’ve been crawling all over it for many decades.
Your claim that because temperatures and CO2 levels were high in the past, they shouldn’t be a problem is naive kindergarten thinking.
It’s true that living things can adapt to incredibly harsh and demanding conditions, otherwise there would not be polar bears and Inuit. But that is entirely beside the point. It’s not the extreme conditions that matter, it’s the rate of change.
How long do you think it takes for an animal or plant to evolve to adapt to a new climate regime ? And it’s not just an individual species, it’s the whole ecology that allows a species to exist.
Re your ridiculous figure of 2000 ppm Co2, are you really so confident that you want to live to find out what that will be like ? Your children and grand children ?
http://www.sustainablewoodstock.co.uk/onetwo%20degrees%20summary.pdf
October 2nd, 2012 at 6:47 pm
@ulvfugl
Good analysis.
Ever the optimist, I still hold out a wee little bit of hope that near-term thermonuclear war over dwindling resources (or a dose of Abrahamic fratricide) will be “radiation therapy” enough to excise the tumorous growth of agricultural city-Statism (civilization) from Gaia before she dies.
Dr. Martin E. Hellman of Stanford University considers nuclear conflict “virtually inevitable” within this century.
Even so, come Lord Shiva.
October 2nd, 2012 at 6:49 pm
.
Arthur, can you find room for one more stowaway on the Starship? Since we were discussing anime, I think it only appropriate that you talk to the committee and make an exception for this person of fair skin. She’s made quite an effort, you must admit.
http://shine.yahoo.com/beauty/real-life-anime-girl-anastasiya-shpagina-8217-bizarre-172400323.html
.
October 2nd, 2012 at 9:22 pm
ulvfugl & Timothy Scott Bennett
Can I address this comment?
“Something happened at Gobleki Tepe and at Sumer, which changed our fate.”
My basic view on this is that humans have always been on the lookout for advantage, to themselves and their group. If a basic limit to that self advantage in H/G living is that all advantage is shared and yielded to the group, (a literal socialism in practice),it is simple to see how a limit is reached on the relations with the biosphere, population, use of local food and water sourses etc, which includes complex but nevertheless codified relations with neighbouring groups, or even a fine mythological lore and tradition on creation dynamics etc if inhabiting a region for a long period.
As I have previously characterised this relationship to the biosphere it is childish, or a childish adaptation. That may not suit some peoples sensibilities, but it is my view. Humans have become survival experts because we are masters of our own selves. At least in capacity, and it is this inner desire to survive beyond ordinary Darwinian selection, that is the sign of an adolescent phase of relationship to the Biosphere. This phase is what changed us in that period you refer to, and agriculture en masse is a sign that humans desired to leave behind the childlike relations with the biosphere.
To be clear ‘a childlike relations to the biosphere’ is characterised by being limited by the constraints of the surrounding supportive matrix, both biosphere and culture. The uptake of fire, as a self generated tool, was a major beginning on that path to the adolescent phase.
‘Control of fire by early humans’
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_of_fire_by_early_humans
“Evidence for the controlled use of fire by Homo erectus beginning some 400,000 years ago has wide scholarly support, while claims regarding earlier evidence are mostly dismissed as inconclusive or sketchy.”
Stone tool use also.
‘Stone tool’
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stone_tool
“The earliest known Oldowan tools yet found date from 2.6 million years ago, during the Lower Palaeolithic period, and have been uncovered at Gona in Ethiopia.[3] After this date, the Oldowan Industry subsequently spread throughout much of Africa, although archaeologists are currently unsure which Hominan species first developed them, with some speculating that it was Australopithecus garhi, and others believing that it was in fact Homo habilis.”
The fact that it took so long to accumulate these skills is testament to the struggle for that shift. Now humanity is dominated by the desires and destructive effects of that adolescent relationship to the biosphere. Utitarianism, exploitation and a lack of compassion for all beings, on the negative, but aggression to break boundaries, shake off conditioning and aspiration to live forever, that sounds like a positive. Inflected in a social and cultural dynamic for an extended time, this adolescent phase becomes delusional and destructive and morphs into a death wish.
‘Spiritual Sickness’
http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/spiritofthings/spiritual-sickness/2998984
“David Tacey: Yes, psyche is really a very big term. It can actually include the ego as part of itself. But psyche and that part of it which is often unconscious is often what tradition has called the soul or the spirit, and it’s very hard for the ego to live in close proximity with the soul or spirit because these parts of us are actually wanting
different things. The ego wants adaptation to the world, it wants development, it wants progress, it wants material well-being, and the soul of course wants something quite different, it wants us to adjust ourselves to forces which are beyond the ego.
And that kind of adjustment can be delayed or put off for quite a long period of time. There comes a period, however, when the delaying and the putting off can’t be tolerated by the psyche any longer. That’s what is referred to as the so-called midlife crisis. So that part of the personality was always there from the beginning, but in a sense the ego has a certain period of time to adjust itself and develop itself in the world. After that, then the soul or spirit actually has to have its way.
…I am more interested in a really how, for instance, denying our own spiritual life, our spiritual urges, can have a detrimental impact on the life of the psyche and the life of the body.
…I’ve been very influenced, going back further in time, by Aboriginal rites of passage and initiations, where the rites themselves can be quite difficult and almost traumatic.
And they are the ones that I think we could make a lot of use of, that knowledge coming out of, say, Aboriginal culture today because those rites of passage really did have an existential impact and really did turn young lives around.
…Coming back to your question about self-harm, which of course is on the rise in secular Australia and a lot of Australian schools are reporting a worrying trend towards self-harming, from my point of view, operating through the lens of what I call archetypal medicine, I would want to go back to where does this appear in the history of civilisation? Where does self-harming come in?
So, for instance, if you look at Aboriginal cultures, just before the initiation process when boys and girls…actually I’m not allowed to talk about girls because that is women’s business and being a man…so let me confine myself to men’s business…that just before the initiation process, often there is a laceration of the body. It’s referred to in anthropology as scarification, often across the chest or the arm,things put on the body similar to our popular concern for tattooing. And apparently what it symbolises is that the old self must die before the new self can be reborn. This is the actual thinking behind it. So the cutting means to cut across the old self, to somehow destroy it, to mutilate it in some kind of ritualistic way.
What you might say from a point to view of spirituality is that these people are crying out for a sense of meaning. They want to be inducted into something beyond themselves, they are beginning to find themselves disgusting, they are beginning to find their bodies intolerable because the soul, the theory goes, requires nourishment. You know, man does not live by bread alone but by every word that comes out of the mouth of God. So a lot of these young people are actually enacting in their pathology their desire to enter a meaningful world, and that kind of meaning isn’t available to them. So they just go on cutting, and some people go on self-harming right through their teenage years, right through their 20s and even beyond.
One of the great things about Aboriginal cultures, when they function properly, is that they confine adolescence to about five or six days. You go in as a boy or a girl and you come out as a man or a woman after the initiation. In secular culture you don’t know when you’ve become a man or when you’ve become a woman…
It may never happen for you. And so you go on with these adolescent
behaviours which couldn’t be tolerated in nomad cultures which were subsistent and had to be dependent on everybody being alert and participating in the needs of the tribe. Today with our society, yes, we’ve lost this framework for enabling people to graduate from being children to being adults.
…But in ancient cultures the elders aren’t wanting to inflict harm because they are wanting to inflict harm, they are wanting to do this to create a shock so that the old self can be put to ritual death. And often actually in the boys’ rituals in outback Australia they are actually put in shallow graves, and there is a smoking ceremony and there are sticks and leaves put…and the body painted white, which is the colour of death for Aboriginal cultures, which is why when the so-called white people arrived they thought they were spirits from another world because their skins were whiter than the native people of Australia. All these things contribute to this very powerful sense of having to terminate an existence based on the ego and to bring in a new
existence is based on ancestral wisdom. And yes, it is shocking.”
That death wish is the unconscious desire to have the psychological death to adulthood, or a real relationship in the universe. Most H/G groups had rituals to QUICKLY transition youth to adult status, by an authentic ordeal and crisis of thier place in the group and the biosphere.
World culture today relies on generating desire(advertising) and providing opportunities to satisfy that desire(products, services, wealth), all of which, beyond subsistance, is an enactment of adolescent spychology.
Generally speaking that transition from childhood to adolescence is going to happen. In early gropus there were always a few who matured and were informed by a more mature adaptation, as I said, the shamans and avatars. The socoal and political elders had some maturity and were in relations to this wizdom of shamans, and avatars. But the links can easily be broken, or disfunctional.
The path to growth brought humanity to where we are because it is in ourselves that we are motivated to self realise our own free and blissful nature.
Stuck in the adolescent illusions of hubris and desire, we have not had a legitimate active cultural mechanism to turn attention to ego sacrifice for some many thousands of years. Corruption has overcome all the world religions and ways, because each has been founded on particular errors of understanding. Having had no complete way to address the ego transcendence problem, humans have been prey to the wholesale comodification of desire, in all phases of its existance- generation, distribution and use, but as we know, none of that desire is ever quenchable ultimately, and materialism leaves no satisfaction of the heart.
Self realisation requires understanding, nothing more or less. To understand individuals must go through an ordeal to the point of crisis. The crisis is of understanding “who am I?”
I am not about to try to explain that, I am uninitiated into those mysteries, however, it does not invalidate a claim to point the way even if one is not there.
We are on the continuum of human being. That change referred to, variously described as occurring between 15000 and 10000 years ago, could possibly be just when densities of humans reached a saturtion for the carrying capacity of the land, and we were ready to ‘grow’. That is not something we could have avoided, IMO, and it is not a destiny in some spooky sense.
My argument is consistant with C.G.Jungs main thesis that individuation is the primal human impulse, beyond survival concerns. The Self emerges from the unconscious because it is the reality. The mechanism of the ego, the early adaptation to existance in a local fieldspace we call the body-mind, cannot accomodate that emergence, and like a shell of an egg must fall away for that to happen. The chick, when strong enough must do the work of pecking away the shell.
That emergence will not occur by itself, it must be a voluntary sacrifice of the illusion of the small world inside the shell.
That is why self realisation is considdered an act of ego sacrifice.
This world situation is not devoid of efforts to address the problems we face, and the rise of ecological groups, conservationists, etc is evidence many feel the loss of the biosphere, but equally we feel like we are on a runaway locomotive we cannot stop.
That is how it is in the early stages of trying to counter ego adaptation. A machine, that will only end in death.
BTW the ‘Terminator’ movie series is a very good dramatisation of the way the ego related to death. It brings up the child response, characterised by fear, that is the usual present condition of adaptation. Only the adolescent hero will attempt to fight back, against all odds, and the characters of John Connor, and his mother Sarah Connor, show the transition from child to adolescent, in the apparent struggle with Death.
John Connor’s solution to defeating ‘The Machines’ is never quite shown, but in a messiah like chronicle he is posited as the one that made the difference to humanity going extinct. It is IMO John Connor’s particular relation to technology, (like Anaken Skywalker’s in Star Wars), that positions him to fight back. He has been taught by his mother, who had to educate herself for the great task, by living with anyone who could teach her and John about machines, technology stratergy and weopons and warfare. (For Sarah that included a man from the future, thank dog for magical realism in cinema!)
Julian Assange, (and to a smaller extent Bradley Manning) represent the same relationship to technology having a bearing on defeating the machine- in Assanges case the world political oppression of developing countries by the dominant ones, by the use of military and covert power.
I have moved here into an analogy to popular fiction because I wish to describe how the Avatars operate. (in this particular respect the rest I cannot say).
The Avatars have investigated the Ego and Body-mind in the same way John Connor and Aniken Skywalker have of technology and machines. The Avatars know this process of ego and self. Therfore, thay are in a position to understand the limitations and perspective of the ego adaptation and POV.
Death is seen by the child personality as a threat, and the response is fear.
To the adolescent Death is also a threat, but the fear is given over to anger, and the response is defiance, rebellion and combat.
To the adult, Death is a friend, assisting transition from one phase to another, and the response is embrace and love.
The adult phase of life has a spectrum of understanding and it’s fruition is Self-realisation, but adults see, and respect wizdom and the evident realisation of others they encounter, from within their watershed, or from another.
The ultimate destiny of all is self transcendence, bliss and outshining love. The ordinary destiny of all is Death, suffering and forgetting.
We got here from there.
Having stated I was not going to write any more sermons, I may have tripped into that here, but it is not in the vein of ‘preaching’ just explaining a view. It won’t happen again, I promise.
October 3rd, 2012 at 1:00 am
Yes, well, it seems your research has lead you into major misconceptions.
Matthew 7:6
a search for possible new ways to see reality
To see reality is to be reality: to see God is to be God. The passage commonly translated from Hebrew about Moshe seeing G_d “face to face” also carries the meaning “face in face.
General question: for the “old timers” here, is this thread typical of a comment discussion for an NBL post? Atypical? Stupid question?
It is a taste of anarchy. Dr. McPherson practices agrarian anarchy, and promotes anarchy at t/his blog.
October 3rd, 2012 at 2:36 am
To Ivy Mike:
The article “New Polar Bear Counting Method Creates Confusion”,
to which you provided a link, simply describes the well-known difficulties that polar bear researchers have in tracking the bears. Those difficulties have not prevented the researchers from arriving at an estimated count of polar bears throughout the Arctic.
I have read the reports of scientists who count polar bears, and it is they who have said that the polar bears numbered about 5 to 10K in the 1960s, and 20 to 25K today. Those figures were provided by the U.S. Geological Survey, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the IUCN Species Survival Commission’s Polar Bear Specialist Group.
On February 10, 2009, the Polar Bear Specialist Group reported that “The total number of polar bears worldwide is estimated to be 20,000 – 25,000.” The PBSG is the authoritative source for information on the world’s polar bears, and one of IUCN/SSC’s more than 100 specialist groups that work to produce and to compile scientific knowledge about the world’s species and give independent scientific advice to decision-makers and management authorities. http://pbsg.npolar.no/en/status/
International Business Times, August 2, 2011. If you think statistics are a pointer towards the growth or decline of a species, it will be interesting to have a look at the estimates published in a 2008 report by U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. “The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service estimates that the polar bear population is currently at 20,000 to 25,000 bears, up from as low as 5,000-10,000 bears in the 1950s and 1960s. A 2002 U.S. Geological Survey of wildlife in the Arctic Refuge Coastal Plain noted that the polar bear populations ‘may now be near historic highs,’” it read. See: http://m.ibtimes.com/polar-bear-global-warming-extinction-climate-change-research-world-wide-fund-wwf-geological-survey-s-190805.html
The Globe and Mail, April 12, 2012. The number of bears along the western shore of Hudson Bay, believed to be among the most threatened bear subpopulations, stands at 1,013 and could be even higher, according to the results of an aerial survey released Wednesday by the Government of Nunavut. The study shows that “the bear population is not in crisis as people believed,” said Drikus Gissing, Nunavut’s director of wildlife management. “There is no doom and gloom.” He said the media in southern Canada has led people to believe polar bears are endangered. “They are not.” He added that there are about 15,000 polar bears across Canada’s Arctic. “That’s likely the highest [population level] there has ever been.” http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/healthy-polar-bear-count-confounds-doomsayers/article4099460/
ulfugl wrote: “It’s not the extreme conditions that matter, it’s the rate of change. How long do you think it takes for an animal or plant to evolve to adapt to a new climate regime? And it’s not just an individual species, it’s the whole ecology that allows a species to exist.”
In relatively recent geological times there have been several Glacial periods that began or ended quite abruptly, and some species did not survive the changes — such as the megafauna at the end of the last Ice Age. That is a natural process, and life goes on. During the past million years, much of Northern Europe has been covered by a rotating sequence of oak forest, arctic steppe, and continental glaciers. Sometimes that sequence was swift and harsh. Humans (including Neanderthals and Erectines) have survived numerous Ice Ages; we are very resilient as a species.
The notion that increased atmospheric CO2 can cause a Sixth Extinction is highly speculative, because it has never been proved that CO2 caused an Extinction in the past. Furthermore, all of the species living on earth today evolved under conditions of 2,000 ppm atmospheric CO2 and temperatures as high as 6 degrees Celsius above the global average of today.
The record of paleoclimatology shows that the earth is probably on the brink of entering the next Ice Age, as a result of the orbital cycles. Increased atmospheric CO2 will not be the cause of the next Ice Age; nor will increased atmospheric CO2 be able to prevent the next Ice Age.
Yorchichan wrote: “The only counter to this I’ve read is that due to the higher output of the sun at present, levels of CO2 that did not cause runaway greenhouse in the past will now.”
It’s estimated that early in earth’s history the sun was only 70% as intense as it is today. In 1972 Carl Sagan and George Mullen pointed out that evidence of liquid water from 3.8 billion years ago and hints of early life forms from 3.5 billion years ago were anomolous to the “faint young sun” situation. It is theorized that high levels of atmospheric methane, CO2, and sulfides may have caused a greenhouse effect that raised the earth’s temperature and supported the emergence and evolution of life. 500 million years ago, the atmospheric CO2 level was more than twenty times higher than it is today.
