An Apology, a Response, and a Free Dystopian Science Fiction Novel from Geoffrey Chia; The Thrilla in Doomerzilla (Extinction or Bottleneck?), a Podcast

by Dr Geoffrey Chia, Cardiologist/Physician

1. Apology to Mr Friedrich Kling

I made a grave mistake in my NBL critique article for which I owe a public apology to Mr. Friedrich Kling. Mr Kling never posted any holocaust denialist articles, I got the name wrong, it was Gerald Spezio who was the culprit, who had been repeatedly banned by Dr McPherson for such behaviour. Once again, apologies to Mr Kling.

My sloppy and stupid mistake in naming the wrong person highlights once again the principle that irresponsible “free” speech, especially if harmful to and misrepresentative of another person or group of people, should be deleted or banned and if a mistake is made it should be corrected. No one should be exempt from such principles, especially myself. It also shows that Dr McPherson despite his busy schedule has endeavoured to enforce responsible free speech on his blog, having banned holocaust denialist posts when he identified them, which actually negates one of my previous criticisms. Mr Kling is not one of the whiny, anonymous, cowardly, killjoy orcs or WACKOs who I oppose.

 

2. Response of the WACKOs

I have been accused of using a harsh tone which is true, however that is not a patch on the abusive, vulgar and profane language used by the the prime WACKO himself in the past. Didn’t like my tone? Well then look to yourself as being the worst offender, all well documented. He responded first off the bat with hysterical laughter befitting the promoter of an insane death cult.  The rest banded together with mutual backslapping to agree with each other and achieve “majority opinion” and thus “discredit” my ideas. The obvious tired tactic they employ is to wilfully misinterpret and misrepresent what I have written, to set up a straw man argument which they then “demolish”, then congratulate each other on the consensus they have achieved. I have encountered exactly the same behaviour when dealing with global warming denialists. They were unable to counteract my arguments with any reasoned response. Dr McPherson himself stated: I disagree with essentially nothing in Chia’s essay except the harsh tone and inappropriate attacks on other people.

The fact is that my harsh tone was directed against people who were many, many times harsher in their tone to others in the past. They just did not like a taste of their own medicine. The WACKOs claim I launched an ad hominem attack against them, which merely demonstrated their misrepresentation or lack of understanding of the term. An ad hominem attack is a baseless, unsubstantiated denigration of another person’s character which is irrelevant to the main topic of discussion (e.g., accusing James Hansen of being a child molester “proves” that global warming is a hoax). Calling out a proven embezzler to prevent him from seizing your father’s retirement fund is not an ad hominem attack, it is an accurate evidence-based description, a factual exposé, required to prevent harm. My factual description of the WACKOs was solidly based on well substantiated abundant evidence of their previous behaviour which had been thoroughly documented on NBL ad nauseum. If the WACKOs found such a factual description of their previous behaviour to be insulting, then they have only themselves to blame. I put forward credible hypotheses as to the reasons for their perverse mindset based on the few snippets they had revealed of themselves. Perhaps a trained psychiatrist such as Dr Carolyn Baker may wish to evaluate those hypotheses. The WACKOs behaviour was entirely relevant to the main topic of discussion, NTHE, as explained below.

Science depends on reasoned criticism for progress. After initially listening to Dr McPherson’s arguments in 2012 I found them very convincing based on overwhelming evidence and was not able to think of any strategy by which humanity could escape NTHE. Some critics disagreed with him because they were “optimistic” that humanity would find a solution. That sort of criticism is vague and useless, being based on faith rather than reason. Reasoned criticism would require them to specify in detail a feasible strategy by which some humans could conceivably survive this Permian-type global wipeout we are facing. After ruminating for almost two years, I believe I have worked out such a strategy. Not guaranteed, not foolproof, but not impossible to implement. I emailed Dr McPherson asking if he could identify any factual or logical flaws in my essay and asked him for his reasoned criticisms of my arguments. His email response to me? “You are correct Dr Chia“.

The main point I want to make is that Dr McPherson is not the founder or promoter of an insane death cult. He will go in the direction that evidence, facts and reason take him. That is the mark of a true scientist. The WACKOs however are a different sort of creature who have flocked to NBL to promote their insane death cult ideology, to drown out reasoned discussion and to sabotage any survival initiatives, for reasons best known to themselves. It is essential to expose these poisonous and harmful hangers-on for what they are. If they want to kill themselves, by all means go ahead, but encouraging other people to commit suicide is simply not on. If they are personally not interested in any survival strategies, no one is forcing them to participate, but trying to scuttle the initiatives of others is simply not on.

As a physician, is it sufficient to merely treat diseases as they arise? All physicians will agree that prevention is better than cure. Initiatives to reduce smoking require we must also oppose the tobacco lobby. Healthy eating initiatives require that we advocate public health measures to minimise salt, sugars (especially high fructose corn syrup) and saturated fats in processed foods or at least ensure the foods are clearly labelled. This puts us in direct opposition with commercial vested interests. The granddaddy public health issue of all time, global warming, was essentially ignored by the medical community, an utter disgrace. The reasons for such inaction were varied, but one reason was that it required we oppose the most powerful vested interest of all: the fossil fuel lobby. It is now too late on that score, the horse has bolted. If only more medicos were willing to stand up against those who would cause harm, accepting that they would be making enemies by doing so, things could have been different. In my attempts to devise a feasible plan for humanity to avoid extinction, I have been reviled in this forum, a truly bizarre situation. Nevertheless I forge on and I oppose the WACKOs.