Cyanobacteria appeared about 3 billion years ago,and they began to oxegenate the atmosphere about 2.4 billion years ago. The oxegenation of the atmosphere accelerated about 450 million years ago, when plants conquered the land. The cyanobacteria and plants consumed and reduced the earth’s atmospheric CO2, and produced free oxygen, which enabled the proliferation of animals. The earth’s coal beds and oil deposits were created by plants that sequestered CO2, particularly during the Carboniferous Era.
The high levels of CO2 that were present in the earth’s early atmosphere have been greatly reduced by the photosynthetic process of the oceanic cyanobacteria and terrestrial plants. The earth’s oceans are also highly effective at sequestering CO2.
Since we have probably passed the summit of Peak Oil, the consumption of the remaining oil should produce an amount of CO2 roughly equivalent to that which has already been burned since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. However, there remain extensive coal beds which, if burned, will release much more CO2, as well as coal ash, unless effective methods of “scrubbing” the smoke are employed.
I’m not worried about CO2; I think that the earth’s carbon cycle can handle it without a climate catastrophe. What I see as a far greater concern is population overshoot, which will decimate both the environment and human civilization. Population overshoot can result not only in the collapse of civilization, but also in a chronic state of a
maximal human population enduring conditions of endemic starvation, malnutrition, deprivation, and environmental degradation, constantly beating their heads against the ceiling of their own numbers on an overpopulated planet.
October 3rd, 2012 at 2:55 am
@ Ulvfugl at 5:18
I would suggest that agriculture -> population growth -> violence against nature -> rinse and repeat preceeded the salvationist religions.
Gilgamesh waged war against the forests long before the Judeo-Christian form of social control was created, which codified ecocide.
BTW, the PIOMAS ice volume for September is out today. The exponential rate of ice loss continues. . . and appears on target for an essentially ice-free Arctic Ocean by either 2014 or 2015. We can congratulate ourselves for living this far through chaotic, non-linear complex dyanmical change of a complex system.
October 3rd, 2012 at 3:14 am
Hi Anthony,
Gilgamesh waged war against the forests long before the Judeo-Christian form of social control was created, which codified ecocide.
Interesting point. Yes. Probably the problem starts at Sumer, would you agree ? Obviously, there’s whole books devoted to this, so can’t be addressed very adequately in brief comments.
This paper went in my mental “oh shit” folder, because it made me realize that we are starting to lose control over the climate system. No matter what path we follow – even if we manage slightly negative emissions, i.e. artificially removing CO2 from the atmosphere – this model suggests we’ve got an extra 0.25°C in the pipeline due to permafrost. It doesn’t sound like much, but add that to the 0.8°C we’ve already seen, and take technological inertia into account (it’s simply not feasible to stop all emissions overnight), and we’re coming perilously close to the big nonlinearity (i.e. tipping point) that many argue is between 1.5 and 2°C. Take political inertia into account (most governments are nowhere near even creating a plan to reduce emissions), and we’ve long passed it.
Just because we’re probably going to miss the the first tipping point, though, doesn’t mean we should throw up our hands and give up. 2°C is bad, but 5°C is awful, and 10°C is unthinkable. The situation can always get worse if we let it, and how irresponsible would it be if we did?
http://climatesight.org/2012/10/02/permafrost-projections/
October 3rd, 2012 at 3:55 am
RE: record-setting September 2012 PIOMAS data
I find it singular that a culture whose widely beloved theological tenant is Hell has managed to create one on earth.
♫ What bliss will fill the ransomed souls,
When they in glory dwell,
To see the sinner as he rolls,
In quenchless flames of hell. ♪
~Isaac Watts (1674-1748), hymn writer
The view of the misery of the damned will double the ardour of the love and gratitude of the saints of heaven.
~Jonathan Edwards, “The Eternity of Hell Torments” (sermon), April 1739
How does that saying go:”Careful what you wish for?”
♪ It didn’t turn out quite the way you wanted it to, did it?
Now you know, this is what it feels like. ♫
~Nine Inch Nails, The Wretched
October 3rd, 2012 at 4:05 am
Hahaha, yes, Ivy Mike, we were given Heaven, here on Earth, as our birthright, but someone thought they could ‘improve’ it, and now we have turned it into a Hell of our own making… well, that’s one way of looking at it….
The Ultimate Fabric of the Universe is…. Nothing.
October 3rd, 2012 at 5:04 am
.
Ivy Mike, when you look back at some of the Cold War history and all the alleged close calls, I find it near impossible that the Fratricide of which you speak didn’t indeed take place. Perhaps it did, and this is one of the alternate possibilities per quantum theory. When that possibility path met its end, this one took over as our collective conscious. The process is seamless, so their is no recollection of any of the other possibility paths that are running concurrently. You never know.
.
October 3rd, 2012 at 5:45 am
The passage commonly translated from Hebrew about Moshe seeing G_d “face to face” …
Moshe? Very droll, Robin, very droll.
October 3rd, 2012 at 6:30 am
.
That Moshe meeting God story always cracked me up. I think God’s response to Moshe when Moshe asks God who how should refer to God to the Hebrew people, God replies “I am who am,” or something to that effect. Of course, this could be interpreted in many ways. One way, is that it is God being dismissive and essentially saying “listen you little twit, I ask the questions and I give the orders. I’ll let you know what you need to know when I think you need to know it, so shut up and listen.” Another interpretation is that God is whatever Human will make of it…meaning it’s fungible and based solely off perception, and as we know, perceptions aren’t static, and neither is the treatment of the identity of God. And of course, yet another interpretation is that God is being cagey and prefers not to be cornered. Moshe’s question is an attempt to corner and contain, and God’s too clever, obviously, to allow its creation to contain its progenitor. Also, if you think about it, Moshe and his fellow hairless apes couldn’t comprehend a more thorough explanation, even if one was forthcoming. Suppose God was one of the programmers who created the simulation and was doing a little tweaking early in the running of it. How would that explanation have been received by Moshe’s fellow Hebrews when he returned from the mountain. Mel Brooks could run a great skit off of that idea. Anyway , I love when Noah talks to God, especially this rendition.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlmIeH7DT_w
.
October 3rd, 2012 at 6:53 am
listen you little twit, I ask the questions
Not for nothing did Ruth Benedict classify the ancient Hebrew culture as paranoid. I once asked the I Ching, “Who are you?” The reply I received left me in no doubt of my presumptuousness.
October 3rd, 2012 at 6:57 am
Ivy Mike
One man’s story of hell.
“23 minutes in Hell”
http://spiritlessons.com/Documents/BillWiese_23MinutesinHell_Text.htm
“He (the Lord), said to me also, “Tell them I am coming very, very soon.” And He said it again, “Tell them I’m coming very, very soon.” Now I think, why didn’t I say to him, “What do you mean Lord? What’s ‘soon’ to you?” That’s how we think. But I didn’t ask. You just don’t think to ask those things then. You just want to worship Him so much. The peace of God that comes over you being next to Him is unexplainable. I’ve been in anointed services, but there is no comparison to the love and the peace of God you feel being next to Him.
And then I looked up and I saw those demons on the wall, that were so ferocious, they looked like ants on the wall! They just looked like ants! They were still big, but with the power of God next to you, all of God’s creative power, they looked like ants on the wall. I couldn’t get over it. I thought, “Lord they’re just ants!” And He said, “You just have to bind them and cast them out in my name.” I thought “boy, the power He’s given the church.” These things that were so ferocious, we were no match for a devil without Jesus, none. They’re ferocious, but with Him, they are nothing! A boldness rose up in me right then, when I saw these creatures I felt like saying, “you creatures were the ones torturing me, wanting to tear me apart? Come on! Come on now!” Maybe a little bit of my flesh rose up or something, you know, I thought, Jesus get ‘em.”
I once worked for a man who was very charismatic, and he’d once founded a new age centre in the 1960s and he use to keep this idea in his head that he was a great teacher, helping others. On the surface he definitely had something, he was dignified and extremely polite and socially very skilled, even warm and childlike when relaxed. Many seemed to buy this smooth exterior. I recall many discussions with co-workers about his constant criticisms, and also pitting one worker against another, creating competition. He would also use the excuse of having no extra money for things essential to some work processes, when all abot me I could see great wealth, spilling from many residences and studios and overseas trips etc.
In the particular creative fields we were working in he assumed all responsibility for the productions – when clients came we were to pick up brooms and clean and look busy. I never did, I had too much to actually do, but longer term employees knew the drill. However, none of the actual work was done by this guy. Such a Janus…eh I mean …shame.
One of the employees told me she heard a story that this man had visited Ashrams in India in the 1960′s, met Krishnamurti, and come back with the impression of having evolved beyond most others. Unknown to him a co-resident hippy minded dude at an Ashram had slipped a dose of some powerful psychdelic into his tea. He still doesn’t know to this day. Imagine…?
Perhaps Bill Wiese’ had a similar, but altogether bad, trip? And then was saved.
Expect more of these types to crawl out as the temp rises.
He he!
October 3rd, 2012 at 7:18 am
@ M. Bama, RE: “alternate possibilities”
I’m a bit more down to earth. The sci-fi woo-woo sounds just like the Xian heaven, and I think like Jefferson on that subject: “I am a materialist.”
“To talk of immaterial existences is to talk of nothings. To say that the human soul, angels, god, are immaterial, is to say they are nothings, or that there is no god, no angels, no soul. I cannot reason otherwise…” ~Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams, Aug. 15, 1820
And I concur with Derick Jensen when he writes the following in his book “Endgame:”
Premise Sixteen: The material world is primary. This does not mean that the spirit does not exist, nor that the material world is all there is. It means that spirit mixes with flesh. It means also that real world actions have real world consequences. It means we cannot rely on Jesus, Santa Claus, the Great Mother, or even the Easter Bunny to get us out of this mess. It means this mess really is a mess, and not just the movement of God’s eyebrows. It means we have to face this mess ourselves. It means that for the time we are here on Earth—whether or not we end up somewhere else after we die, and whether we are condemned or privileged to live here—the Earth is the point. It is primary. It is our home. It is everything. It is silly to think or act or be as though this world is not real and primary. It is silly and pathetic to not live our lives as though our lives are real.
_____________________
@ OzMan, RE: “Hell”
Hell is a pagan Nordic goddess inserted into the Bible—quite dishonestly—in place of things like the Valley of Gehenna by Jerusalem.
Hell, it’s a damned tourist attraction.
October 3rd, 2012 at 7:20 am
@ M. Bama, RE: “alternate possibilities”
I’m a bit more down to earth. The sci-fi woo-woo sounds just like the Xian heaven, and I think like Jefferson on that subject: “I am a materialist.”
“To talk of immaterial existences is to talk of nothings. To say that the human soul, angels, god, are immaterial, is to say they are nothings, or that there is no god, no angels, no soul. I cannot reason otherwise…” ~Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams, Aug. 15, 1820
And I concur with Derick Jensen when he writes the following in his book “Endgame:”
Premise Sixteen: The material world is primary. This does not mean that the spirit does not exist, nor that the material world is all there is. It means that spirit mixes with flesh. It means also that real world actions have real world consequences. It means we cannot rely on Jesus, Santa Claus, the Great Mother, or even the Easter Bunny to get us out of this mess. It means this mess really is a mess, and not just the movement of God’s eyebrows. It means we have to face this mess ourselves. It means that for the time we are here on Earth—whether or not we end up somewhere else after we die, and whether we are condemned or privileged to live here—the Earth is the point. It is primary. It is our home. It is everything. It is silly to think or act or be as though this world is not real and primary. It is silly and pathetic to not live our lives as though our lives are real.
October 3rd, 2012 at 7:20 am
@ OzMan, RE: “Hell”
Hell is a pagan Nordic goddess inserted into the Bible—quite dishonestly—in place of things like the Valley of Gehenna by Jerusalem.
Hell, it’s a damned tourist attraction.
October 3rd, 2012 at 8:32 am
Manufacturing Doubt
http://climatesight.org/2010/01/17/manufacturing-doubt/
This is how it is done.
“When their arguments are so similar, it should come as no surprise that most skeptics have ties to (conservative think tanks), CTTs. Many of the most prominent skeptics write books – S. Fred Singer has written at least eight books skeptical of climate change, and Patrick Michaels has written at least five (Amazon). In 2008, a survey was conducted of books skeptical of climate change or other environmental issues, and found that an incredible 92% of the authors were affiliated with a CTT (Jacques, Dunlap, and Freeman, 2008). Additionally, some of the authors had connections to more than one CTT. For example, S. Fred Singer has been a part of ten different CTTs throughout his career. Patrick Michaels has been part of two, and Richard Lindzen has been part of three (Greenpeace USA).
It is obvious that CTTs want “experts” on their staff, because they want to sound scientific and credible. Additionally, the CTTs are willing to pay generous sums of money for expertise with a convenient conclusion. In 2006, the American Enterprise Institute offered ten thousand dollars plus expenses to any scientist who wrote a critique of the IPCC (Hoggan and Littlemore, 2009). Sure enough, a handful of scientists responded, and with good reason – they wouldn’t get a ten-thousand-dollar bonus for publishing a regular old peer-reviewed study.
Another interesting fact about publicized skepticism is that it did not appear until governments started promising action on climate change – George HW Bush in 1988 (Hoggan and Littlemore, 2009), Margaret Thatcher in 1990 (Thatcher, 1990), and Brian Mulroney in 1992 (United Nations). In fact, 87% of the books from the Jacques, Dunlap, and Freeman survey were published in or before 1988. Those published before likely did not even mention climate change – many of their titles suggested skepticism about toxic chemicals, the environmental concern of the 1970s. Therefore, it is very easy to pinpoint a short period of years and political events that sparked mass PR coverage of skeptical viewpoints. This trigger provides yet more evidence that skeptics are publicizing their views not to further scientific knowledge, but to manufacture public doubt and delay action….
So, when skepticism started in response to political promises, where were its roots? Unsurprisingly, the manufacture of doubt started with fossil fuel companies. In 1991, the Western Fuel Association, the National Coal Association, and the Edison Electric Institute formed a PR coalition named, ironically, the Information Council on the Environment (ICE). ICE launched a major advertising campaign denouncing the idea of anthropogenic global warming. The campaign’s objective, in ICE’s own words, was “to reposition global warming as a theory (not fact)” and “to supply alternative facts that suggest global warming will be good” (Hoggan and Littlemore, 2009). These objectives are a blatant example of manufacturing doubt, because they are based on the ends, not the means. ICE chose a conclusion that was convenient for their industry, and cherry-picked “alternative facts” to support it.
Several years later, a leaked document from another fossil fuel company, the American Petroleum Institute, gave away the organization’s entire game plan. The document laid out an ideal scenario in which the media reflected climate change as an equal-sided, unsettled debate, citizens began to accept this framing, and public support for the Kyoto Protocol fell apart. To achieve this utopia, API planned to “produce, distribute via syndicate and directly to newspapers nationwide a steady stream of op-ed columns and letters to the editor authored by scientists” (Walker, 1998). By manipulating how the media framed climate change, API could push public opinion in a predetermined direction. This document shows that fossil fuel companies such as the API have stopped caring about science anymore, otherwise the objectives would be “to publish our latest discovery that invalidates global warming in a prestigious journal”. Rather, their efforts are focused on the media, the public, and policymakers. They are consistently promoting ends that don’t have means to support them.
Over the last decade, however, fossil fuels have gradually shifted away from creating their own propaganda, choosing to fund CTTs instead. ExxonMobil, for example, has spent $20 million since 1998 funding CTTs that express climate change skepticism (Hoggan and Littlemore, 2009)…
Additionally, since the skeptical view exploded following the near-action in the late 1980s, our society has spent 20 years without any significant plans for mitigation. The Kyoto Protocol failed in both Canada and the US. The Copenhagen summit did not lead to any politically binding targets. US President Barack Obama is finding it difficult to pass even the most meagre cap-and-trade legislation through the Senate, and the position of the Canadian government is to wait and see what the Americans do.
A democracy cannot function without an electorate that is accurately informed. We see an example of this scenario with regards to climate change legislation. Even though the scientific community is, essentially, as sure as it can get about the existence of human-caused climate change, the manufacture of doubt has prevented the public opinion from following suit, and prevented voters from demanding necessary political action. A well-funded campaign has led us astray from the ideals of democracy….”
Ah well, what else is a privatly owned media for?
October 3rd, 2012 at 9:29 am
.
Ivy Mike, in otherwords, what you’re saying is Sting is full of shit.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wtQvbA0WC4&feature=related
Doesn’t matter to me either way, but it’s interesting to imagine….I mean, since we have the ability to imagine, why not use it? Of course, I agree with you that some imaginations can be quite destructive….like this current imagined material world we’re living in…..it could very well lead to the end of imagination, and then what will there be? Maybe we should leave imagination where it resides….as a form of self-entertainment and distraction….the stuff for good art and Killing The Time. Perhaps the problems started when that imagination made its way from pastime to full time. Anyway, I’m glad to hear you’re not a Soul Man. We’ll see if you get the same treatment Kathy C received fro not being one. I’m not either, at least I think I’m not, but I do like to ponder and consider….it makes life more interesting…for me, at least.
.
October 3rd, 2012 at 9:33 am
.
Hell Is For Children
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MxYsi5Y-xOQ&feature=related
.
October 3rd, 2012 at 9:45 am
.
Ah, yes, the fine and upstanding Jefferson….and, I would say, often very misunderstood because he’s often quoted and taken out of historical context. Here’s Jefferson, Washington and their peers idea of Liberty…so those like Glenn Beck and the various Libertarians who like to sling the phrase “Founding Fathers” around would be advised to know just what the hell they’re talking about before they use it in their arguments.
Since I’m reading this book right now, it’s pertinent, and it validates what I have always suspected.
http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2007_09_16_archive.html
Albion’s Seed, Part II: The Cavaliers 1642-1675
The Cavalier Legacy: Hegemonic Liberty
Fischer quotes Dr. Samuel Johnson, pondering the Cavalier view of freedom. “How is it,” Dr. Johnson asked, “that we hear the loudest yelps for liberty among the drivers of negroes?” And, frankly, we’re still wondering: How did the descendants of these Royalist plantation owners, who among all the English settlers held on most stubbornly to their noble British roots, end up supplying so many of the revolutionaries that ultimately led America to independence?
Fischer has an answer. He argues that the Cavalier cry against tyranny expressed by Jefferson, Washington, and other Virginians wasn’t the least bit out of character. In fact, it came straight out of their essential conviction that free white men of property are the morally proper holders of all the rights and liberties that matter:
Virginian ideas of hegemonic liberty conceived of freedom mainly as the power to rule, and not to be overruled by others. Its opposite was “slavery,” a degradation into which true-born Britons descended when they lost their power to rule….It never occurred to most Virginia gentlemen that liberty belonged to everyone. It was thought to be the special birthright of free-born Englishmen — a property which set this “happy breed” apart from other mortals, and gave them a right to rule less fortunate people in the world….
One’s status in Virginia was defined by the liberties one possessed. Men of high estate were thought to have more liberties than others of lesser rank. Servants possessed few liberties; and slaves [and women] had none at all. This libertarian idea had nothing to do with equality. Many years later, John Randolph of Roanoke summarized his ancestral creed in a sentence: “I am an aristocrat,” he declared. “I love liberty; I hate equality.”
In Virginia, this idea of hegemonic liberty was thought to be entirely consistent with race slavery….The growth of race slavery in turn deepened the cultural significance of hegemonic liberty, for an Englishman’s rights became his rank, and set him apart from other less fortunate than himself. The world thus became a hierarchy in which people were ranked according to many degrees of unfreedom, and they received their rank by the operation of fortune, which played so large a role in the thinking of Virginians. At the same time, hegemony over others allowed them to enlarge the sphere of their own personal liberty, and to create the conditions within which their own special sort of libertarian consciousness flourished.
Edmund Burke made similar observations when describing this new Southern breed in Parliament:
A circumstance attending these colonies…makes the spirit of liberty still more high and haughty than in those to the northward. It is that, in Virginia and the Carolinas, they have a vast multitude of slaves. Where this is the case in any part of the world, those who are free are by far the most proud and jealous of their freedom…
I do not mean, Sir, to commend the superior morality of this sentiment, which has at least as much pride as virtue in it; but I cannot alter the nature of man. The fact is so; and these people of the southern colonies are much more strongly, and with a higher and more stubborn spirit, attached to liberty than those to the northward…In such a people, the haughtiness of domination combines with the spirit of freedom, fortifies it, and renders it invincible.”
Since Albion’s Seed was written 18 years ago, a lot of writers have drawn on it to explain events in modern America (a tradition I plan to continue, in due time). It’s notable that the overwhelming majority of them seized on Fischer’s dissection of the Scots-Irish Borderers, pointing out that the rednecks, white trash, holy rollers, crackers, and other assorted lower-class yahoos that supported Bush have been with us from the beginning — and been nothing but trouble from then to now.
In the rush to blame the Borderers, though, this section on the Cavaliers has been almost entirely ignored. Yet I found it to be at least as powerful in its explanatory power. Because, as Dr. Robert Altemeyer’s work makes clear, authoritarianism is always a two-part problem. While the Borderers may supply more than their fair share of right-wing authoritarian followers, they’d go nowhere without a high-social-dominance authoritarian leadership to guide them. And in Fischer’s description of the Cavaliers, we see the early American prototype of that high-SDO authoritarianism.
It’s all there: the love of luxury, the crony capitalism, the unabashed right to exploit others for what you can take, the love of hierarchy for its own sake, the tacit understanding that those who have more stuff also have more rights. Altemeyer’s description of the high-SDO leader — amoral, manipulative, intimidating, hedonistic, pitiless, exploitative, prejudiced, nationalistic, hostile to equality, religious only for outward appearances, and almost always politically conservative — fits Fischer’s portrait of the Cavalier gentleman like a fine Spanish kid glove on the hilt of a Sheffield dress sword.
.
October 3rd, 2012 at 10:07 am
Most of the time, there is not much to say about initiation ritual of girls in studied societies. It mostly centers around the men’s house in the center of the settlement of on the fringes or in the woods, and the way they are going to convince the women to continue to serve their interests, material and sexual. In one tribe, the women possess the material wealth (sheeps). The men regain that wealth in reselling them back their sons after initiation for all the “money” they have. If they do not pay, their sons are killed. In the outback of Australia, one group of wandering aborigenous people would approach a temporary settled group, the men in the wandering group wanting a woman for sex would stay up while all the others lie down. some men of the stationary group would then count them and choose which women would go to serve them. So many stories, that change every time they are told… I am done with this thread. see you later.
October 3rd, 2012 at 1:50 pm
http://despair.com/wishes.html
October 3rd, 2012 at 1:51 pm
http://despair.com/mercy.html
October 3rd, 2012 at 2:05 pm
David Suzuki on Rio+20, “Green Economy” & Why Planet’s Survival Requires Undoing Its Economic Model
http://www.democracynow.org/2012/6/25/david_suzuki_on_rio_20_green
A quote worth repeating:
“DAVID SUZUKI: Well, you know, the thing we hear over and over again is that we need a paradigm shift. It’s become a cliché. But I absolutely believe this is the critical change, that all of the stuff that goes on will not achieve anything unless we ultimately see the world in a different way. You see, our beliefs, our values shape the way we look out at the world and the way we treat it. If we believe that we were here, placed here by God, that this—all of this creation is for us, it’s for us to go and occupy, dominate and exploit, then we will proceed to do that. And that’s the paradigm we now exist within. And we’re driven then by that sense that it’s all there for us.
We need to shift that to a better understanding that we are part of a vast web of interconnected species, that it is the biosphere, the zone of air, water and land, where all life exists. It’s a very thin layer around the planet. Carl Sagan told us that if you shrink the earth to the size of a basketball, the biosphere, the zone of air, water and land, where all life exists, would be thinner than a layer of Saran Wrap, and that’s it. That’s our home, but it’s home to 10 to 30 thousand—30 million other species that keep the planet habitable. And if we don’t see that we are utterly embedded in the natural world and dependent on nature, not technology, not economics, not science—we’re dependent on Mother Nature for our very well-being and survival. If we don’t see that, then our priorities will continue to be driven by man-made constructs like national borders, economies, corporations, markets. Those are all human-created things. They shouldn’t dominate the way we live. It should be the biosphere.
And the leaders in that should be the indigenous people, who still have that sense, that the earth is truly our mother, that it gives birth to us. You don’t treat your mother the way we treat the planet or the biosphere today. If we don’t make that fundamental shift, then we’ll just go on: “Oh, we got to be more efficient. We got to have a green economy,” and all that stuff. But we haven’t fundamentally changed in our relationship with the biosphere.”
Yup!
October 3rd, 2012 at 2:09 pm
Re italics. Thanks and “Doh!” I know a few bits of html code. I just never remember that this is the place to use them.
Robin: Anarchy… great. Cool. Thanks. That’s framing I can abide by.
Ivy Mike: re seeing the possibility for nuclear war as “radiation therapy”… I though I was the only one who thought about such things. Thanks!
Pax…
October 3rd, 2012 at 2:57 pm
Morocco Bama,
Holy Shit, Arthur! Hey, I have a better [geoengineering] idea. Why don’t we throw a couple of nukes into the Yellowstone Caldera….that ought to do the trick, don’t you think? I mean, what could go wrong, right?
The blowback from that would look really cool, though.
Everyone’s making this geoengineering thing way more exotic and complex than it has to be.
Just paint the Arctic Ocean white (let him who has understanding take heed). It’s all spelled out in the Johnson Proposal.
October 3rd, 2012 at 3:15 pm
Morocco Bama,
Arthur, can you find room for one more stowaway on the Starship? Since we were discussing anime, I think it only appropriate that you talk to the committee and make an exception for this person of fair skin. She’s made quite an effort, you must admit.
http://shine.yahoo.com/beauty/real-life-anime-girl-anastasiya-shpagina-8217-bizarre-172400323.html
The transformation is quite impressive. No question about that. Hmmm.
October 3rd, 2012 at 3:39 pm
To OzMan:
“When their arguments are so similar, it should come as no surprise that most skeptics have ties to (conservative think tanks), CTTs.”
On the flip side, we could say that most CO2 alarmists have ties to neoliberal think tanks and leftist NGOs — but that would be untrue, just as the statement quoted above is untrue. The truth is that both sides of the CO2-caused climate debate are represented by people from all walks of life. Some of the CO2-skeptic bloggers that I am acquainted with are retired scientists who run their websites on their own time and on their own dime.
Many CO2 alarmists have ties to big business; for example:
New York Times, November 2, 2009.
Gore’s Dual Role: Advocate and Investor
The deal appeared to pay off in a big way last week, when the Energy Department announced $3.4 billion in smart grid grants. Of the total, more than $560 million went to utilities with which Silver Spring has contracts. Kleiner Perkins and its partners, including Mr. Gore, could recoup their investment many times over in coming years. Silver Spring Networks is a foot soldier in the global green energy revolution Mr. Gore hopes to lead. Few people have been as vocal about the urgency of global warming and the need to reinvent the way the world produces and consumes energy. And few have put as much money behind their advocacy as Mr. Gore and are as well positioned to profit from this green transformation, if and when it comes. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/business/energy-environment/03gore.html
December 17, 2008. David Suzuki Caught Lying About Corporate Donations
Actually, the David Suzuki Foundation’s annual report for 2005/2006 lists at least 52 corporate donors including: Bell Canada, Toyota, IBM, McGraw-Hill Ryerson, Microsoft, Scotia Capital, Warner Brothers, RBC, Canon and Bank of Montreal. The David Suzuki Foundation also received donations from EnCana Corporation, a world leader in natural gas production and oil sands development, ATCO Gas, Alberta’s principle distributor of natural gas, and a number of pension funds including the OPG (Ontario Power Generation) Employees’ and Pensioners’ Charity Trust. OPG is one of the largest suppliers of electricity in the world operating 5 fossil fuel-burning generation plants and 3 nuclear plants… http://suzukiwatch.wordpress.com/
David Suzuki has a huge carbon footprint. Suzuki has fathered five children, he owns several homes (one of which is a fly-in property), and he jet-sets with his family members all over the world.
October 3rd, 2012 at 5:54 pm
USA/NATO/Israel Axis of Evil : “The truth is that both sides of the CO2-caused climate debate are represented by people from all walks of life.”
That’s ‘truth’ ? My impression is that there is only one ‘side’, and that is the science and the scientists, who are unanimously freaking out about what they see happening.
What you are calling ‘the other side’, ( consciously or unconsciously following the propaganda strategy developed by Big Oil and Bog Coal, and corporate MSM, to spread disinformation to cause public confusion and delay ) has no reputable peer reviewed science to support it.
Sure, there’s a ragbag of nutters who feel compelled by a variety strange psychological and emotional needs to raise any number of arguments that have been repeatedly debunked, along with all the paid shills. The fact that you want to be associated with them is telling.
“The reasons for my reticence are multiple: writing about climate scepticism is a singularly depressing experience, simultaneously frustrating, futile, coarsening, and, worst of all, staggeringly boring. Frustrating, because you find yourself engaging with a school of thought that refuses to subscribe to normal rules of rational argument, has no qualms about embracing staggering illogical inconsistencies, and is committed to the use of discredited evidence to advance its cause. Futile, because you are arguing with a fundamentalist world view that will simply not correct its inherent flaws no matter how compelling the contrary evidence it is presented with. Coarsening, because with two sides of the climate “debate” that refuse to budge it inevitably leads to a degree of incivility on both sides; I have been accused of corruption, immorality, and, on one memorable occasion, treason for supporting climate science, and equally, whenever you engage with climate scepticism it is hard not to reveal that you regard your opponents as either intellectually or ethically bankrupt.
But worse than all of that, is the sheer boredom. Almost every discussion between environmentalists and climate sceptics follows a remarkably predictable and circuitous path that proceeds in ever decreasing circles until someone (usually me) gets bored and walks away.”
http://www.businessgreen.com/bg/james-blog/2214378/how-to-argue-with-climate-sceptics
October 3rd, 2012 at 6:03 pm
@ USA/NATO/Israel Axis of Evil
Do you get paid as a KOCHsucker, or do you just parrot “Ethical Oil” talking points for free?
October 3rd, 2012 at 6:36 pm
.
You know what I find hilarious? Someone who can rail against religion and yet still follow NFL Football as though it’s not a religion in its own right. Talk about hypocrisy. That’s high up there on the hypocrisy curve, imo.
Myself, I don’t care for either, and I see them both as arms of the same Octopus. How’s that for Gross Intolerance?
.
October 3rd, 2012 at 6:42 pm
.
USA/NATO/Israel Axis of Evil does raise one important point for those who care to look past their spittle. Of course, I think the point’s inadvertent, but he still alludes to it. CO2 and Global Warming is controlled by Big Business either way…both the denial side of the coin, and the faux solution side of the coin. You have to agree with him about Gore, Suzuki and a number of the other leading establishment types who have adopted this message. They don’t share your concern, and they’re in it because it’s yet another opportunity to exploit.
.
October 3rd, 2012 at 7:07 pm
USA/NATO/Israel Axis of Evil
Thanks for the David Suzuki ready reckonner.
I’m not going to deny what you write, nor challenge that Mr Suzuki has a huge carbon footprint. That all may well be, howerver, it does not make him wrong, or telling despairate lies. He may be doing that also, and Al Gore may have a lot of capital to invest in renewable energy contracts because of his family’s fortune from tobacco production. All this does not make people wrong or completely fraudulent.
I read the text of Mr Suzuki’s interview and I hear him saying completely challenging things to middle class 21 Century citizens of wealthy nations and it is very close to what is discussed here. That is not a coincidence.
Mr Suzuki is a geneticist by training and I have heard him in interview explain how elders must speak out about the damage and corruption in the big zones of commerce and government, and international trade agreements.
He explains that when economic threats are no longer a concern, then retired people can speak of what they know. I recall also Richard Heinberg and Dimity Orlov I think repeating that this is how the story of Peak Oil got traction, after a cohort of aging oil engineers retired and decided to speak out in the late 1980′s and 1990′s. They had expertise and experience. And to me that is worth listening to. I won’t just believe all they say.
There is another issue, Mr Suzuki has also remarked that radiation is causing a mojority of cancers worldwide. He states that the fine capillaries of the prostrate and mammary glands, and other tissue traps the radioactive particles and induces cancer.
He speaks to a broard middle of the road audience. Derrik Jensen speaks to radicalising youth(in the main), and Guy speaks to… well anyone who will listen and gives a damn, (IMO).
I look at what people say as well as who they are. Who wouldn’t, but show me a carbonless individual in a wealthy country and I’ll show you a Rhino’s arse full of Bullfrogs.
Lighten up.
The message is as important as the messenger, but of itself the message can be looked at and critically appraised regardless of the origin, at least up untill it makes sense to then ask who is saying it and perhaps why.
So when disputes arise like Anthropocentric Global Warming, I ask ‘what does Mr Suzuki have to gain by now coming out with very radical statements he knows will never come true?” My answer is that the guy is getting despairate, yes despairate.
TPTB are never going to let go of their economic model of human existance. It is going to have to die all around them first. And it will.
Given Mr Suzuki has grandchildren, and wants to see them survive and thrive, whatever else he may have up his sleeve, in terms of his foundations taking money from big whoever, I can’t really see that it matters given the message.
There are some in the environmental movement who gladly take guilt or bribe money from big whoever, so they can do their work. I have no opinion on that as I am personally moving to a moneyless way of living, which is a constant crisis. But at least it is neither the ennui of Bundy-on-Bundi-off, nor stress-debt ridden hair loss or child beating.
How about you explain why you believe that human industrial activities are having negligable effect on the biosphere? And what is your carbon footprint? I have never owned nor driven a car, and whenever I have ridden in any private or public motorised transport there has been at least two passengers. I also have 5 children, all of which brush their teeth and don’t own houses or cars or invest in wind farms or grow pasture animals. How in the world could you come up with a comparitive carbon footprint for Mr Suzuki, and not compare it to all kinds of other people , with class, income, education demographic rekoners to assess them?
It’s meaningless to talk of carbon footprint now. It is the total carbon we need to look at, and if it doesn’t matter how much carbon we put out then why is it a problem if he has so much carbon inducing stuff?
I don’t know why I bother?
Because I care, I guess.
October 3rd, 2012 at 7:16 pm
Morocco Bama
You also make a good point.