3. Free dystopian science fiction novel

The medical community also abrogated their duty to oppose illegitimate warfare, one of the few notable exceptions being Dr Helen Caldicott, one of my heroes and renowned opponent of nuclear madness. Attached via three pdf files is a dystopian science fiction novel I wrote 10 years ago in response to the invasion of Iraq which unfortunately remains all too relevant today. The ongoing atrocities and civil war are a direct legacy of the US invasion. Obviously some of the thoughts in the novel are out of date. I believed then that energy limits were likely to hit us before global warming catastrophe. I believed that solutions were still possible and the scenario of near extinction was a farce, not a genuine concern at the time. Since writing that novel and associated essays, I have abandoned hope of any high tech fixes to our predicament. The reality of our future is turning out to be worse than depicted in the novel, hence it may be better to call it a eutopian (not utopian) rather than dystopian novel. I used a pseudonym for ironic purposes but made no effort to hide who the real author was. If you enjoy it, pass it on. If not, don’t read it. Quite simple really.

Cover art

Front matter

Text

*******

The Thrilla in Doomerzilla (Extinction or Bottleneck?), Podcast

Off the Microphones of Guy McPherson, RE & Monsta

Follow us on Twitter @doomstead666
Friend us on Facebook

Aired on the Doomstead Diner on June 26, 2014

logopodcast

Discuss this Conversation at the Podcast Table inside the Diner

THE THRILLA IN DOOMERVILLA

 

              GUY McPHERSON                   RE

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-tox5703QZ0s/T-7A3lngFKI/AAAAAAAAKAI/_4sCysPtsYY/s1600/7190462.jpeg RE-BM-Camp3

                 EXTINCTION                   BOTTLENECK

 

We have been doing Podcasts for a full year now, and one of the first guests we invited on to talk Collapse with was Guy McPherson of Nature Bats Last. The one-year anniversary of the Podcasts seemed like a good interval on which to catch up with Guy and further discuss the issues surrounding Collapse, in Guy’s case with emphasis on the Climate and Pollution issues we are currently facing down, which is where his focus lies.

Of all the bloggers who are looking at Collapse issues, Guy has perhaps the most radical view, that the current spin down will not just lead to Collapse of Industrial Civilization, but in fact lead to a Near Term Human Extinction by mid-century. This isn’t my view, I tend to think we will see a large population collapse and Bottleneck of Homo Sapiens by mid-century, but not Extinction on this timeline. Over the course of the last year on both of our blogs, Nature Bats Last for Guy and the Doomstead Diner for me, we have come into conflict on several occasions arguing the probabilities here. In this Podcast, we hash out some of these differences of opinion, while managing not to get tooooo ticked off at each other. LOL.

This is Part 1 of a 2 part conversation with Guy, in Part 2 Guy and my co-host on the Collapse Cafe Monsta further discuss the issues. I had to sign off on participating in that part of the discussion because the Cafe where I use their free WiFi closed unexpectedly early that day. We will air Part II in the next week or so hopefully.

Whether you are in the Uber Doom camp of Guy and believe that we will see the Extinction of Homo sapiens and just about all other life forms above the level of the Tardigrades or in the Full Doom Camp and think we are approaching a Population Bottleneck on the order of Toba, which knocked down Homo sapiens to just 10,000 Human Souls or 1000 Breeding Pairs left standing, you certainly will get an earful of DOOM in this Podcast from both Guy and me. If you are Doomer Lite and just think this is a blip in Generational Collapse of the Strauss & Howe 4th Turning variety, or if you are Cornucopian and think the Cold Fusion Cavalry is right around the corner here to Ride to the Rescue, you probably won’t agree with most of what is said, but still worth listening to IMHO.

Also, don’t miss the Anniversary Vidcast of the Collapse Cafe with Ugo Bardi of Resource Limits and Gail Tverberg of Our Finite World. We discuss NTHE issues in the second half of the Vidcast.

…and that’s all the DOOM, this time until next time, HERE on the Doomstead Diner.

:)

RE

_______

McPherson was interviewed 23 June 2014 by SFPI radio

_______

Part two of McPherson’s 12 April 2014 presentation at the University of Rhode Island is embedded below. Part one is embedded at the Recent video tab.

Comments 153

  • Hierarchical societies are based on production surpluses and strive to regiment and domesticate all their members, whether gentlemen or goats, ladies or llamas, children or camels.

    One of the prime features of domestication (besides shrinking brain size, documented even in humans) is the loss of many other capabilities that are no longer as much needed in the changed milieu.

    The classic example in humans is shrinkage of the teeth, about 1% in every 2,000 years since the control of fire. Loss of sight in cave denizens, both vertebrate and invertebrate, is another classic example.

    Prior to the arrival of the Europeans, the natives of the (now) Manhattan island had their environment and dynamic ecosystems were intact; they were well adapted to that milieu, without computers, phones, office water coolers, Starbucks and fast food.

    Fast forward to today’s battalions of cubicle serfs: if any one of them were to be transported in a time machine back to the same place in pre-European Manhattan, that person’s survival would be even shorter than one of the natives temporarily separated from the tribe. Both the cubicle serf and the separated tribesman would be dependent on the tribe for long-term survival.

    Today’s Manhattan is entirely dependent on its built up infrastructure and the sustaining flows from its hinterland. Juice for the grid, water in the taps, food on the supermarket shelves, and millions of other items trucked, shipped (in its original, narrow meaning) or flown in from elsewhere.

    The wholesale loss of physical, social (community) and mental skills associated with abdicating so much of one’s functionality in nature unquestioningly to a hierarchy (and mostly a nameless and faceless hierarchy at that, except for a few top functionaries) leaves one in the position of the blind cave insect, or the flightless island bird without predators.