However, these types you mention have not taken the message to heart about the extinction protocal. They are working on a modified business as usual model yes.
If you read the text, or watch the video of Mr Suzuki at Rio, he clearly, and emphatically states that the change in thinking about the biosphere must be a revolution and total. I can’t reconcile those comments with the category of ‘leading establishment types’ who see it as a profit making scenario.
I and many others here and further afield have junmped out of the heating water beaker, and ‘they’ have not, even though we can all see the steam rising all about. Its just not hot enough for those frogs yet. Pun intended.
October 3rd, 2012 at 7:32 pm
Sampling of AGW skeptics, each of whom believe that they have the correct answer.
October 3rd, 2012 at 7:39 pm
.
OzMan, I really don’t care what David Suzuki says or doesn’t say. Same goes for Al Gore. Since we agree that we’re done for anyway, what does it matter what he says in regard to this topic? Who cares if he has some form of clout? It’s too late anyway, even if he was inclined to help push through some kind of change…which I don’t think he is by the way, at least not a change that would radically change his standard of living. If you want to spend your time rebutting USA/NATO/Israel Axis of Evil just use your own words and a less controversial source rather than a hack like Suzuki or Gore. I give your opinion and paraphrasing of the issue much more weight than I’d ever give their rendition.
.
October 3rd, 2012 at 7:40 pm
Some are developing coping strategies for the descent stage of empire:
‘Radical Simplicity and the Middle-Class: Exploring the Lifestyle Implications of a “Great Disruption”.’
http://simplicityinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/RadicalSimplicityandtheMiddle-Class3.pdf
“How would the ordinary middle-class consumer – I should say middle-class citizen – deal with a lifestyle of radical simplicity? By radical simplicity I essentially mean a very low but biophysically sufficient material standard of living, a form of life that will be described in more detail below. In this essay I want to suggest that radical simplicity would not be as bad as it might first seem, provided we were ready for it and wisely negotiated its arrival, both as individuals and as communities. Indeed, I am tempted to suggest that radical simplicity is exactly what consumer cultures need to shake themselves awake from their comfortable slumber; that radical simplicity would be in our own, immediate, self-interests.”
Be prepared for more of these types of articles. as the need arises.
October 3rd, 2012 at 7:56 pm
MB : “I give your opinion and paraphrasing of the issue much more weight than I’d ever give their rendition.”
What a strange narcissistic argument. You don’t care what Gore, Suzuki, etc think, because we are all doomed, but you’re telling Ozman what HE should say here, so that YOU will be more impressed ???
If nobody should care what Gore, Suzuki say, why should anybody care what carries weight and impresses YOU ? I mean, your ‘logic’ is totally bizarre.
October 3rd, 2012 at 7:58 pm
Morocco Bama
I never waste my time doing anything now, it all has meaning.
Since you are in a chipper mood, would you care to comment on my armchair analysis on an earlier post regarding John and Sarah Connor in the Terminator series of movies?
All those moveies are coming in handy now.
“Lost in Space” has always had an existential slant to it for me, even as an 5 year old I got it. I guess the new series “Lost” is just for a newer post 9/11 us-and-them generation.
When put together with the recent New Scientist edition titled ‘Reality’, it seems the quantum uncertainty chickens are coming home to roost, for the mainstream that is, because we uber-now-understand-seeing-the-collapse-of-Empire-all-clearly-ahead-of-the-pack dudes have seen it long ago. eh?
You wrote:
“I give your opinion and paraphrasing of the issue much more weight than I’d ever give their rendition.”
Gee, cheers, made my (sunny) day.
Um.. any objections if I frame that and put it up on my study wall?
Or are you just buttering and sauteeing, for an after dinner snack?
October 3rd, 2012 at 8:24 pm
An interesting point, IMO, does arise out of this, and that is the notion of hypocrisy.
Fwiw, I give more weight to people who can make a clear and coherent statement of their views and who also ‘walk their talk’ in a way that is consistent with those views.
From what little I know of Ozman, he appears to fit that category, as would Theodore Kaczynski, as would Thoreau or Ed Abbey.
Also, fwiw, there is NOTHING in my own life of which I am ashamed or would be embarrassed by if it became public knowledge. I walk my talk, every day, every minute.
However, we were talking a little about culture, Japanese culture, earlier, and I recall reading somewhere ( forget the source and the Japanese words, and it could be inaccurate, but anyway for the argument ) that this Western concept of hypocrisy does not exist in Japanese culture. it’s taken for granted that people will have a public face, with associated expressions, and a private face, with very different associations.
For me, that is unacceptable, but I have to ask how much that is because I’m encultured to that stance, and how much results from my own personal introspection.
St Augustine had a lot to say about that stuff. He was tempted by watching the entertaining human slaughter in the Coliseum, even though he felt disgusted by it, and revolted by his own pleasure at the spectacle.
In contemporary public affairs, hypocrisy is a prime means of assassinating and discrediting opponents. If say, someone campaigns publicly against child abuse, and then is caught abusing their own children, they lose their credibility. Doesn’t seem to apply to the elite though, the bankers and politicians and mafia bosses just do whatever they want and get away with it because nobody can stop them.
If what is said about Suzuki receiving money from dubious sources is accurate, one has to ask, why he accepts it, and why they give it. It smells bad, to me, even if I like what Suzuki says. But that’s another interesting issue. Heidegger was a great philosopher, IMO, but also a member of the Nazi party. Does that mean I should reject his philosophy ? I don’t think so. Same applies to Carl Jung.
October 3rd, 2012 at 8:41 pm
When G_d tells Moshe אֶהְיֶה אֲשֶׁר אֶהְיֶה, (ʾehyeh ʾašer ʾehyeh – “I” am what “i” am, that is the Hebrew equivalent of the Sanskrit aham brahmāsmi – “i am the Reality”. The reason why there is no proper noun for the name of G_d in Hebrew is explained in the Kabbalistic text, the Sefer Yetzirah in Chapter 1 verse 7: “What name can be given to the One without a second?”
That is, for any name to be meaningful, there has to be at least the possibility of another entity in the same domain that could be given another name. The corollary is that “G_d” is to each creature the same as what that creature perceives as its identity. To a grasshopper, G_d is the Grasshopper; to a moose, G_d is the Moose; to a democrat, G_d is the Democrat
This is beautifully illustrated by a modern story. Two zebras had a deep difference of opinion. One believed that it was a white horse with black stripes, and that G_d is white, while the other believed that it was a black horse with white stripes, and that G_d was black. They both died and arrived at the Pearly Gates at the same time. They asked Saint Peter whether G_d was black or white. Because of his deep understanding, Saint Peter asked them to ask G_d directly. The zebras has their Divine Audiences sequentially, and after they both had returned Saint Peter asked them what they had found out. The first zebra said “G_d is white”, and the second said “G_d is black”. Saint Peter asked why. The first said: “When I asked “Are you black or white?”, G_d answered “I am what I am”"; the second zebra said “I asked the same question, and G_d answered “I is what I is”".
October 3rd, 2012 at 8:57 pm
Ozman : “When put together with the recent New Scientist edition titled ‘Reality’, it seems the quantum uncertainty chickens are coming home to roost, for the mainstream that is..”
Worth bearing in mind, although that New Scientist stuff seems a good brief overview, a while back there was some controversy over some stories they printed and they were forced to admit that they are not a ‘serious’ science journal, but lean towards ‘entertainment’.
I’m in the same boat as everyone else, regarding the quantum stuff. It makes no sense, nobody understands it, and I wish some genius could put it all into a comprehensible package that could be generally agreed, but that seems unlikely at the moment, all the eminent physicists seem to have their own idiosyncratic interpretations…
And although it seems impossible to have a constructive discussion with MB or Kathy C. because neither are able to get past preconceived dogmatic nonsense and understand nuanced and subtle distinctions, my own position is that I think the naive realism Kathy C. appears to endorse should be privileged above all other knowledge.
In other words, we are human animals, living at a certain level of ‘reality’, evolved to deal with trees and tigers and cabbages and chickens, because that’s been primary throughout our evolution. I think that should be respected, it’s vital to our survival.
However, the quantum stuff is gradually creeping into the mainstream, that’s true, and it is absolutely amazing, that stuff like buckyballs, huge molecules, and stuff the size of an amoeba, just on the boundary of what is visible to the eye, even larger ( see vide ) obey these weird laws, being in two places at the same time, etc, totally mindboggling.
What that means for our epistemology and ontology, nobody seems to know, afaik. IMO, the shamans, the mystics, the sadhus, yogis, taoist alchemists, zen masters have been into this stuff forever, albeit they found it by a different route.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvYYYlgVAao
October 3rd, 2012 at 9:05 pm
ulvfugl
Carl Jung was a Nazi???
October 3rd, 2012 at 9:11 pm
Sort of. There’s been much discussion between supporters and opponents over the years, should be easy to google. He stepped into influential positions vacated by Jewish doctors. What his private thinking was is not easy to know. Maybe, bit like contemporary America, people have a sense of what they have to say if they want to keep their job and advance their career.
October 3rd, 2012 at 9:32 pm
OzMan, you wrote: “How about you explain why you believe that human industrial activities are having negligable effect on the biosphere?”
I never said any such thing. That’s your “if someone doesn’t believe in CO2-caused climate change, they must be an anti-environmentalist” bias talking. It’s a false assumption and a knee-jerk stereotype.
Most people, if they knew my opinions, would call me a radical environmentalist. I am opposed to nuclear power, coal-fired power plants (unless the smoke can be scrubbed clean until it contains nothing but harmless CO2), and any form or level of water or air pollution. I would ban all chemical herbicides and pesticides. I believe in the principle of the Commons, which no one has the right to pollute, abuse, or monopolize (including those whose excuse is that they are “providing jobs”). I would have no objection to banning all air travel (except perhaps by solar-powered Zeppelin). I oppose US Imperialism, which makes aggressive war throughout the world, wasting huge amounts of energy and resources in the process.
OzMan, you wrote: “And what is your carbon footprint?”
First, and most important, I will say this: I have no children, which I believe makes my carbon footprint vastly smaller (in fact, immeasurably smaller) than anyone who has begotten a child. There’s no way that anyone who’s begotten a child can ever reduce their carbon footprint to the level of someone who has no children. There’s no way that a person with no children can burn enough carbon or consume enough resources in one lifetime to equal the carbon footprint of someone who has begotten a child. The carbon footprint stops with the death of the childless person, while the carbon footpront of the person who has begotten a child may continue for generations — and it may increase exponentially.
I’ve been a vegan for the past 42 years. I worked for 22 years as a Registered Nurse. I stopped working five years ago, and I have no intention of seeking another job, although I would be willing to sell some of my writing. I live in a 275 square foot apartment. All of my clothes are used, either from thrift stores or the discards that people leave out on the sidewalks in my neighborhood. When the soles of my shoes wear out (about once a year) I buy a new pair of shoes, because I have wide feet and it’s hard to find used shoes that fit me or are not worn out. I have a large collection of used books and used classical music CDs. I have a computer, but no TV. I have a 1986 Nissan pickup truck that I use for errands about once a week. Otherwise I walk everywhere. I have taken two airline trips in my life: in 1980 to India, and in 1986 to Vancouver, BC (about 600 miles round trip).
Al Gore, David Suzuki, James Hansen, and Bill Gates have all called for a zero-carbon or carbon-neutral economy. (Which is impossible, unless we all stop breathing.) Gore, Suzuki, and Gates are in favor of giving carbon credits to favored industries (kudos to James Hansen for opposing the elitist carbon credit scam).
My opinion is that if carbon restrictions and austerity are to be imposed on society, the restrictions should be equal for all citizens, with no special privileges allowed for any individual or corporation. The equal allocation of carbon rights should bring about an economic leveling of society, and I am certainly in favor of that.
If instead the State imposes carbon restrictions and austerity unequally, allowing special privileges to the upper economic classes and to corporations, I would consider it a form of tyrrany that violates the rights of those who are placed at a disadvantage by the government. Civil disobedience (or possibly sabotage) would be an appropriate response to that tyrrany.
October 3rd, 2012 at 9:47 pm
If I may interject, you sound like a fairly decent person, USA/NATO/Israel Axis of Evil
so why this weird “….until it contains nothing but harmless CO2″
and this weird “…a zero-carbon or carbon-neutral economy. (Which is impossible, unless we all stop breathing.) ”
Perhaps you’d care to explain your thinking behind those two remarks ?
October 3rd, 2012 at 10:22 pm
Here is one take on what the quantum stuff means. It effectively destroys all naive realist, physicalist, materialist, etc, worldviews.
However, my personal estimation, it is ( probably ) wrong, it’s an interpretation that’s being favoured because it appears to support a particular agenda. I think that I/we must be scrupulously sceptical and discerning when trying to evaluate what this stuff means, and that’s hard, to say the least, of you’re not a trained quantum physicist, particularly as the trained quantum physicists disagree themselves…
“The truth is, everything in the universe is ultimately Energy, and Energy is influenced by Mind. Something only appears as matter when it is being observed.
Quantum physicists talk about electrons, or events being potential, rather than actual physical entities. So that there are various potentials, basically until somebody looks, and then it sort of forces the universe to make a determination about which potential is going to be actualized.
All of existence is fundamentally an unlimited quantum field of energy, a sea of infinite possibilities waiting to happen.
Consciousness collapses the wave function into actual particles that exist in space and time. Consciousness experiences energy as matter.
Consciousness is the energy that influences energy. All energy is actually consciousness, therefore it is consciousness influencing itself.
The observer is not apart from the observation. The experimenter is not apart from the experiment.
The observer simultaneously plays a part in creating the reality he is observing. The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle of consciousness states that no pure measurement is possible without creation. Physicists who deal in quantum mechanics state: “You cannot (objectively) observe something without changing it in the process.”
This experiment also shows that God remains unmanifest unless you participate. Without God, we cannot. Without us, God would not. We are all co-creators of reality with God. God moves only when there is intention or prayer. Faith is focus.
Everything is energy and energy is mental. The mind creates and controls reality.
Our thoughts have the very power to shape our reality. This is how the Law of Attraction works. What we focus on most of the time, we get. The observer creates reality simply by observing.”
This means, referring back to my exchange with Kathy C., that the chicken, the knife held to the throat, the rock, the tree, the house, every damn thing, is created by the attention of the mind, when consciousness collapses the probability wave.
Some people ( Tom Campbell ) say that there are always a range of possibilities or realities available, depending upon the level of consciousness of the individual and their intent. If you do not select a reality via your own free will, then it will be automatically supplied ( by God, by the Universe, by the ‘thing’ that we are all immersed in ).
Some hardline materialist logical positivist scientists get completely crazy and irrational at the mention of this kind of interpretation, because it destroys their paradigm of reality and the story they have been telling themselves all of their lives, so, in a sense, it is understandable that they react so vehemently, because their whole identity is threatened.
I try to be neutral. I’d really like to understand what’s going on. Like a judge in a particularly complex, weird, outlandishly strange trial, I want to hear all the evidence, every quirky detail, and then make my best appraisal as to what the evidence can tell us about the true nature of our existence.
Yes, I know, we are all doomed, and there’s no point in saying anything, but like the man condemned to be hanged in the morning, I am free to be as cranky as I like, and to enjoy my last moments as best I can
October 3rd, 2012 at 10:26 pm
Forgot the link for that quote
http://www.mindreality.com/observer-creates-reality-simply-by-observing
October 3rd, 2012 at 10:37 pm
It is remarkable that this stuff has been known for a century, with new insights constantly added ever since, and yet it has scarcely touched the mainstream public view as to the nature of everyone’s reality. I wonder why that is ?
http://youtu.be/cwrqZYFNiCA
October 3rd, 2012 at 10:39 pm
ulvfugl
I am partial to character endorsement,(at a distance even), as much as anyone else, so thank you for some kind words.
I would only go as far as say that when one has some children to be responsible for, and a working partner who finds her occupation ‘dearth’ instilling, and one has quit one’s Empire job 6 months earlier, I can’t really say I am walking the talk or not, because there is so much mess and crisis in our houshold. 3 adolescent girls, their boyfriends, exams, one girl at uni. cycle s of hormones ganging up, with no extra money, a 12 year old boy who is intellegent and doesn’t have a screen of his own like his high achieving peers. Too much of modern life is ‘decided’ by group influences, and as a natural introvert, who learned extroversion when it was time to in, in spits and starts, but mostly in mid twenties, I have been the ‘Mike Ruppert’ of our domestic wilderness here, and although I have only ever really said there are going to be some difficult and drastic changes I still have conversations where my 12 y/o accuses me of being a doom’er.
“Get a job!” he says, ‘What Job?” I counter. “I’m almost 50, and applying for motel cleaning jobs only leads to them giving it to single mums who I agree need it” I reply.
“You think all the stuff you do and jabber on about is going to save the world, you do. And the walking, you say you want to walk around Australia, but you don’t” he shoots back.
“And you have so many projects to help everyone in this dismal future, but you never finnish any” his words wounds me deeply.
I explain, “It is either stay and fight, and adapt to the emergent simplicity, and insecurity, of a vary rustic life, or it’s go walking, if no one needs me here.” He has heard this once before and has no response. I expand, “I love you more than anyone else in my world, and I will never abandon you, as you know my father did me and my brothers. That is a promise” I say, which I have said before on a few occasions. All the others don’t really get it, or have a simple version, so I have taken to leaving copies of short articles and essays around the communal areas on these topics, but no one reads them,(YET).
The community reading nights?
No one came, not even my partner.
I am changing them now for Spring/Summer to full moon ‘walk and talk’ evenings. Next full moon we will see if anyone else comes.
So yes I am at the stage of ‘force and flow’. Picking moments to force, and moments to flow, not just with ‘my’ priorities, but with family and the surrounding bioshere. Many highs, and I don’t need to get low anymore.
Don’t be fooled, this is not a long complaint of how hard OzMan’s lot is. Don’t bother with that. I have it exceptionally easy, we all should know that. I am merely trying to flesh out the ‘walk the talk’ stuff, for ulvfugl and anyone else, because I am pretty interested in other posters, including essayists, and Guy’s own living arrangments, and adaptations, not from a personal POV, but to learn and share what new and old shit works.
Chicken tractors work; using banks of solar lights for emergerncy power works; discussing communal ethics and living arrangments hepls. Knowing local weather helps; talking to otherwise alienated neighbours helps.
I suppose my son was correct – in some small way, I do want to upskill and get some psycho-physical prep for the future, for me, for him and his mum and sisters, and for the community, and anyone else too. I imagine there are many, many is some permutation of the same situation or resolve.
Like waiting for the fruit to fall, the sun to rise, or the worm to turn, it seems all too painful to stand firm on your intuitions and precognitive dreams when all the others who surround you are,(with respect) like locusts interested in devouring what is a exquisitely mystery filled domain, with enchantment and life teeming from its boosom.
If the crushing began tomorrow, the instincts, well prepared for some years now, could kick in and the way would be more difficult, more unsafe, and less certain, but it would respond to action with a yielding that few could imagine, as need finally meets ability.
If walking the talk can be interpreted as readying for every possible permutation of responsibilities, then I am a loser on that front.
As I tried to explain to my 12 y/o son yesterday, I am not an arsehole, though many in the extended family work hard to keep the notion in circulation. Arseholes are out there, demanding that their entire family go off to a commune, or live free in the commons, or become vegan nomad dumpster scavengers way before it is necessary. I can’t demand that, because no one would come with me. So I have resolved to walk my talk and hang the downsides. Learning some meta survival processes and jive will never hurt anyone, except my family financially. When you refuse to bring home the beacon, there is a tendency for the family relations to smoke out the unpallatable, ugly underlying realisation that family relations can show themselves as economic ley lines, but no further. That is a test I was not expecting! I don’t see them starving or missing any wearable clothes or hair products yet. Hey ho.
I can’t really report on my walking and talking, except on a daily basis to my inner uber self, as those ideals and principles, rooted in, as some here may reluctantly know, a committment to authentic self realisation, are never going to pass away in me.
I hesitate to go into protracted discussions with my 12y/o son about the coming ‘Challenges’, because his stage of life is very forward looking, and the last thing I would have is an overburdened teenager, brooding about the fate of the planet…
Oh… memories of my own boyhood come flooding back…. (The harp… I hear Apollo’s harp…)
October 3rd, 2012 at 11:10 pm
Sometimes that sequence was swift and harsh. Humans (including Neanderthals and Erectines) have survived numerous Ice Ages; we are very resilient as a species.
Yes indeed: resilient enough for Homo sapiens to go from a bottleneck population of 2,000 breeding pairs to the present 7,000,000,000+, elbowing out Neanderthals, erectus, Denisovans and any others on the way. And the elbows have acquired Herculean strength: enough for each to elbow out a hundred species a day.
And indeed there were some episodes where the climate shifted in a matter of a decade or less. Yet there was no change in the price of grain futures on the major mercantile exchanges. So today’s grain futures are largely manipulated.
With the polar bear popolation exploding, does the Climate Change Hoax™ come just in time to exercise control (or, in deference to Morrocco Bama, exercise “unconscious stimulus/response”) over that population?
The notion that increased atmospheric CO2 can cause a Sixth Extinction is highly speculative, because it has never been proved that CO2 caused an Extinction in the past.
Amen, brother. And if it does happen, we can take cheer in the thought that there will be no humans around to rue it.
Furthermore, all of the species living on earth today evolved under conditions of 2,000 ppm atmospheric CO2 and temperatures as high as 6 degrees Celsius above the global average of today.
Very true. All humans evolved with gills and aquatic respiration, laying eggs, “once upon a time”. In biblical times there was no possibility of evolution. That is why only Noah & Co. survived the Divine Deluge. Monsieur G_d would have to resort to something else now.
The record of paleoclimatology shows that the earth is probably on the brink of entering the next Ice Age, as a result of the orbital cycles. Increased atmospheric CO2 will not be the cause of the next Ice Age; nor will increased atmospheric CO2 be able to prevent the next Ice Age.
On the brink, indeed. The vastness geological timescales were barely perceived in the Hebrew texts, from which are derived hymns like “A thousand ages in Thy sight are like an evening gone”. An age = 7 years. An evening = 7,000 years. An evening + a morning = a day = 14,000 years. A couple of hours in that “day” could justily use of the word “brink”.
What I see as a far greater concern is population overshoot, which will decimate both the environment and human civilization.
A much tastier poison! At least so long as one is living in the heart of the Empire.
♫ What bliss will fill the ransomed souls,
When they in glory dwell,
To see the sinner as he rolls,
In quenchless flames of hell. ♪
The Germans in their perceptiveness have a word for it: Schadenfreude, “shadow joy”. Their remarkable perceptiveness was even manifest in their Führer, Herr Schicklgruber’s last directive to the Germanic people.
Moshe? Very droll, Robin, very droll.
The term is used to call attention to a frame of reference where worship of Mr. J. Christ is seen as a violation of the admonition
לֹא-יִהְיֶה לְךָ אֱלֹהִים אֲחֵרִים, עַל-פָּנָי.
“Thou shalt have no other gods before Me.”
Droll, yes, outside that frame of reference.
It is silly to think or act or be as though this world is not real and primary. It is silly and pathetic to not live our lives as though our lives are real.
Derrick Jensen groks it.
CO2 and Global Warming is controlled by Big Business either way…
I had the impression that the appropriate form should be:
“CO2 and Global Warming is unconsciously stimulused/responsed by Big Business either way…”
October 3rd, 2012 at 11:21 pm
ulvfugl
You wrote:
“It is remarkable that this stuff has been known for a century, with new insights constantly added ever since, and yet it has scarcely touched the mainstream public view as to the nature of everyone’s reality. I wonder why that is ?”
Is that a rhetorical question?
My answer?
Well, the paid-for-by-cheap-oil-latter-stage scientific revolution had two components. ‘Applied’ and ‘pure’ research.
‘Pure’ was led to believe it was serving mankinds thirst for knowledge, better living standards, blah blah etc etc. ‘Applied’ used and abused ‘Pure’ to gain material advantage over poorer states, and peoples(classes), and the Biosphere…eh ah resources, sorry. When the asymtote of practical industrial applications was approached ‘pure’ was curtailed and dictated, through tenure restrictions and funding selection, so as to benifit military industrial consumption, over and above ‘pure’. ‘Pure’ begun to waffle, at least in terms of something meterable -insert Teslar as colateral damage, and his revolutionary claims hit the CIA vault along with many ‘applied’ light bulb ideas, from radical ‘pure’ (teslar genius and others-got-at-by-stealth too) not suited to metering for profit based hamster living – see ‘The Trueman Show’, for modern dramatisation of managed ‘consume, be silent, die’ suburbia sandbox enantiodrama.
All ‘pure’ now has to pass through stringent ‘no waffle’ ‘applied’-for-profit strainer, in order to attract metering investment, including big pharma, big mobile phone cancer, big climate warming denial, etc.
Brings up what possible use large Hedron collider has, if not to see if future time travel is possible, under smoke screen of Higgs-Boson derivative reality/mass proving tin toy trick.
Guess what? What use is ‘pure’ now to ‘Newtonian-consumption-have-a-wine-n-cheese-cracker-watch-sinefeld-bunk-your-neaghbour-plant-more-trees-donate-to-local-charity-man’. Does water taste sweeter? Does Sun shine with more colours? Does happiness get easier?
Only commerce and military indusrtrial benefits, and before you go spruiking about my microwave, I never have had one.
‘Pure’ is too difficult, especially when it challenges the ground we walk on. That is better left to consumer-cinema-fantasy-speculation-on-reality-meterables, but can bring some profound Solaris moments if we follow it fully.
Most people will tend to only be interested in a few yards ahead and behind, or to use another metaphore, sealed roads are for the usual unadventurous person, off-road is for the hardy, the bush trail is for the determined seeker, however, wilderness is for fools! HA!
October 3rd, 2012 at 11:32 pm
Hahaha, thanks for that, Ozman. If I’d known the impact my remark would make, I’d have given it a warmer tone.
I have lived the life of a zen hermit for a very long time, I know very little of the demands of families and children, but I can have a head full of alternative and often very critical voices, telling me what I should and shouldn’t do, so then I have to have a committee meeting with my brain and sort it all out.
I know that my view of ‘soul/subtle body’ has been misconstrued here, but part of the ‘walk the talk’ thing is to keep my soul clean and uncontaminated by the dirty world and the corrupt people everywhere. It’s a daily task.
If I was you, I’d think about making some useful item, something that people will need and value. I don’t know what that might be, but the satisfaction from making physical things is tremendous, and is even better when people actually want them.
One thing that made a huge impact on me, when I was about 12, and suffering terribly from a school I loathed and a family I couldn’t get on with, there was a BBC film about India. It described this guy who made ornate brass platters and bowls. The commentary was amazing. It was totally condescending and spoke of this man as the epitome of poverty and deprivation and the general backwardness of that culture compared with the fantastic British way of life we all ‘enjoyed’.
I reflected on that story for months. It told me I was being conned. That guy had a FANTASTIC life. He spent all day sitting at the foot of a beautiful tree, going tap tap tap with his hammers, making beautiful designs, chatting with neighbours and passers by, gossiping and laughing, and at the end of the week he took all his work to the market, sold it, bought new sheets of metal and food for the week and repeated the same thing.
I would have given ANYTHING for a pleasant, creative, independent self-contained life like that, but I was being told by soceity, school, parents, peers, everyone, that that man was deprived and a figure to be pitied and despised, whilst to ‘get ahead’ meant becoming a lawyer or a dentist or a research chemist or whatever…. lots of money, clean white shirts, a nice modern house and a nice new car, pension plan, foreign holidays, blablabla….
I have had many attempts to construct a similar lifestyle in UK, but the negative forces are often too strong. Most craft work cannot compete with cheap foreign imports, ( from places like India ). But I have had a few great successes. It is possible to find niche markets, like, say, locally, traditional coracles. I did it with wooden chairs, for a while but now my health isn’t up to that anymore. But everybody likes a special beautiful chair, and it’s possible to make them by hand and get a good profit, if you’re skilled enough. Welsh stick chairs are fantastic, even better that Shaker chairs, I’d say.
October 3rd, 2012 at 11:33 pm
I’m gonna get me a Jack Keroac book, luv that stream of consc…er, bleet bleet, materialist jive. What ..the..fu..?
What’s it called?
“Off The Road”?
Ha!
October 3rd, 2012 at 11:42 pm
Chairs !
http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/~chrislees/The%20Carningli%20Chair/chair1.html
October 3rd, 2012 at 11:56 pm
ulvfugl
Your comments are most welcome and neighbourly. I am pretty skilled at the makey-makey stuff, but for all of my attendant crafty skill, there has been an inner conflict with the call to assist others with the root cause of our problems as egos. For a long time I would investigate some spiritual/psychological angle, Jung, Astrology(real not popular), Adi Da Samraj, then move to some scientific, or let me say more practical(not so fast) needs like food growing, water, biochar and wood stoves… chairs, yes, well , I haddn’t got to them but, then back to the subtle. I am experienced enough now to see a see-saw when I see it. Both components have needs, and like the David Tacey quotes I put up yesterday, the spiritual and material(..whatever!) aspects have times of needs. Kathy C would say ‘continue to fast and see how your consciousness manages’(Sorry to verbal you Kathy C). Good point from the materialist POV. ‘Spiritual Sickness’, alludes to a principle I teach my son, the impulse to inner growth in us operates like a tree grows, always towards the light, and it never stops. So even if the culture has devolved to a baseline of gratuitous adolescent consumption-desire roundabout, and attendant suffering, the growth then is unconscious, and will manifest somehow, that is if one is not listening.
It is now almost a crime to have an inner life, for you will be ‘mad’icated out of your gonads if you disclose to an authority that you believe something because of an inner resolve. That is what I suppose the Thought Police concept was all about.
I am finding some paths, but it is really a testing time and I can’t tell if the family will hang together through it all.
Why not get a job, just conform and forget about what is causing the problems?
That just wouldn’t be wilderness, now would it?
October 4th, 2012 at 12:00 am
The quarrel over The Great Global Warming Hoax™ is only worthwhile if one avers that there might still be time to mitigate the worst consequences by sufficiently drastic measures.
If like our host, one hews to the opinion that the window for mitigation has closed, (which should imply the closure of the window for prevention as well), then with regard to the quarrel, the proper attitude would be EFFIT!
Let those who wish to quarrel argue themselves hoarse. For the rest, better to quit carping, and carpe diem. Join the indifferent and the agnostics.
October 4th, 2012 at 12:22 am
ulvfugl
Look re the Chairs: there are a lot of craftsmen and women, artisans in my region and local markets are full of all sorts of stuff, there is a wicker guy. I just can’t come at making something in that range. I have developed a number of board games, (one called “Hell” which spins of Snakes and Ladders, and is very hard to get out of) and a modular 3D role-playing terrain system that uses figures like Warhammer stuff. I am not into Warhammer myself, and don’t play or watch others play, but have a long history of diorama making, and worked as a professional Architectural Modelmaker for 28 years or so(Empire Job).
The craft thing here is a bit too fusion junk-hippy-commercial for my liking, which means embellished mirrors with pixie surrounds- it just isn’t my thing, but I will considder the well positioned solid craft market object direction more closely again. I have issues though about doing any of that for money, it feels better to give it away, but perhaps that is a luxury I may practice if I am ever on my own again in the future. Time will tell -(Insert any other closing homily that is to your liking).
October 4th, 2012 at 12:25 am
ulvfugl wrote:
If I may interject, you sound like a fairly decent person, USA/NATO/Israel Axis of Evil
Thank you, and I want to make it clear that I feel that the posters on this forum are decent people also, including those who disagree with my opinions.
ulvfugl wrote:
so why this weird “….until it contains nothing but harmless CO2″
and this weird “…a zero-carbon or carbon-neutral economy. (Which is impossible, unless we all stop breathing.) ”
It’s not weird unless you believe that CO2, which is to plants what oxygen is to humans, and puts the carbon into carbon-based life-forms, has suddenly become a fatal threat to all life on earth.
The CO2-caused climate change theory is primarily based on lab experiments and computer models which cannot be trusted to represent how CO2 functions in the actual Biosphere. The data from paleoclimatology shows temperature driving CO2 — not CO2 driving temperature. It has never been proved that CO2 caused an Extinction in the past. In the past, in spite of high CO2 and high temperatures, life flourished.
Unfortunately, most people’s science education has been so rudimentary that they depend on “experts” and “authorities” for their information and their opinions, because they lack the knowledge base to assist themselves with critical, independent thinking. To make matters worse, science has become politicized by people with hidden agendas.
October 4th, 2012 at 12:28 am
there has been an inner conflict with the call to assist others with the root cause of our problems as egos.
It entirely depends on the readiness of the receiver.
Someone may grow up in a particular urban neighbourhood and move away in one’s mid-teens, returning to the city four decades later. On taking a bus to the old stomping grounds, the person may find it to be quite unfamiliar: different stores, different storefronts, different street markings, etc.
One might step into a store and ask “What place is this?” The reply might be “This is X street between Y street in that direction and Z street in that direction. One might instantly regain one’s orientation and say “Ah, yes, this used to be such & such store!” and the response could be “Yes, that was a long time ago, but they moved out twenty years ago, and we moved in”.
Similarly if the student is ready, all the master has to say is “You are the Buddha”, and the student would respond “Ah, yes! Thank you!”, and could walk out: no need for initiation, no need for study, no need for meditation, prayer, pilgrimage or whatever.
But then there is the gulf between grokking and intellection.
October 4th, 2012 at 12:29 am
Why not get a job, just conform and forget about what is causing the problems?
That just wouldn’t be wilderness, now would it?
Well, it’s not for me to say what you should/ought to do, at all, but I found a way which brought great success. You design, or re-design, your whole life. Everything. Refuse all compromise. Make every action and aspect to the highest standard that you can conceive of.
It seems kinda unlikely, but it worked for me.
Even to the level of every single thought. Review each thought and consider whether it is the best possible thought…. then design your whole life around you, very much like Mollison’s permaculture principles and zones… and at the heart of it, make something superb and useful and pleasing, so that they beat a path to your door because it makes them happy and inspired to give money or goods to you, in exchange for what you have made…
October 4th, 2012 at 12:31 am
“Join the indifferent and the agnostics.”