    Nor can we expect the hierarchy to willingly transition itself to oblivion. From those with the pomp and pelf to those picking crumbs that fall from the master’s table (“entitlement) all these folks will defend the status quo, even as it continues to be hollowed out from inside and eroded from outside. BAU: keepin’ until it’s impossible to keep on.

    And then what? A rapid loss of the present supporting flows that are normally channeled through hierarchy will leave the supported ones both without the skills and the biospheric/ecosystem environment that supported our hunter-gatherer ancestors. Some want to survive through BBBB – a stash of bullets, beans, britches and band-aids. Others seek edible forest gardens, permaculture, hydroponics, aquaponics, various communities, remote oceanic islands, and whatever. Unfortunately Nature not only Bids Last but also holds THREE jokers: resource depletion and environmental degradation, and climate disruption.

    And Nature is in no hurry. “A thousand ages in Thy sight are like an evening gone”. An “age” in both the Judaic and Aryan traditions is seven years. An evening is 7,000 years; an evening and a morning is 14,000 years, if we should go by Rabbi (and physicist) Aryeh Kaplan’s reading of the Tanakh. Let’s hope concrete domes are sturdily designed and built. Timeframes of multiple millennia are a bit longish, even with the patience of a Job. (Not the Apple fellow).

  • ‘Civilization killed us. Plant no crops, build no cities. Live like a wild animal, kill nothing, eat only that which falls from the trees, sleep on the ground, bathe in the river.’

    pat, i have one crucial point of disagreement, one which opens up a nasty can of worms by basically questioning whether life is worth living in a world of predators and prey. wild animals, predators are killers by both nature and necessity. have u killed any mosquitos or other bugs lately? have u eaten meat or fish? even if u’re a committed vegan, will u kill to save yourself or a loved one?

    if and when one comes to term with the nature of this dog eat dog kill or be killed world while also understanding that all biological life on earth is family… i have sympathy for your position, but is it practical? if the answer is no, one must then deal with disillusionment/nihilism and dispense with any further pretensions of being ‘moral’ (except in a limited selfish way).

    other than that one point, i love what u’re saying, empathize and identify with it. even as hypocritically i’m enjoying the comfort of industrial civ. near it’s peak, and knowing i’m very likely a dead duck without it.
    ____________________________________________________

    ‘“Life is a comedy to those who think, a tragedy to those who feel.” – Jean Racine, via ‘ed’

    ain’t that the truth!

    ‘(In the upcoming transitional phase, though, if you happen across
    the smoked corpse of one of those Koch dudes, I’d go for a few
    slices on a hoagie roll with lettuce & Russian dressing…you
    know, the sandwich the delis call “Putin on the Ritz”.)’

    babytyrone, thanks for sharing that punny ending!

  • “Perhaps a trained psychiatrist such as Dr Carolyn Baker may wish to evaluate those hypotheses.” – Dr. Chia”

    Baker is not a psychiatrist. Psychiatrists are Medical Doctors, a distinction I would expect a cardiologist not only to perceive, but to defend.

    ——
    Wow, what a tedious and tendentious semi-faux-apology by the passive-aggressive aggressive Chia. I’m not sure what the point is of his drive-by blasts at “wackos” who (strangely?) take the blog owner’s propositions seriously. Damned if we do, damned if we don’t. As wildwoman points out, more pointless testosterone sprayed in our general direction.

    @Mark, don’t let the screen door hit ya where the Good Lord split ya…

    @Friedrich, I’d agree if not for the fact that there is no “solution”. It’s true that dictatorships can effect change that democracies will never countenance. I may be mistaken, but I heard somewhere that the old Castro regime distributed pressure-cookers so that energy might be saved in the cooking of staple foods. That’s the kind of imposition a “democracy” could/would be unlikely to implement.

    I was in a situation with a number of young Americans most recently. I mentioned the possibility of the military taking over the functioning of the USG (this is already in partial implementation on levels they and the rest of the public can’t/won’t acknowledge, but the possibility for more overt management is real, imo). The young Americans were horrified and repulsed at my mentioning of this, but I pointed out that the military can impose emergency (or “emergency”) compliance on a number of necessary levels that we would not ordinarily accept: as in the previous example, regarding resource use.

  • @Apneaman, re. your link:

    “I thought ‘oh well, this makes sense, I just hope females will still survive’”

    Bwah ha ha ha ha…..!

  • Oops. forgot to add the “unclear on the concept” tag in my last comment.

  • @ RE

    So, having made a total fool of yourself, showing us all that you don’t even understand how the software that YOU SET UP actually works, and accusing me of being a dimwit, when I am correct and you are wrong, you try to hide your stupidity by cluttering up the thread with even more junk in your frantic efforts to smear me.

    All because YOU are a liar, and I am naming you as such, in public.
    I responded at greater length on the version of this thread that appears on the Forum, fwiw.

    @ Brunswickian

    re siddhis.

    Yes.

    re totally underwhelmed
    and YAWN

    Yes, me too

    @ Tony Weddle

    re your nonsense, my response on the Forum

    @ Godofredo Aravena

    My response on the Forum thread

    A wise person understands that it is almost an obligation to share “enlightenment”

    I have never claimed to have any great wisdom or to be enlightened. I express my opinions, tell people what I think, answer questions as best I can, try to explain what is happening, as I understand it, and so on.
    People think that there is something to be found, to be discovered, to be gained, to be achieved, and so on.

    It’s mostly nonsense, imo. We are already there, or rather, here. There’s nowhere to get to. If you don’t know how to find everything you seek, here, now, in this very moment, wherever you may be, between this breath and the next, then you are wasting your efforts, thoughts, energy and precious life time.

    @ infanttyrone

    A million naked ladies in the desert, I’m sure I dreamed that one time, didn’t I ? :-)

    @ mt

    Thanks.
    I’ll let you into my personal private exclusive secret Death Cult, but you have to sell me your soul, ‘k ?