No thanks, I’d rather fight to the last breath.
“The task of an activist is not to navigate systems of oppressive power with as much personal integrity as possible; it is to dismantle those systems.” -Lierre Keith
October 4th, 2012 at 12:40 am
Ozman : “I have issues though about doing any of that for money, it feels better to give it away, but perhaps that is a luxury I may practice if I am ever on my own again in the future.”
This is insane, Ozman. What i’m talking about is the dignity accrued from earning a living by contributing something functional that people need. Think of it in hunter/gatherer terms. You’re the guy who makes the best fishing barbs. It’s a gift economy, if you like. You swap your fish barb for the basket that the other guy has mad, because he’s the best basket maker and you need an effing basket to carry your fish. Read David Graeber, this is the glue that held simpler soceities together. Everyone has something to offer and contribute to the tribal whole, and everyone in turn receives what they need. The exchanges are never quite equal, there’s always some fractional obligation left over, to be settled next time. And the fairness and honesty expressed in these kinds of exchanges determine status and respect and loyalty and so forth… all the important stuff that capitalism and money has erased from our lives…
October 4th, 2012 at 12:46 am
ulvfugl
Thanks, But I don’t now intend to be the centre of anything, I would be a Nomad if I were single. No magic, no Siddhis, just plain rambling.
I am definitly not needed, at least not in this condition, Ha!
Robin Datta
Yes I agree. I am over the ‘force it’ side of that. It will be. I’m no teacher, that’s for sure. Appropriate help is always the key, with self and others, IMO. With that, Intuition knows best.
October 4th, 2012 at 1:03 am
ulvfugl
I follow you on the reciprocation track. And H/G functionality therein. All good there, no question. Human need is always the rub for me. I spent several years as theraputic Masseur, with my own business. heal with the hands was my go. some good work was done, but overwhelmingly I learnt that a high percentage of people were generating body problems from the subtle workigs, and no amount of pushing the lard around would shift it. I had others who responded well, and it was ok. (A lot of the crap is literally in our illusory minds)
I will work it out, it’s been chugging along lately with the effort I’ve put in. At the moment, furniature can be had at very low cost, and the whole utility-asthetic thing hangs on the borders of the issues for me.
I work best, to my optimal, with adapting one off objects for a need, albeit mine or another’s, so I have a range of possibilities, including vegetable garden establishment. There is a need for that around here. I have a few irons warming. Don’t sweat, the gift community is the way to go for sure, but in an established community it can work very clearly. I’ll see how it unfolds in this watershed.
October 4th, 2012 at 1:10 am
USA/NATO/Israel Axis of Evil : so why this weird “….until it contains nothing but harmless CO2″
and this weird “…a zero-carbon or carbon-neutral economy. (Which is impossible, unless we all stop breathing.) ”
It’s not weird unless you believe that CO2, which is to plants what oxygen is to humans, and puts the carbon into carbon-based life-forms, has suddenly become a fatal threat to all life on earth.
The CO2-caused climate change theory is primarily based on lab experiments and computer models which cannot be trusted to represent how CO2 functions in the actual Biosphere. The data from paleoclimatology shows temperature driving CO2 — not CO2 driving temperature. It has never been proved that CO2 caused an Extinction in the past. In the past, in spite of high CO2 and high temperatures, life flourished.
Unfortunately, most people’s science education has been so rudimentary that they depend on “experts” and “authorities” for their information and their opinions, because they lack the knowledge base to assist themselves with critical, independent thinking. To make matters worse, science has become politicized by people with hidden agendas.
No, no, no, no, no, no, NO !
Look, dear personage, you are missing some vital information and have gone astray. With respect, the problem of global warming as nothing whatsoever to do with plants needing CO2 as we need oxygen. NOTHING. The CO2 that say, a tree, takes up from the air, to grow its leaves and wood, goes back into the atmosphere when it dies, rots or burns. So it takes the CO2 up, then it releases it all again. The net difference to atmospheric CO2 is ZERO.
That’s NOT the problem. The PROBLEM is the CO2 that has been sequestered for millions of years, locked away in the geological strata, as oil and coal, and which has now been released into the atmosphere in an incredibly short period of time ( a couple of centuries ).
Look, I’m trying hard to be good humoured, respectful and sympathetic here, but I have a short fuse on this issue. There are so many mistakes in your reasoning. It’s NOT the CO2, per se, that has suddenly become a threat to all life on Earth, it’s the rapid warming of the planet and catastrophic climate change that results from increasing levels of CO2. Of course CO2 is vital to plants, just as is water, just as is nitrogen, phosphorous, potassium, and other elements. But just as for your own body, the quantity has to be right and stuff has to be in the right place. Water is benign, but you can still drown in it.
It’s not the CO2 that people breath out and plants breath in that is the problem, that was essential to keep our planet at the nice cosy temperature that allowed us to flourish for 10000 years. Is all the ADDITIONAL CO2 from coal and oil that has been added, and we know that, because that carbon has a different isotopic signature, which can be detected and measured, so it can be distinguished from the CO2 that was around pre-industrial revolution.
The CO2 climate stuff is NOT just based on computer models and lab experiments, where are you getting this nonsense ? They’ve been checking out the history of Earth’s atmosphere for 100 years and more, they’ve got ice cores going back hundreds of thousands of years, containing bubbles which tell what gases were around each year and how they changed, none of the mainstream reputable scientists accept your claim that temp drives CO2, it’s a denialist propaganda stunt to cause confusion, as is the ‘CO2 is plant food’ crap.
As I’ve said to you earlier, it’s not that life cannot adapt to extremes, it’s that life cannot adapt to the rapid change to extremes that we have caused. Look, if the climate changed slowly, over say, a thousand or ten thousand years, a forest can adapt, it can even move, by growing more on one boundary, less on another, and follow a thermocline, and all the species can also adjust their rhythms, migrations, nesting times, etc.
But they cannot do that if the change happens over a couple of decades. Which is what we are witnessing now. The whole ecology of the forest just collapses, and you get massive loss of biodiversity, and all that carbon gets released into the atmosphere with no forest to do the re-uptake, adding to the problem.
Another serious aspect you have not mentioned is the terrifying acidification of the oceans.
I could go on, but perhaps that’s enough for the moment….
October 4th, 2012 at 1:17 am
Ozman : Thanks, But I don’t now intend to be the centre of anything, I would be a Nomad if I were single.
No, no, wherever you are, nomad or sedentary, you’re always at the centre… where else could you be ????
perhaps you have not understood that ?
October 4th, 2012 at 1:32 am
Ozman : I work best, to my optimal, with adapting one off objects for a need,
Yes, i understand that well. Most artists and creative craftspeople love the buzz of one-off. And at the other end of the spectrum are the iPads and motor cars mass produced identically in millions. But there’s a splendid middle ground, small production runs, where each item is special but you do enough repetition to get the benefits of efficiency and build trained habits. Think of it like a woman baking cakes or making jam. Nobody wants to be an automaton, in a factory, putting this into that a thousand times a day. That’s degrading and destroys a person’s humanity. Henry Fucking Ford and Taylorism.
But that’s not necessary. I made chair parts for eight chairs, and expected to get six good ones assembled at the end of a week. That’s worth a lot more than most labour gets paid in industry, provided you’ve got a sales outlet. If you’re really good and build a reputation, you don’t even have to try to sell, people come and ask for them, it’s effortless, but that takes time…
Each chair slightly different. It never got boring. A week of chairmaking a week of gardening, and so forth. There’s really no need to distort or force human nature, you just do whatever feels good and satisfying, but with a degree of self-discipline, which is also quite natural. I mean, you don’t catch any fish unless you have the self-discipline to get out of bed and go and sit by the river… sometimes even when it rains and is cold….
October 4th, 2012 at 1:46 am
USA/NATO/Israel Axis of Evil wrote: Furthermore, all of the species living on earth today evolved under conditions of 2,000 ppm atmospheric CO2 and temperatures as high as 6 degrees Celsius above the global average of today.
Robin Datta responded: Very true. All humans evolved with gills and aquatic respiration, laying eggs, “once upon a time”.
If you would go back and read what I wrote in my previous comment, you would see that I was talking about mammals. “All of the species living on earth today” includes all of the mammals. Technically, I could have been more accurate by saying “all of the mammalian genera living on earth today.”
For the first half of their evolutionary history, mammals lived under conditions of 2,000 ppm atmospheric CO2 and temperatures as high as 6 degrees Celsius above the global average of today.
Mammals emerged about 210 million years ago, when atmospheric CO2 was 2,000 ppm. Atmospheric CO2 stayed at 2,000 ppm until 100 million years ago. By 50 million years ago, CO2 had declined to 800 ppm.
50 million years ago, during the Eocene Optimum, the earth’s temperature rose to 6 degrees Celsius above the global average of today. CO2 was about 800 ppm.
In paleoclimatology, periods of Hothouse Earth are called Optimums because “An optimum in biology is the most favorable environment for growth and reproduction of an organism in respect to the amount of heat, light, moisture, food, etc., available.” http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_an_optimum
North American mammals of the Eocene Optimum included horses, lions, monkeys, deer, hippos, badgers, bats, rodents, and marsupials. See image: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Eocene.jpg
The Eocene ended 34 million years ago with an Ice Age that lasted for 10 million years.
October 4th, 2012 at 1:54 am
Robin : Similarly if the student is ready, all the master has to say is “You are the Buddha”, and the student would respond “Ah, yes! Thank you!”, and could walk out: no need for initiation, no need for study, no need for meditation, prayer, pilgrimage or whatever.
But then there is the gulf between grokking and intellection.
Sure. But do we need enlightened buddhas ? I think they are a luxury. The world is on fire, grab a bucket and start carrying water… get enlightened, if you must, whilst being useful and busy..
I do admire Vinay Gupta…
http://youtu.be/fhhzX8AtGRA
He works flat out all the time, trying to fix the world’s problems. He knows better than anyone that this is an absurd, pointless and impossible task, but he does it anyway, for something to do, because it’s a personal challenge. He trained as a kapalika, someone who eats their daily meals out of a bowl made from a human cranium, so that they never forget how brief life is and how transitory this world is…
October 4th, 2012 at 2:42 am
ulvfugl:
Read what I just wrote (above) in response to Robin Datta; it serves in part as my reply to your most recent comment addressed to me.
No one is claiming that CO2 is a poison per se; but the CO2 alarmists claim that an increase in CO2 above 400 ppm will cause a climate catastrophe. BTW, ocean acidification caused by CO2 would make CO2 a literal poison.
Since the ocean contains 60 times as much carbon as the atmosphere, a doubling, tripling, or quadrupling of atmospheric CO2 would have a comparatively minor effect on the ocean’s carbon content. The ocean also has minerals to buffer CO2 and organisms to consume it.
The corals emerged during, and lived through, many millions of years with an atmospheric CO2 between 2,000 and 6,000 ppm. It’s unlikely that an increase of CO2 to 2,000 ppm would kill them now.
October 4th, 2012 at 3:19 am
Morocco Bama wrote: “USA/NATO/Israel Axis of Evil does raise one important point for those who care to look past their spittle. Of course, I think the point’s inadvertent, but he still alludes to it. CO2 and Global Warming is controlled by Big Business either way…both the denial side of the coin, and the faux solution side of the coin. You have to agree with him about Gore, Suzuki and a number of the other leading establishment types who have adopted this message. They don’t share your concern, and they’re in it because it’s yet another opportunity to exploit.”
Actually, for me that point was not at all inadvertant. I see the elitist ruling Oligarchs infiltrating both sides of almost every major controversy. It’s called Controlled Opposition, and it’s a time-tested strategy for controlling society and the course of events. Provocateurs and false-flag attacks are frequently used to start wars. The Russian FSB bombed Moscow apartment buildings in the summer of 1999 to provide an excuse to invade Chechnya, and the US government did 9/11 to launch the bogus War on Terrorism. My protest sign says “Al Qaeda is CIA.”
As I stated here before, I think that the CO2-caused climate change hoax is being used to manipulate public opinion toward outcomes that suit the elitist Oligarchs’ agenda. The Democrats and the Republicans are Siamese twins, and Barack Obama (whose mercenaries raped Libya and are now raping Syria) is Bush Three.
After Peak Oil, Big Oil will become Big Green; Big Oil already is the biggest investor in alternative energy. But Big Oil/Big Green wants us to commit to giant wind farms that they own — not to home systems that we own ourselves.
Sitting on a sofa on a Sunday afternoon
Going to the candidates debate
Laugh about it, shout about it
When you’ve got to choose
Ev’ry way you look at it, you lose
- Simon And Garfunkel, Mrs. Robinson Lyrics
October 4th, 2012 at 3:31 am
USA/NATO/Israel Axis of Evil : “No one is claiming that CO2 is a poison per se; but the CO2 alarmists claim that an increase in CO2 above 400 ppm will cause a climate catastrophe. BTW, ocean acidification caused by CO2 would make CO2 a literal poison.”
They make that claim on empirically demonstrable grounds, like the cataclysmic, melting of the Arctic ice, the droughts, floods, forest fires, melting permafrost, rising sea levels, etc, all around the world. We are HAVING the climate catastrophe NOW, and it is going to get MUCH worse. What we have NOW is the time lagged result of emissions thirty and more years ago. Emissions have never stopped rising. Doesn’t that tell you something ?
You have to think about what you mean by ‘poison’, and how you define the term. it has no meaning with regard to climate systems, it’s derived from a model of human and animal bodies, where something like cyanide or arsenic disrupts some metabolic function, sometimes fatally.
The concept of a poison doesn’t really work when applied to the global biosphere, unless you think it has a physiology in some way analogous to living organisms, ( which is an idea I personally favour but most climate scientists do not ).
In any case, the concept of a poison is dependent upon dosage. One molecule of strychnine would be imperceptible to a human body, a small amount is actually a tonic, but drink sufficient and it’ll kill you. The same applies to CO2, a small amount 250ppm was essential to keep the planet habitable. Without that CO2, the whole place freezes to snowball Earth.
Since the ocean contains 60 times as much carbon as the atmosphere, a doubling, tripling, or quadrupling of atmospheric CO2 would have a comparatively minor effect on the ocean’s carbon content. The ocean also has minerals to buffer CO2 and organisms to consume it.
Completely wrong. It doesn’t matter how much carbon the oceans contain, what matters is how much dissolving CO2 increases the acidity, and how fast that happens. It’s going to destroy crustacea and molluscs and corals by preventing shell formation, and they are vital components of the oceanic ecology and food chains. It could easily mean a big change in phytoplankton, which has already dropped dramatically, upon which we all depend for half of our atmospheric O2.
The ocean absorbs about 30 percent of the carbon dioxide we put in the air through fossil fuel burning, and this triggers a chemical reaction that produces hydrogen, thereby lowering the water’s pH.
The sea today is 30 percent more acidic than pre-industrial levels, which is creating corrosive water that is washing over America’s coasts. At the current rate of global worldwide carbon emissions, the ocean’s acidity could double by 2100.
http://www.desdemonadespair.net/2012/10/ocean-acidification-emerges-as-new.html
The corals emerged during, and lived through, many millions of years with an atmospheric CO2 between 2,000 and 6,000 ppm. It’s unlikely that an increase of CO2 to 2,000 ppm would kill them now.
You keep ignoring the speed of the change. Previous changes often took hundreds of thousands, even millions of years. Anyway, it’s already clear that the corals are being killed NOW, by a variety of causes, temperature increase, rising sea levels, wrecked ecology, pollution…
It is simply incomprehensible to me, astonishing, when you described your rather responsible and ethical life story earlier, how you seem to be so cavalier and reckless when it comes to the biosphere. I can’t get my head around that at all.
Has it occurred to you that you could be mistaken, and you’re going to have to witness the collapse of the whole bloody thing ? Or is that a problem for you ?
October 4th, 2012 at 3:38 am
“As I stated here before, I think that the CO2-caused climate change hoax is being used to manipulate public opinion toward outcomes that suit the elitist Oligarchs’ agenda. “
I happen to agree with the rest of your analysis, but I think you are badly mistaken on the climate science. You’re not alone. David Icke and others also make the same argument. It’s wrong. It’s the actual science from the actual climate scientists, marine biologists, palaeontologists, etc, etc, that matters, not all the hangers on who want to use it for their devious political agendas. The idea that the world’s scientists are in on a conspiracy to fool everyone is just garbage, totally ridiculous. Science, despite all its faults and shortcomings and indeed, in some areas, corruption, is the best and only means we have of checking out what’s actually happening.
October 4th, 2012 at 3:39 am
Sorry, previous comment correction : ‘Or is that NOT a problem for you ?’
October 4th, 2012 at 3:55 am
It is true that the Prototherian (egg-laying), Metatherian (pouched) and Eutherian (placental) mammals as well as Aves (birds) and Angiosperms (seed-bearing) plants evolved under conditions more extreme than those forecast by the doomsayers. And in past extinctions a seed-stock of species survived to radiate into novel branches to the evolutionary tree.