    @ Robin Datta

    re Taffy was a Welshman

    Racist taunts are common in most countries where different ethnic groups coexist. You may know that. Are there any exceptions ?

    Twll dîn pob Sais !

  • Robin Datta,
    It is probably not too much of a stretch to add a fourth joker,which is the natural tendency of humans to resort to war when resource limits become urgent.Climate disruption will be hastening those limits which would be upon us within years or decades anyway due to the ever increasing pressure of the human population.(Now over 7.2 billion )
    There are now 2 books with the title “Climate Wars”, one by G.Dyer,which I have read,and a more recent one by Welzer.Both contain details of various hotspots to come as water,food,minerals and other resources become increasingly scarce.

  • Hey everybody, would it not be ironic in the extreme if NTHE turns out to be for quiche-eaters? I refer to UNTHA: Ultra Near Term Human Annihilation courtesy of the ALIEN INVASION!

    My main source is none other than Catherine Austin Fitts who will be known to many. She did an interview on RED ICE radio. Apparently, the skinny is that many US$ trillions have vanished into the black budget as a desperate attempt to develop tech to avert the threat. The meeting of two cultures with a marked disparity in tech does not go well for the loteks.

    The drug trade in the US was permitted as a tax on the population and was seen to be in the ultimate good.

    One would hope that the guys running the breakaway economy are much smarter than the guys running US foreign policy!!

    All very interesting.

  • On a whim I just searched Google for UNTHA (I had just made that up) and……..UNTHA is North America’s leading provider of industrial waste shredders and grinders

    Spooky

  • Question everything.

    In our modern belief, there are many things that are not coherent.
    In some cases, we use our perception as human beings, and we export that to others. Being the others either other humans, or other animals, or other living beings.

    The broad expression of suffering, many times used on NBL, regarding children of the current or next generation is a good example. If I suffer for whatever reason, then the others must suffer, when clearly suffering is a quite personal reaction. Some will suffer, others will not, facing or living the same situation.
    What is bad for me, is bad (must be) for ALL the others.
    That is what I would call individual-centrism, the ultimate expression of anthropocentrism. Another good example is the religion, if it is good for me, it must be good for others.
    We fight wars imposing what is good for me. That is good. But when somebody else comes to me trying to impose his good side of the issue, that is bad.
    Totally non coherent.
    We act everyday like this, in a non coherent way.
    The same goes for laws and rules.

    Vegans
    The veganism is a another example of anthropocentrism and acting in a non coherent way.
    For the time being, we assume that animals feel like us.
    We suppose they are sensitive as humans.
    My question then is, plants do not suffer?
    What makes different a plant from another living being?
    Just because they do not move, or cannot express suffering to a level that we can understand, they are not sensitive?
    To eat plants, may imply suffering for the eaten plants.
    Or they are willing to be eaten, or cooked?.
    We do not know for sure, but I would expect that some kind of reaction must occur.
    Rules must be equal for everything, or we do not eat any other living being, or we eat some of them depending on our needs. We are free to choose. As most animals do, even some plants.
    Veganism to be coherent with LIFE suffering, should eat only fruits or parts of the plants they produce to be taken by animals.
    These complex rules, one thing but not another…taylor-made to make some people feel comfortable, and make them feel they are right.
    Nature, my common reference, does not make any difference among animals. There is a food chain, depending on the place or area, and the system follows the rule. And it works fine.
    Then, if we go to ourselves, how do we face sickness caused by germ, that in essence is a living being?. How about Bugs?
    My point is, I am not against veganism, I am against anthropocentrism.
    Being veganism one expression of that. Although they say they are against that.
    It is another wolf in sheep´s clothing.

    Anthropocentrism is what is destroying us.
    Not the meat we eat.
    Not the oil we burn.
    Not the destruction of environment.

    Overpopulation is another sample of anthropocentrism.
    All our concepts regarding “human and personal rights” are another sample of Anthropocentrism.

    The overpopulation, a consequence of our addiction to human and personal rights, in our personal benefit, is in the end, the truly cause of our near extinction.

    As long we keep on making rules that we accommodate to suit our personal or human feelings and perception of what is good or wrong, everything resulting from that will be non-lasting, not in equilibrium. Non coherent.
    Nature is coherent.
    There are no rights in nature.
    Humans are not part of nature, we share the biology, but we are here to learn, we do not have to find our place, we have to make it. With a wisdom we have not gotten yet. That we are not seriously looking for.

    As long as we keep on scratching the surface of the origin of our problems, avoiding, taking a shovel, to dig deeper, we are going nowhere. But just to extinction.

    Nothing against vegans, they are just a good example of typical non-coherent practice.
    But almost everything we look at regarding our rules of behavior, are non-coherent.

    Ulv

    I have nothing against you, it is just that seems to me that you are a waste.
    A valuable life of thoughts, perceptions and experiences that is about to become useless.
    So many books read, information, personal efforts, all directly to the drain line.
    Lost forever.
    There will be no heritage.
    A full waste.
    Can things be a little bit different?

  • @tvt
    Glad you enjoyed it.
    I’ll skip posting the sandwich song by Stealers Wheel.
    Mostly to prove that I occasionally have some self-control.
    Thanks again.

    ——————————-

    @Freidrich Kling

    Old business

    A looong time ago you posted something referring to UFOs and soon after that I put up a YT clip from the movie Repo Man in which a zany (or profound) character came to the conclusion (eventually) that UFOs are also time machines. You made a comment to the effect that watching it was a waste of your time. Sorry you didn’t appreciate the humor. It wasn’t meant to offend you or waste you time. A few decades back I read quite a few books about the UFO phenomenon. The only author’s name I remember is Jacques Vallee, but I read books by a few other serious people on the subject. If you have any thoughts about The Disclosure Project in general and Carol Rosin in particular, I’d be interested to read them. I find Rosin especially interesting because she was a protege of Von Braun and was also present at Timothy Leary’s death (that’s some wide-ranging cultural bandwidth). Because so many of the people here, who are able to imagine the planet dying in 15-85 years or so, seem to be allergic to the UFO subject, feel free to ask Guy for my email address.

    New Business

    For these reasons the only viable solution to our suicidal march toward the abyss is the creation of a global benevolent dictatorship or ruling junta.

    If Guy and others are even close to correct on their various estimates of remaining time (2030-2050-2100…not much difference) and projections of 50% or more Oxygen depletion from atmospheric methane and CO2 (and any/all of the other processes they cite), then I disagree with your statement for two reasons:

    1) Guy often uses the word ‘predicament’ as opposed to ‘problem’, because his analysis is that there is no solution to what we’re facing. I find the semantic choice compelling.

    2) We already have an effective global dictatorship and ruling junta in the form of Banks, Oil, and Arms. (You can add one or more to the list…it can be more than a troika.) The big problem is that they aren’t benevolent, at least not to people like us. Many decades ago Leary and Ginsberg floated the concept of dosing some world leaders with LSD. Didn’t get done; probably wouldn’t have done much good back then. I don’t see TPTB lining up these days to undergo re-grooving therapy via ayahuasca and I don’t believe that people praying for their leaders or meditating on world peace are going to make any difference beyond making themselves more frustrated.
    And TPTB aren’t going to relinquish the control they have.

    ———————————–

    People here at NBL are also allergic to off-planet ideas, but if you want a solution to survival of a species that’s living on a planet that is essentially in hospice, then, absent a real miracle, the solution-space to the problem can’t include that particular planet. Maybe some sort of human/machine merger could survive, but that would be a different species in my book. Off-planet and trans-human seem like logically possible solution-spaces, but unless I win the Powerball lottery, I’m not going to have the financial resources to sign up for either, so I’ll bide my time and try to make peace with myself and others. But unless HSA buys up all the ammo, I think I’ll be armed while making peace…the last thing I want to do is contemplate my imminent demise after having my face eaten off by some zombie.

    You may not be the only one to catch holy hell now…
    which circle has the best music clubs ?
    I’m partial to Rockpalast.


    ——————————————–

    The music is optional and will not be on the final exam.

  • @FriedrichKling

    ‘what’s your workable solution?’

    Before I answer that I will list the tings I have tried:

    Speaking with local MPs.
    Speaking with local councillors.
    Speaking and writing to city and regional councils.
    Writing to government ministers.
    Writing books (5).
    Writing magazine articles.
    Radio interviews.
    Standing for election (at national and local levels).
    Speaking at conferences and forums.
    Speaking to students.
    Writing opinion pieces and letters.
    Television interviews.
    Speaking at community meetings.
    Handing out leaflets.
    Pointing out the dysfunctional nature of local government plans.
    Supporting an ‘Occupy’ group.
    Commenting on websites.
    Getting an e-book uploaded.
    Handing out DCDs.
    Bringing Guy McPherson to NZ.
    Leading by example.
    Speaking personally with the to-be-elected mayor and speaking personally with him after his election.
    Speaking with senior council officers.

    Over a period of 15 years that combination had close to zero impact. Nothing has changed (other than the values of the negative factors, which have predominantly risen substantially). Everything is still being driven off the cliff, locally, nationally and globally.

    So as far as I am concerned there is no ‘workable solution’.

    I believe we are at the ‘brace for impact’ stage and there is almost left to do except keep oneself sane and safe, while we wait for the major ‘told ya so but ya wouldn’t listen’ stage.

    I still do what I can to pull individuals out of ‘The Matrix’ as I meet them, but no longer go out of may way to do so. This afternoon I visited the library research centre) -yes, open on Sunday afternoons- and shared a few things with staff, including the futility of ‘hoping’ (which is one of the things not included on my list). On the way home In had a long talk with a couple of American missionaries, and did my best to pull them out of ‘The Matrix’ they are trapped in

    These are times for healthy cynicism.

    .

  • Darn it!

    there is almost nothing left to do except keep oneself sane and safe,

  • @ Godofredo Aravena

    Ulv

    I have nothing against you, it is just that seems to me that you are a waste.
    A valuable life of thoughts, perceptions and experiences that is about to become useless.
    So many books read, information, personal efforts, all directly to the drain line.
    Lost forever.
    There will be no heritage.
    A full waste.
    Can things be a little bit different?

    You have not grasped this concept of Near Term Extinction yet, that we discuss here, every day ?

    When there is a mass extinction event, there will be no heritage.

    You just look at the geological record and what has occurred when previous similar events happened.

    What’s happening now is almost unprecedented in the entire history of this planet.

    The changes to the chemistry of the oceans and atmosphere, the collapse of the biosphere, the tiny percentage of the natural world that remains intact.

    Civilisation is about to collapse, and the human species is on the brink of extinction, along with most of the rest of the life forms.

    This, to me, is the most probable prospect.

    Some people take a different view. They have a faith, akin to religious faith, that technology will ‘save’ them. I believe they are deluded, just as I believe that those who expect the Rapture are deluded.

    If civilisation collapses very soon, and most people die, and if the nuclear plants were successfully shut down first, and several other ifs… well, then the prospect might be different, some humans and more life forms might survive. That seems a less likely probability to me.

    The fact that I envisage these scenarios are the future facing us, is because I look at the science.