Few if any of the original surviving species exist now as was. In even the most rapid extinctions, 200 species per day would easily beat their record. If the previous extinctions were indeed associated with global cooling, we must surmise that the present extinction is also associated with an as yet unidentified global cooling, or else it is an entirely new phenomenon, where comparisons to previous extinctions may be difficult. Also as pointed out by others the timescales required to permit evolutionary adaptation can be a limiting factor when the rate of change is rapid.
Homo sapiens started out as one of the most adaptable and resilient species. But like the animals we domesticated, we too have become domesticated. When domesticated animals ate released into the wild, they tend to have very poor survival. Exceptions include those that need to be “broken” such as horses or trained as dogs to be useful to humans. Also animals released into protected environments (free of competitors and predators) as in the case of goats and cats, do better.
It can be pointed out that humans with their anomalously long childhood and adolescence require very long periods of training. However, the training that produced the next generation of hunter-gatherers amongst our forebears may have been different from the training that produces banksters and cubicle serfs.
October 4th, 2012 at 4:02 am
The 400+ Fukes is related to peak fossil fuels, and long-time NBLers do not conflate it with rising CO2.
October 4th, 2012 at 4:25 am
USA/NATO/Israel Axis of Evil
You won’t get taken seriously, really. My 12 y/o knows that CO2 causes ocean acidification, and the phytoplankton cannot from calcifications for the invertebrate shells and are vulnerable at early stages. The ocean food chain will collapse.
You seem to have views that a bat and a bullfrog might arrive at by fingering through a road map. The views are pretty undefined too:
“The ocean also has minerals to buffer CO2 and organisms to consume it.”
‘Buffer’? What does that mean exactly? How do minerals ‘buffer’ corals?, and what minerals?
I’m all for alternative fiews, but they need to come aright with the evidence on this one.
A short intro to OA 10
‘World leading Australian marine scientists feature in new online education resources’
http://oceanacidification.net/news/world-leading-australian-marine-scientists-feature-in-new-online-education-resources/
“What is ocean acidification?
What causes ocean acidification?
How does ocean acidification impact on coral reefs?
Are today’s conditions very different from the past?
Can we predict how ocean acidification will impact on coral reefs in the future?”
Should do the trick.
October 4th, 2012 at 4:31 am
The 400+ Fukes is related to peak fossil fuels, and long-time NBLers do not conflate it with rising CO2.
There is however a connection to rising sea level, as in UK many are built close to the shore, how they intend to decommission them when they are under water is unclear…
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/mar/07/uk-nuclear-risk-flooding
October 4th, 2012 at 5:22 am
.
Actually, for me that point was not at all inadvertant. I see the elitist ruling Oligarchs infiltrating both sides of almost every major controversy. It’s called Controlled Opposition, and it’s a time-tested strategy for controlling society and the course of events. Provocateurs and false-flag attacks are frequently used to start wars. The Russian FSB bombed Moscow apartment buildings in the summer of 1999 to provide an excuse to invade Chechnya, and the US government did 9/11 to launch the bogus War on Terrorism. My protest sign says “Al Qaeda is CIA.”
I agree with you on this, 100%, but I don’t think every major event/issue is inculcated by this process. I do believe there are issues that percolate without the application of the methodology you have described above and that said methodology is applied after said events/issues reach a point where it may pose a threat to the Established Order. At that point, the Methodology is applied and used to usurp and co-opt the issue/event and to turn that issue/event into something exploitable for the PTB. I believe this is the case with AGW. I do not believe AGW is a hoax, but I do believe that at the highest levels it has been usurped and co-opted, and no positive change can come of it. In fact, if we don’t collapse and go extinct within 40 years as many here consider probable, I believe that AGW will be used by the Oligarchs to depopulate the planet in the creation of a New World for themselves.
As I stated here before, I think that the CO2-caused climate change hoax is being used to manipulate public opinion toward outcomes that suit the elitist Oligarchs’ agenda. The Democrats and the Republicans are Siamese twins, and Barack Obama (whose mercenaries raped Libya and are now raping Syria) is Bush Three.
Well, once again, we’re pretty much in agreement on this, although I don’t believe AGW is a hoax. I will admit, I’m not a Climate Scientist, nor am I a Scientist at all, and I do rely solely on the expertise of these individuals in forming that opinion. I am literally at their mercy, but that’s true of most things these days….when it comes to scientifically technical matters.
After Peak Oil, Big Oil will become Big Green; Big Oil already is the biggest investor in alternative energy. But Big Oil/Big Green wants us to commit to giant wind farms that they own — not to home systems that we own ourselves.
Sitting on a sofa on a Sunday afternoon
Going to the candidates debate
Laugh about it, shout about it
When you’ve got to choose
Ev’ry way you look at it, you lose
- Simon And Garfunkel, Mrs. Robinson Lyrics
Thank you for that, it’s one of my favorite songs….and The Graduate ranks right up there as one of my favorite movies. I agree with you about Big Oil being in charge of and in control of Big Green, and that the motive is to keep power generation centralized because he/she who controls that, controls everyone….or almost everyone. However, speaking of Peak Oil, there are some who refute this notion who are not conservative shills. Admittedly, they are few and far between, because most who deny or argue against Peak Oil are generally of the character I have described, but here’s one person who is not. I’m not saying I agree with this person, but I do appreciate his panache and he does have a way of arguing points that make you see issues from another perspective you may not have already considered.
http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr52.html
This Newsletter from McGowan really made me see Ruppert in a whole new light, and it allowed me to see the methodology you posited at work. Now, put on your bullet proof vest, because I suspect the the bullets will be coming in short order.
.
October 4th, 2012 at 5:27 am
Robin Datta,
The quarrel over The Great Global Warming Hoax™ is only worthwhile if one avers that there might still be time to mitigate the worst consequences by sufficiently drastic measures.
True, for the most part. But your sentiment is too utilitarian, IMO. Proper understanding of how and why we got here is still valuable in itself, no?
If like our host, one hews to the opinion that the window for mitigation has closed, (which should imply the closure of the window for prevention as well), then with regard to the quarrel, the proper attitude would be EFFIT!
Not necessarily the “proper attitude”, but I concur that, for the most part, it is now the attitude of our host, AFAICT.
Let those who wish to quarrel argue themselves hoarse. For the rest, better to quit carping, and carpe diem. Join the indifferent and the agnostics.
Carpe diem =/= Join the indifferent and agnostics
October 4th, 2012 at 5:36 am
.
I never waste my time doing anything now, it all has meaning.
You inferred this from I said, but I did not imply it. How you spend your time is your business, and how you value that use of time is your valuation. For me, it’s regressive to go over it again, but that’s for me, not necessarily for you. Obviously, you see some value in it, and since that’s so, have at it. I was merely making an observation….not a command or a demand, just an observation…take it, or leave it.
.
October 4th, 2012 at 6:05 am
With thanks to Dane Wigington, I’ve posted a new essay. It’s here.
October 4th, 2012 at 6:06 am
.
Here’s the Final Scene from The Graduate. Still gives me the Good Vibe Shivers when I watch it. Don’t you love the close up on the Establishment’s faces where they show their teeth clenched…they’re like hissing snakes speaking in Parseltongue….venomous, sadistic….vengeful and spiteful….they are The Cavaliers of which David Hackett Fischer wrote, and they hold the greatest contempt fr those of their own ilk who attempt to cast off that ilk. And the cross to bar them from breaching the door to the church…..PRICELESS. The very same religion that superficially served as glue for them, is the same mechanism that makes them wholly inept and unable to respond effectively to the loss of one of their own. And that scene in the bus when all the robots turn and look at them as though they are Aliens makes me think of The Stepford Wives as in “this does not compute…I really must get this recipe..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahFARm2j38c
Gawd I love this movie…I think I need to watch it again….I do every year or two, and it’s about time for a refresh.
.
October 4th, 2012 at 6:15 am
MB : “…nor am I a Scientist at all, and I do rely solely on the expertise of these individuals in forming that opinion. I am literally at their mercy, but that’s true of most things these days….when it comes to scientifically technical matters.”
Although there is much that is distressing and unacceptable in the world of science, like people who cheat or falsify data, and corruption by money, such as Big Pharma, there are also some built in safeguards, in that most scientists are highly competitive and determined to advance their careers, and to do that depends upon building a good reputation amongst their peers, by doing honest high quality research and getting it published in the learned journals. Their colleagues can soon tell who is full of crap and not worth serious attention, and who comes up with really impressive work that everyone respects. So if you follow the debates in any particular scientific field it begins to become fairly obvious who is worth listening to, and who the shills will say anything if it’ll earn them a few dollars from a corporation or think tank.
That’s why the tenureship idea was introduced, so that professors would be financially secure and not be bought or pressured into corruption. It hasn’t really worked. Just as in US politics, the administration can be bought and captured by corporations, so can academics. Once corruption starts, it spreads, because they all think ‘Well, if the other guy is doing it, I better do it too, or he’ll get ahead’, so the whole thing becomes rotten… looks like that’s the direction we’re going in, corruption by corporate fascism…
As for other issues raised, seems there’s a slightly surprising degree of agreement… I’m impressed, for example, that anyone noticed the false flag blowing up of flats blamed on the Chechens, which hardly ever gets a mention…
October 4th, 2012 at 6:43 am
ulvfugl,
That’s why the tenureship idea was introduced, so that professors would be financially secure and not be bought or pressured into corruption. It hasn’t really worked. Just as in US politics, the administration can be bought and captured by corporations, so can academics.
In the U.S., the main source of this was the passing by Congress in 1980 of the Bayh-Dole Act, which changed the relationship between academia and business. Before 1980, in academic institutions, any commercializable discoveries made from research funded with public money could not be licensed exclusively to one company. Not surprisingly, companies were not particularly interested in commercializing publicly-funded research discoveries, which then usually passed quickly into the public domain. University relationships with business thus typically were limited to providing education and training of undergrad/grad students who would then go on to work for industry.
The Bayh-Dole Act changed the licensing regulations to allow academic institutions to exclusively license to one company commercializable discoveries made from publicly-funded research. This change transformed the relationship between universities and business, from one that was primarily education/training in nature to one that was much more commercially-oriented. On-going generation of patentable, commercializable intellectual property is now an important component of tenure evaluation. And so the nature of tenure was transformed as well.
October 4th, 2012 at 7:04 am
Thanks for that, Arthur. All part of the neoliberal deregulation Milton Friedman-Reagan-Thatcher crap, i guess….
Incidentally, i am not any sort of scientist, i have no formal qualifications in any field, but I’ve studied biology, zoology, botany, ecology, animal behaviour, etc, in more depth than most professors. I’ve been an anarchist since I was 17 and a zen buddhist since shortly after, but my father taught in University for 35 years, and I was what I think you guys call a ‘campus brat’ with free run of the place, so I could use all the libraries, sit in on lectures, hang out with the students, mingle in staff meetings and parties, etc, so I got a fair idea of how it all worked, and my dad got papers published in Nature, which is about as good as it gets for recognition of scientific work. But all that was long ago, i’m not up to date with much anymore…
October 4th, 2012 at 7:30 am
ulvfugl,
Thanks for that, Arthur. All part of the neoliberal deregulation Milton Friedman-Reagan-Thatcher crap, i guess….
No problem. Incidently, the Bayh-Dole Act is considered by technology historians to have been a key driver in the development of the modern biotech industry. I agree up to a point. Personally, I think it might be better to say that the modern biotech industry developed in the particular way that it did largely because of the Bayh-Dole Act. If the Act had never been passed, things would have gone much, much differently. Hmmmm. The potential exists for a really great alternative history novel in that idea.
October 4th, 2012 at 7:32 am
ulvfugl,
What did your father do research on, back in the day, if I may ask?
October 4th, 2012 at 11:53 am
Its funny how everyone is off topic towards the end of the comments. Do me one huge favor and go outside look up everyday, when you notice something wierd (geoengineering) tell a friend to tell a friend to tell a friend. The only thing that can stop WHAT IS HAPPENING NOW is you and all the other people out there that care about this earth need to come together. Right now this is the only habbitable planet we know of so we need to treat it well. I fear the idea of having children not knowing what will be there for them in the comming years. Peace and love to all and earth the mother of our kind.
October 4th, 2012 at 12:27 pm
After reading the negative comments regarding this article and Dane as a person, I feel truly sickened. My hope for humanity and the earth is at an all-time low. Instead of intelligent discussion about geoengineering, it has devolved into petty arguments, insults, and commenters veering way off topic. But that’s the Internet for you.
To the doubters or undecided…open your eyes and look at the sky every once in a while. Watch some chemtrail videos on YouTube. Look at chemtrail photos online. The evidence is everywhere – staring us right in the face. We’ve just grown so accustomed to these trails, we don’t really notice them anymore.
Normal contrails don’t spread out into a white lingering artificial haze that blocks the sun for hours and hours. Chemtrails do. Why are there thousands of military jets flying back and forth in a grid pattern every day leaving huge persistent contrails? Why are these jets capable of turning the contrails on and off abruptly? Why don’t commercial aircraft leave the same type of lingering contrails? Why were the skies so much clearer 10 years ago? 20 years ago? When I was a kid, seeing any type of lingering contrail was a rare occurrence. And I lived near an air force base and major airport, both with tons of air traffic. What’s changed in those 20-25 years?
Is there sufficient evidence to irrefutably prove chemtrails are real and being used for a specific reason right now? No, probably not. What we need are military personnel or other insiders to come forward and blow the whistle. Give us some hard proof to bring chemtrails out of conspiracy theory and into fact. Until then, 99% of people are going to keep their heads buried in the sand and refuse to even consider the possibility. But all of us are going to continue suffering the health and environmental consequences.
October 4th, 2012 at 1:20 pm
On topic, fwiw
Why were the skies so much clearer 10 years ago? 20 years ago? When I was a kid, seeing any type of lingering contrail was a rare occurrence. And I lived near an air force base and major airport, both with tons of air traffic. What’s changed in those 20-25 years?
One thing that has changed is the increase in air travel which has grown every year…
Not saying that explains what you think you see, I’m not convinced either way re chem-trails, but air travel generally is very nasty, even if it’s just contrails…
Growth of the industry in recent years raised a number of ecological questions.
Domestic air transport grew in China at 15.5 percent annually from 2001 to 2006. The rate of air travel globally increased at 3.7 percent per year over the same time. In the EU greenhouse gas emissions from aviation increased by 87% between 1990 and 2006.[40] Despite continuing efficiency improvements from the major aircraft manufacturers, the expanding demand for global air travel has resulted in growing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Currently, the aviation sector, including US domestic and global international travel, make approximately 1.6 percent of global anthropogenic GHG emissions p/a. North America accounts for nearly 40 percent of the world’s GHG emissions from aviation fuel use.[41]
CO2 emissions from the jet fuel burned per passenger on an average 3,200 kilometers (2,000 mi) airline flight is about 353 kilograms (776 pounds).[42] Loss of natural habitat potential associated with the jet fuel burned per passenger on a 3,200 kilometers (2,000 mi) airline flight is estimated to be 250 square meters (2700 square feet).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airline
I read somewhere that the Pentagon wants wall-size high detail radar maps or everywhere, and to do that they need a ‘ceiling’ to bounce the radar off, so they seed the sky with aluminium etc, which makes a good reflector… but evidence ? Any strong evidence from a reputable impartial independent source for any of this ? Seen none yet…
http://www.theozonehole.com/airtraffic.htm
October 4th, 2012 at 1:33 pm
Hi Arthur,
What did your father do research on, back in the day, if I may ask?
It was actually quite interesting. It began as his personal PhD research, and went on for decades, because he kept passing off bits to PhD students, who got there’s long before he got his, at the end he had 36 student all doing spin off PhDs… anyway, it concerned the breeding of sheep… it had always been assumed that the rams mated with any females they could mount. He tethered a number of rams of different breeds and then did time lapse photography of the whole field to study the sheep behaviour, and discovered that it was actually the ewes that chose which ram they wanted to mate with, and they had clear preferences for certain rams, that was one of his major contributions that got into Nature… loads of other stuff like that… meant I read all his books on animal ethology, Tinbergen, etc… I’ve been thinking about that stuff ever since… If I had a spare lifetime to do over, I’d devote it to bio-semiotics, I think there’s so much wonderful fascinating stuff in that area…. look at the biosphere as semiosphere, everything is sending messages and signals to everything else, all the time, from bacteria all the way up to charismatic megafauna… ties into Gaia theory, physiology of the biosphere, etc, nobody has really looked at that adequately… but alas, now I am old and the world is so fucked up,
but thanks for asking 
October 4th, 2012 at 2:21 pm
uglfugl:
You keep saying that increasing atmospheric CO2 will cause acidification of the oceans. That, my friend, would be a case of direct poisoning of the oceans by CO2, because atmospheric CO2 is constantly being absorbed at the ocean surface, and some of that CO2 converts to carbolic acid in the water. That’s why some people think that increasing atmospheric CO2 will cause acidification of the oceans.
But I think that the ocean’s CO2-buffering mechanisms are resilient enough to handle a doubling, tripling, or even quadrupling of atmospheric CO2. Why do I think that? Because the ocean has buffered CO2 levels of 2,000 ppm in the past without a catastophic collapse of all life in the ocean.
By “minerals” acting as a buffer to acidity in the ocean, I meant bicarbonates, carbonates, boron, silicates, and soluble ions such as calcium, magnesium, iron, sodium, potassium, phosphorus, zinc, flouride, copper, and others.