    For total fuckwits like RE and others, like yourself, to confuse my analysis of our predicament with me WELCOMING this state of affairs, is really quite obscene.

    I have worked day and night for much of my life trying to AVOID this state of affairs.

  • @ infanttyrone

    One for you, on the beach juke box

  • @ Kevin Moore
    So as far as I am concerned there is no ‘workable solution’.

    Yes indeed, it is the only logical outcome.
    I presume you know of the book sponsored by the NZ Govt in the ’70s regarding the effect of a nuclear war on NZ. It basically came to same conclusion as those “What to do in case of Nuclear Attack” posters http://www.posterrevolution.com/gallery/item.cfm?ID=545185

    The follow-up project was abandoned. The dire consequences were largely due to the effects of EMP and cessation of trade – pretty much the same as the coming collapse. The population has grown substantially since then. Imagine: no fuel, no fertiliser – uh-oh.

  • @ulvfugl

    Reading what I wrote before I see there is another minor error.

    However, I believe there is a bigger error in what you wrote: ‘What’s happening now is almost unprecedented in the entire history of this planet.’

    WHAT’S HAPPENING NOW IS UNPRECEDENTED IN THE ENTIRE HISTRY OF THIS PLANET.

    Like you, I have spent much of my life working to AVOID the present circumstances from arising, have gone through the despair stage, and am now at the acceptance stage; that does not mean I am looking forward to NTE or the mayhem that must come soon; I do have two generations of progeny, and one group is relatively poorly placed for what lies ahead.

    I now have no illusions. The empire is too strong and the people are too weak, and too weak-willed. And one of the most common of human behaviours is betrayal, which I have personally experienced time and time again throughout my life. By the time a significant portion of the masses do wake up it will be far too late to put any kind of mitigation in place.

    I was asked this afternoon if I was happy. I replied: “How can I be happy when the world is in such a terrible state? I can achieve moments of happiness, such as when the tui above us was singing. But that’s not the same as being happy.”

    Of course the young female missionaries from privileged backgrounds I was speaking with were poorly-educated, poorly-informed, gullible and captured, so I doubt they really understood what I was saying. They commiserated, and moved on, hanging on to hope and delusions.

    By the way, I witnessed am most peculiar spectacle this afternoon: a young woman was bawling her eye out and sobbing profusely as she marched along the street clutching a cell phone, presumably having been shopping for consumer items, judging by the bags she was carrying. I heard her from a distance of about 80 metres, and he kept up the performance, mostly at top volume, for at least 800 metres. As I followed a path away from her route I continued to hear the bawling, coming from a distance of at least 150 metres away. Whether she had been dumped by her boyfriend or had been told that no one was going to drive to town to pick her up, I had no idea. A comparison that came to mind was of a woman of similar age in Syria, or Iraq, or Afghanistan, with no cell phone, perhaps no house to live in, perhaps several members of her family, or all of them, killed as a result of hostilities.

  • Hey U,
    Thanks for that one; been on my YT faves for years.
    I recall you being an acoustic music fan.
    This is as close as I can find. Miked but no big amps.

    But wait…no one has told me or Mr. Kling to Go to Hell yet?
    Maybe the internet is broken.
    Maybe this is the last post ever.
    Hope it goes through.
    It sure would be nice if this goes through and you like it.

    OK, everyone…break’s over…back on your heads.

  • Regarding the Shakhova interview, note what she says in the first minute or two, and she’s mentioned it before. Her team hasn’t revisited many areas during her research. Consequently, we can’t really determine if what she has seen is unusual or if the methane fluxes have increased. Such data will come with time.

    An apology to Guy. Since I sampled the details of Feedback 1, I see he has added more detail. I’ve looked at some of the links and they seem sound. I’ll have to think on this some more. However, what I can’t understand is, if the clathrate gun was fired at least 5 years ago, why has the methane concentration in the Arctic only increased at the rate that it had been before the pause in the middle of the last decade, indeed, slower than the rate in the latter part of last century?

  • I am getting very bored reading the comments on NBL pieces, where I used to find many of them understandable and others enlightening. Now it seems that male egos have taken over many of the threads, and with each column it seems there’s more competitive mud-slinging.

    Secondly, there does seem to be some “horizontal violence” going on within the community concerned with climate change and impending extinctions. This is typical among minority groups who spend time fighting amongst themselves, instead of uniting and attacking the real enemies, in spite of quibbles on positions and projections.

  • @ Weddle

    I believe you are mistaken and what she says is that when she first took samples in 1999 they did not find ANY methane coming up ANYWHERE, except for one tiny trace. She has more data now than anyone else, there is nothing else to compare, so we have to await the analysis and next publication which will be soon.

    Nice to see you apologise here for once for your many blunders, mistakes and distortions.

    @ kevin

    Hahahaha, well, I’m prepared to concede the ‘ALMOST’, because I did pop it in as an after thought, on the grounds that the impact of the object from Space c 65 MY ago might have left my statement vulnerable to criticism from sharp minds like your own :-)

    Obviously, the speed, the rate, of change is the real killer.

    I am freaked out by the lack of insects here. In my youth, there’d be masses of them around our outside front door lamp at night. I know, because I used to study and collect moths and beetles for a few years, so I was always searching for new species to identify.

    Since I’ve lived here, c. 25 years, there used still to be plentiful insects, but this year, with a similar outside front door light, almost nothing. A warm, humid summer night, and one or two moths.

    What can be the cause ? I really don’t know. This is a rural area, my land is mostly left overgrown and wild, the neighbours don’t use intensive pesticide type farming. I walk around looking at the wild flowers, no flies or beetles or caterpillars.

    Yes, those people…

    ….and it will be terrible—for everybody. But especially for us.

    Approx 5 % of the population using 30 % of the resources for the last half century, inflicting incredible horror and suffering all around the planet, no empathy or imagination, still thinking how terrible it will be for THEM.

    http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/06/the-pitchforks-are-coming-for-us-plutocrats-108014.html

    @ Infant

    Yeah, thanks, she’s great isn’t she. Unpretentious.

    Do we laugh or cry ?

    http://twitter.com/iainmacintosh/status/482877398728589312/photo/1

  • @Henry/Bud Nye:

    “You have to marvel at a species that produces both the Scientific Method and Denial as major constituencies.”

    Such apparent inconsistencies make perfect sense in Suicidal Biosphere Hypothesis, which posits that the biosphere is suicidal and human civilisation is the suicide method.

    For that to work, humans have to be unconscious of their role, at least until such time that the suicide process becomes irreversible.

    In that scenario, it shouldn’t be difficult to see that ‘scientific method’ and ‘denial’ have been essential complimentary human attributes.

    Looking at it from the biosphere’s point of view, (and bearing in mind Robin Datta’s quote; “A thousand ages in Thy sight are like an evening gone”), by way of analogy, if you’ve just fired a bullet at your skull, I’d guess the last thing you are hoping for is to miss-aim, and spend the rest of your ‘life’ in some painful, compromised state with half your skull missing, and yet that seems to be exactly the outcome some of ‘us’ now have in mind for the biosphere, as a best-case scenario, with our ideas of saving as much of it as possible from (self?)-destruction?
    With ‘friends’ like that…….

    Devil’s advocacy?

  • Here’s a pretty scary video documenting odd deformities in a plant (if this was caused by radiation, we can expect much more of this and in many other areas of concern):

  • Tom

    Scary indeed. The deformity in my ash tree leaves may be due to unprecedented aphid infestation. But the ratio of healthy-looking leaves to deformed ones is similar to what the video shows.

  • The latest essay in this space comes from Ray Jason. It’s here.

  • “interesting matters I’d like to see sanely discussed”

    The interesting matters were already discussed many, many moons ago: the only visible folks left from that time appear to be the virgin terry and librarian. The rest are newcomers. If they want to “discuss” let them go back to the archives and exhume and examine the fossils first.

    “If it’s a bottleneck rather than extinction then some people I care about may make it through.”

    Last Person Standing! Or if preferred by some, “Last Patriarch Standing” or “Last Breeding Pairs Standing!” And only a millennium or two before the CO2 starts heading down and the air conditioners can be turned off!

    “Let’s just cut to the chase, it’s been hot in Siberia.”

    Gawd, that’s terrible. They will have to relocate the Gulags now. As bad as the emmeffs closing Gitmo.

    FYI “a trained psychiatrist” in the u.S. is an MD who has done a 4(+) year psychiatric residency and is certified by the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology. Such a person can prescribe medications.

    Psychologists, on the other hand, have a degree in psychology that may be a doctorate or not (a Master’s, a Baccalaureate, etc.). They may or may not have a degree in Clinical Psychology. The Clinical Psychologists have the training to take care of patients. The others may work in industry, academia, etc. And then there are a host of others whose work with patients is similar to Clinical Psychologists, such as Marriage Counsellors, Family Counsellors, Grief Counsellors, etc. who also masquerade as psychiatrists.

    And then there the licensed folks who provide similar service although not formally trained for it, such as barbers, bartenders and bishops.

    “Another good example is the religion, if it is good for me, it must be good for others.”

    Au contraire, persons are different according to their preparedness to receive the teaching. One may approach the river with a thimble, another with a cup, a third with a jug. And the fourth without anything, after having transformed oneself into an ice doll. The first returns with a thimbleful of water, the second with a cupful and the third with a jugful. The fourth does not return.

    “We fight wars imposing what is good for me.”

    What’s good for “me” in the biological sense is having more copies of my DNA sequences runnin’ around. And that’s what counts over evolutionary time – provided, of course, that one does not defeat the usual biological limits with technology.

    “Humans are not part of nature,”
    ¡Excellente! Dominate the earth! Drill, baby, drill! Toss another bag of hot buffalo wings into the shopping cart.

  • @Tom, seeing the same stuff here in Michigan. The rosebushes are mutating just like that tree…and it started about 2 years ago. Just one bush at first, now several have those weird looking growths.

    @lidia, good to have you back. How was the workshop?

    Another oddity is the dearth of hummingbirds. At this time of year, we should be seeing females and hearing hummer wars….and not a one. Had a male for a little while, who was at the nectar and the honeysuckle, but not a single female.

    Have seen some butterflies. Have seen some honeybees.

    The big mitten feels quite tropical so far. Getting lots of rain and those short hard showers so common to the south are happening here every day, practically. I think our temps are average or maybe below average, but a lot more humidity than we typically get here.

  • @18000days

    I confess that I had never heard of the “Suicidal Biosphere Hypothesis” until I read your comment. It does not make any sense to me at all. Among other reasons, just using Occam’s Razor it makes much more sense to me to attribute our self-annihilation behavior to humans, especially to MALE humans, than to the biosphere that produced us and, surprisingly, still supports us, though surely not for much longer. I prefer not to disown responsibility for the role that I and so many other humans–especially male humans–have played in producing the accelerating ecological collapse and mass extinction, including our own.

    It makes much more sense to me to accept that, as the clinical psychologist Albert Ellis used to say so often and so forcefully, “Humans are fucking nuts!” If he still lived, I would write to him and ask, “Do you think it more accurate to say ‘Humans–especially MALE humans–are fucking nuts!’?” I did know him, and I feel pretty sure that he would have agreed and changed what he said accordingly. This suggests to me that we would best work on “fixing” not the biosphere, not geoengineering, not further dominating and controlling nature and Earth, but instead work forcefully and persistently on fixing ourSELVES–especially the patriarchal and misogynist males among us.