“Weathering” (rain and snow) leaches minerals out of terrestrial rocks, and rivers carry the minerals in solution into the ocean. In the ocean the dissolved minerals combine with C02, forming carbonate compounds, which either sink to the ocean floor as sediment, or get incorporated into the bodies of phytoplankton, corals, and other sea creatures. That’s how the sequestration of carbon in the ocean works. The carbon sediments on the sea floor gradually turn into limestone, which, via plate tectonics, eventually bring the limestone beds into a terrestrial landscape, where the minerals get weathered back into the ocean.
When the temperature of the oceans increases, evaporation increases, which makes clouds that bring rain and snow to the land, which increases weathering and the transport of larger amounts of minerals into the ocean.
Both phytoplankton and terrestrial plants consume CO2, and phytoplankton responds to seasonal changes in light and heat, just as terrestrial plants do. NASA satellite data shows that there was a 6% increase in the earth’s terrestrial biomass from 1982 to 1999. http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/GlobalGarden/
In addition to buffering acidity, the dissolved minerals in the ocean also act like a fertilizer to promote phytoplankton growth. One of the proposed geoengineering projects to mitigate global warming would dump iron or other minerals into the ocean to nourish the phytoplankton and foster their growth. The resulting algal blooms would consume large amounts of CO2, and voila, atmospheric and oceanic CO2 would be mitigated and sequestered in the ocean. The big risk with that method would be that overfertilization of the phytoplankton with minerals could cause massive toxic algal blooms that could threaten all other life in the ocean.
NOAA and the EPA have reported that algal blooms (phytoplankton) are increasing in frequency and intensity. That report contradicts your claim that phytoplankton are imminently threatened with collapse.
October 4th, 2012 at 2:30 pm
uglfugl wrote: “I read somewhere that the Pentagon wants wall-size high detail radar maps or everywhere, and to do that they need a ‘ceiling’ to bounce the radar off, so they seed the sky with aluminium etc, which makes a good reflector… but evidence ? Any strong evidence from a reputable impartial independent source for any of this ? Seen none yet…”
Conversely, I have read about several studies which showed that increasing the density of aerosols and particulates in the air does not improve radio signals, but impedes them.
October 4th, 2012 at 2:35 pm
USA/NATO/Israel Axis of Evil wrote: “The carbon sediments on the sea floor gradually turn into limestone, which, via plate tectonics, eventually bring the limestone beds into a terrestrial landscape, where the minerals get weathered back into the ocean.”
Here’s a grammatically improved version of that sentence: “The carbon sediments on the sea floor gradually turn into limestone, and the action of plate tectonics eventually bring those limestone beds into a terrestrial landscape, where the minerals get weathered back into the ocean.”
October 4th, 2012 at 2:51 pm
Conversely, I have read about several studies which showed that increasing the density of aerosols and particulates in the air does not improve radio signals, but impedes them.
I think that we are probably talking about different things here. Yes, radio transmissions, at certain frequencies, probably get impeded, but if say you wanted to get a radar picture of something far over the horizon, it may be that a powerful radar signal directed upwards, hits the aluminium, which is a very effective mirror, gets redirected downward, and then the returning echo signals are analysed and give the picture. But that’s only speculation.
Surely, if they are spraying quantities of barium, aluminium, radium, strontium, whatever, someone could get samples and have them analysed, by a reputable independent agency, that could distinguish them from other known pollution ?
I certainly don’t dismiss the possibility, when we know of the many insane and evil things governments and military have been involved with, but I cannot yet see convincing evidence, some of the videos just look normal to me, and have straightforward explanations. There’s a high flight path above me, probably 30,000ft, and the number of planes is astonishing, sometimes a dozen in view at one time, all on their way to Americas, via Ireland. they are just standard commercial jets. Sometimes the contrails do join up and form cloud cover. It offends me greatly but I don’t see it as chemtrails.
October 4th, 2012 at 3:01 pm
You keep saying that increasing atmospheric CO2 will cause acidification of the oceans. That, my friend, would be a case of direct poisoning of the oceans by CO2, because atmospheric CO2 is constantly being absorbed at the ocean surface, and some of that CO2 converts to carbolic acid in the water. That’s why some people think that increasing atmospheric CO2 will cause acidification of the oceans.
I am saying that increasing atmospheric CO2 IS CAUSING ACIDIFICATION NOW. I don’t see how you can argue with that. Anybody with the lab and ships to take samples can test it and verify the claims, it’s not even controversial !
As I quoted to you : The ocean absorbs about 30 percent of the carbon dioxide we put in the air through fossil fuel burning, and this triggers a chemical reaction that produces hydrogen, thereby lowering the water’s pH.
The sea today is 30 percent more acidic than pre-industrial levels, which is creating corrosive water that is washing over America’s coasts. At the current rate of global worldwide carbon emissions, the ocean’s acidity could double by 2100.
How is it that you don’t understand the point re the word ‘poison’ ? Words matter.
I know the rest. I’m weary of this exchange, when we seem to speak past one another.
You seem to understand roughly how the system works but you still have not grasped what really matters, that is the rate of the change.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=plants-carbon-sinking-capacity-is-much-lower-than-thought
October 4th, 2012 at 3:03 pm
Irreversible Warming Will Cause Sea Levels to Rise for Thousands of Years to Come
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/10/121001191531.htm
October 4th, 2012 at 3:21 pm
uglfugl:
You’re probably right about high-altitude aluminum acting as a radar reflector. (The studies I looked at were talking about urban and industrial smog interfering with radio communications – which might be a “scatter effect”.) If aluminum powder is a great reflector (which totally makes sense), then high-altitude aluminum spraying should help increase albedo. I’ve visited the NOAA website that logs US cloud-seeding operations, and aluminum is by far the most common cloud-seeding aerosol in use.
Recently I had a very involved online debate with a Chemtrail believer, in which I wrote in elaborate detail every reason why I don’t believe that there is a massive covert US government Chemtrail operation. I could repost some of my Chemtrail skeptic writing here, but I’m very tired of the subject, which I find almost too sophomoric to endure.
Most of my local friends believe in Chemtrails. I wish I had a dollar for every time J– told me that people should start shooting down the Chemtrail planes “to save the planet.”
J– is in the process of emigrating (Em I grateful to my country of origin? Hell, no!) to Sri Lanka, but he had to return here for a while between visas. I love clouds, and one evening I pointed out some beautiful stormclouds coming in from the ocean, and J– said “Those aren’t natural clouds — those are Chemtrail clouds. Artificial clouds. None of the clouds in America are real anymore.”
I think that it’s sad that J– no longer sees any natural clouds — only sinister, threatening ones.
October 4th, 2012 at 3:31 pm
I believe there were cloud seeding experiments in UK in 1950s using silver iodide to make rain, and a huge downpour resulted with flooding and several deaths, so the information was classified and kept secret to avoid responsibility for all the damage, insurance claims and drowned people…
October 4th, 2012 at 3:47 pm
If my friend J– is correct that the US government is spraying Chemtrails to intentionally cause disease and death in the population, J– would be justified in wanting to shoot down the Chemtrail planes.
Likewise, if CO2 actually is the extreme and present threat that people say it is, ecoterrorists would be fully justified in sabotaging every fossil-fuel burning engine or furnace they could lay their hands on. After all, the survival of the planet is at stake.
October 4th, 2012 at 4:13 pm
After all, the survival of the planet is at stake.
My sentiments too. But in practice, can it work ? Or does it just cause more suffering with no real result ? Perhaps it’s just too soon… I’ve thought about it a lot, but I never arrive at any very clear resolution. I’m too old and sickly to consider direct action these days, It’s also maybe somewhat unwise to discuss as an emotive topic where some readers might get the wrong impression if you see what I mean, I believe I may already have received a mild rebuke on the new thread…
October 4th, 2012 at 6:00 pm
The Dongas
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/gallery/2012/sep/28/twyford-down-m3-protest-pictures#/?picture=396869527&index=0
October 4th, 2012 at 7:48 pm
USA/NATO/Israel Axis of Evil
You wrote:
“Both phytoplankton and terrestrial plants consume CO2, and phytoplankton responds to seasonal changes in light and heat, just as terrestrial plants do. NASA satellite data shows that there was a 6% increase in the earth’s terrestrial biomass from 1982 to 1999.”
Yes well… if these life forms die and are not replaced becouse of Ocean Acidification and global temperature rise, and redistribution of world rainfall, then no carbon sink is in effect, or a greatly reduced one the following seasons, and that means more of the ‘benign’ CO2 in the atmosphere, without the in/out breathing on an annual basis.
This will greatly increase all the effects by adding to net world CO2.
Knock yourself out with that.
October 4th, 2012 at 9:19 pm
OzMan wrote: “Yes well… if these life forms die and are not replaced becouse of Ocean Acidification and global temperature rise, and redistribution of world rainfall, then no carbon sink is in effect, or a greatly reduced one the following seasons, and that means more of the ‘benign’ CO2 in the atmosphere, without the in/out breathing on an annual basis.
This will greatly increase all the effects by adding to net world CO2.
Knock yourself out with that.”
The modern varieties of phytoplankton and corals go back more than 200 million years, during which time they have survived long periods of Hothouse Earth and Ice Ages, as well as an atmospheric CO2 of 2,000 ppm that lasted for 100 million years.
Since high temperatures and high CO2 didn’t exterminate the phytoplankton and the corals in the past, why should it happen now? “Rate of change” does not provide an answer, because extreme changes in climate have occured rapidly in the past.
Global temperatures were 2 to 3 degrees Celsius higher than today during the Holocene Climate Optimum (between 9,000 to 5,000 years ago).
“Based on the paleoclimate record from ice and ocean cores, the last warm period in the Arctic peaked about 8,000 years ago, during the so-called Holocene Thermal Maximum. Some studies suggest that as recent as 5,500 years ago, the Arctic had less summertime sea ice than today. However, it is not clear that the Arctic was completely free of summertime sea ice during this time.
The next earliest era when the Arctic was quite possibly free of summertime ice was 125,000 years ago, during the height of the last major interglacial period, known as the Eemian. Temperatures in the Arctic were higher than now and sea level was also 4 to 6 meters (13 to 20 feet) higher than it is today because the Greenland and Antarctic ice
sheets had partly melted.” http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/faq/
Polar bears have been around for five million years, during which time they have survived numerous cold Glacials and warm Interglacials. The summertime Arctic sea ice was greatly reduced during the Holocene Thermal Maximum (between 9 and 5 thousand years ago), and the summertime Arctic sea ice was possibly gone during the Eemian Interglacial (125,000 years ago). Since the polar bears survived the Holocene Thermal Maximum, the Eemian interglacial, and many other warm periods with reduced summer sea ice, why should I think that reduced summer sea ice threatens the polar bears with extinction today?
October 5th, 2012 at 1:40 am
USA/NATO/Israel Axis of Evil
You wrote:
“The modern varieties of phytoplankton and corals go back more than 200 million years, during which time they have survived long periods of Hothouse Earth and Ice Ages, as well as an atmospheric CO2 of 2,000 ppm that lasted for 100 million years….
Since high temperatures and high CO2 didn’t exterminate the phytoplankton and the corals in the past, why should it happen now? “Rate of change” does not provide an answer, because extreme changes in climate have occured rapidly in the past.”
Look, your rebuttal of the rapid change reply I would have put up, and others have done already, is not washing. The rapid change is going to take place in a matter of a decade or less, at least untill it hits the high it is heading to, and it will not stop if we dont. The type of changes we are looking at have been ramping for over two centuries to today.
In the past periods you considder they have been centuries long and that is enough adaptive time for populations of sea creatures to be selected out and in and an adaptation takes place. not in the emerging scenario, of rapid OA and global temperature rise, and CO2 rise.
What you also don’t seem to be appreciating is that this long term variability you ‘document’ is still in effect from all the factors that caused them to occur then. large solar cycles, maximums and minimums, all still apply. We have added to these a higher baseline, way too high to remain stable.
But you have a good defence, “CO2 is not a global temp forcer”. Why you can conclude this, when every major international scientific report and countless institutes and scientific university labs are yelling that it does is very worrting.
There has also been a very prudent argument made by many beurocrats and concerned scientist, which includes economists, over the preceeding decades, that there is a risk that the climate scientists are wrong,but the risks of inaction if they are right is so large in economic and biosphere consequences, we don’t need absolute proof to begin serious mittigation.
But to get through to you, since your apriori standpoint is CO2 is not a significant global temperature forcer, is to go for that error, or whatever the problem is. Also you seem to be saying that the Earth has coped with much higher concentrations of CO2…Under other atmospheric conditions, not without other contaminants there also like Sulphur dioxide, and others. They effect, in a add or subtract manner too, to the odverall capture of solar radiation and antrapment of heat etc.
Look at the risk, look at the actual temperature rises, and you will begin to see you are on the Titanic.
October 5th, 2012 at 8:23 am
The bottom line in my mind is that global warming is a symptom, not a root cause. The root cause is overpopulation and runaway compound economic growth. When you undertake a program to mask the symptom without doing anything about the root cause, you are doomed to a terrible failure.
October 5th, 2012 at 11:20 am
OzMan:
I would agree that CO2 can cause catastrophic climate change if you (or anyone) could show me one occurence in the paleoclimate record where that happened in the past. I have yet to see any study that confirms a CO2-caused Extinction event in the past. Without any example of a CO2-caused Extinction event in the past, I have good reason to doubt that one will happen in the future — particularly in the near future. Without any clear example of a CO2-caused extinction in the past, predicting such an event in the future is mere theorizing and speculation.
In my previous post, when I mentioned rapid climate change in the past, I was referring to events that happened on a scale of decades — not hundreds of years. Here are some examples of rapid climate change during the recent geological past:
Warming of approximately 10 degrees Celsius “within several decades or less” at the Younger Dryas/Preboreal Transition, 11,500 years ago. http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005QSRv…24..513G
Warming of approximately 4 degrees Celsius “within a few years” at the end of the Preboreal Oscillation, 11,270 years ago. http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008E&PSL.268..397K
Abrupt +6 degrees Celsius warming 22,000 years ago on Antarctica. http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004QSRv…23….7T
“Dansgaard–Oeschger events are rapid climate fluctuations that occurred 25 times during the last glacial period. Some scientists claim that the events occur quasi-periodically with a recurrence time being a multiple of 1,470 years, but this is debated. The comparable climate cyclicity during the Holocene is referred to as Bond events.
In the Northern Hemisphere, they take the form of rapid warming episodes, typically in a matter of decades, each followed by gradual cooling over a longer period. For example, about 11,500 years ago, averaged annual temperatures on the Greenland ice sheet warmed by around 8 °C over 40 years, in three steps of five years, where a 5 °C change over 30-40 years is more common.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dansgaard-Oeschger_event
———————
Polar bears have been around for 5 million years, during which time they have survived the 20-some frigid Glacials and warm Interglacials of the Quaternary Era. The cyclical advance and retreat of the continental glaciers required the polar bears to migrate or adapt repeatedly — sometimes during periods of rapid climate change that may have occured within decades.
“Due to the exceptionally high proportion of continental shelves in the Arctic Ocean, the combined effect of glaciation and sea-level fall reduced the area of this ocean by as much as 50%, and had a profound effect on hydrographic, sedimentary, and biologic processes.” http://bprc.osu.edu/geo/publications/darby_etal_procean_06.pdf
“The geochemical cycle of carbon indicates more than a 10-fold decrease in atmospheric CO2 since the middle of the Mesozoic Era [100 million years ago]. However, it is unclear what caused the decline in CO2 levels, and whether this decline is the cause of global cooling or if it is the result.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quaternary_glaciation
Note the uncertainty in this sentence: “However, it is unclear what caused the decline in CO2 levels, and whether this decline is the cause of global cooling or if it is the result.”
October 5th, 2012 at 11:32 am
John D wrote: “The bottom line in my mind is that global warming is a symptom, not a root cause. The root cause is overpopulation and runaway compound economic growth. When you undertake a program to mask the symptom without doing anything about the root cause, you are doomed to a terrible failure.”
I do not dispute the fact that humans have damaged the environment in the past and that they continue to do so now. DDT, leaded gasoline, and nuclear fallout are examples of that. I also agree that the root cause is overpopulation and runaway compound economic growth.
However, I do not believe that an increase of atmospheric CO2 on the order of a few hundred ppm is likely to cause a catastrophic change of the entire earth’s climate.
October 6th, 2012 at 7:25 am
USA/NATO/Israel Axis of Evil
“However, I do not believe…”
You present some material and then conclude it is a belief. It will take me personally some time to digest your links, but others may have seen them earlier and have a view. I appreciate your reponse here. Thanks.
Also the John D quote is referring I think to that CO2 is a symptom not of global warming, but as an end product of overpopulation, which he regards as a prime cause. He is NOT IMO using this point to counter the view that CO2 is directly effecting global temperature rise.
You should be able to linguistically detect that and I feel that you have misquoted his original meaning, no?
October 8th, 2012 at 3:39 pm
Swedish Green Party leader Pernilla Hagberg becomes first major political leader to
claim toxic ‘chemtrails’ are real, not a wild conspiracy theory.