  • Wow! I hadn’t read a rant like “witchwind”‘s (Apneaman gave link. Thanks, I think?) in many a decade, and I almost felt the “boys” shriveling under her piquant assaults. Keep that woman away from automatic weapons, will ya? Yes, I’d heard about them from Karen Straughan, for whom they would probably like to devise unique and exquisite tortures.

    Frontiers of black comedy, ever-expanding. I’d love to hear her stand-up act, too. There’s a niche here, somewhere, for just about anyone.

    While always enjoying good and expressive writing, the sole expression with which I found full accordance was “You fucking idiots!” Bene, bene!

    Her summary of feedback loops from Guy’s “Climate-Change Summary and Update” was well-presented as well her sense of impending loss, as most of us have felt at this realization, and are still feeling as our day-by-day companion. And I always appreciate a good reminder to keep up with Guy’s “Update”, most recently of June 26.

    And Guy, you have to take credit for the result, which is that now, Witchwind says she is going to spend the rest of her life with, and appreciating, those she values the most, which apparently does not include male puppies. Oh well, takes all kinds. But, “mission accomplished” for you.

    And, not to worry, or take personally (you didn’t, I see), After crediting you with showing her much of value, she was starting to feel a little too sympathetic, so turning the flamethrower in your direction was obligatory, for she has readers, you know, who must be placated, were she to sound too complimentary toward one bearing the dreaded cojones.

    Oh, and RE should take solace, too, from the prospect of NTHE. For, my sense from this bit of reading was that she and her phalanx of Barbarellas would be less concerned with Toba-like “breeding pairs” and endeavor to keep around just a handful of “breeding slaves”, probably kept working overtime in unmentionable conditions.

    And wouldn’t our own RE make just the candidate to whom they’d love to assign such unpleasant duties. “Open that Penthouse! Look! Look! (whip cracks) Down on your knees, perro malo! Obey!”

    Humans, winding their way from one absurdity to another…

  • It feels like the pace of destruction is increasing (as well as the intensity and area of incidents) lately. I hope it’s just me . . .

    wildwoman: I haven’t seen anything like that around here (45 mi or 72 km from Philly) yet, but the (over 100′ tall) trees around here are all shedding “burnt” discolored leaves, twigs with clusters of healthy leaves on them and lots of “sticks” and small branches – everyday. One of them, I noticed this morning while walking the dogs, has developed an open, whitish “sore” where the trunk meets the ground that’s weeping some type of wet fluid and has lichen on some of the branches (that wasn’t there when I moved here 7 years ago).
    Every tree I look at everywhere in my travels has at least some damage and many are on their last years. It’s agonizingly sad watching this all happen – like we’re choking the life out of the planet. It makes me sick to think about it.

    Yesterday, while pulling weeds in the front garden (yeah, i’m still at it) I uncovered a little mouse hole with two live babies in it, no mom around; they were squealing and trying to move because big ol’ monster me was the threat. I was stunned into inaction – I mean, no matter what I do now they’re gonna die. If I leave them alone a predator will eat them, and even though I don’t have the heart to do them any harm – I already did, just by uncovering them in my human blundering around in nature doing stupid, pointless weeding. I gave up and went in the house, smoke coming from my ears . . .

    Human ethics doesn’t cut it. The zen reality of my having negatively impacted the lives of those two baby mice by doing some innocent weeding just makes me wonder if humans were ever even supposed to touch anything. The cave people in our distant history probably should have gone extinct so the rest of the planet could go about its merry way without us screwing up the entire balance of nature.

    Everything we do seems to be harmful in some way. I’m contemplating going catatonic about now, my circuits are so fried from this ordinary incident. i’m not sure I can take any more of this.

  • @Henry

    Keep that woman away from automatic weapons, will ya?

    A-a-and even though it’s a patriarchal move, you might insist on continuing to carve your own Thanksgiving turkeys…and volunteer to do more of your own prep work in the kitchen.


    .
    .
    .
    .
    .

    @Tom

    Those mice weren’t going to be much more than prey, ever.
    They weren’t going to write sonnets, paint, etc.
    A few may live long enough to be old, creaky, and in pain.
    Not to say you can’t renounce weeding, but you won’t shortcut the lives of many mice even if you decide to quit.

    Cats on the other hand…

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGEllaAoRwA

  • “I uncovered a little mouse hole with two live babies in it, no mom around;”

    I lived in Hopkinsville, KY from 1983.12.04 through 1991.08 (minus six months for BushDaddy’s war. In the back yard I found a shallow well-concealed hole with three baby rabbits in it. Took one out, but it crawled back in. Apparently their mother raised them to maturity.

    Also saw salamanders under the cement downspout catchers in the same backyard. Dark brown in colour, with no toes on their forefeet and hind-feet.

    When I was about six years old, there was no lack of rain in East Pakistan (now Bangladesh). I scooped up some tadpoles from roadside puddles, not knowing what they were, and took them to my mother, who explained that they were baby frogs.

    It is to be remembered that just about every species produces an excess of progeny, well beyond the carrying capacity of the environment if all of them were to survive. Populations are kept in check only through massive mortality in each generation. Even as recently as the late 1800s the same was true for humans as well: out of half a dozen to a dozen siblings, two or three would survive.

  • Robin

    You always just question my words, not the meaning of them altogether.
    The concepts behind.
    But well….

    Constance

    Things change, time changes, people change.
    The times of awareness here are long gone.
    The time to warn others is long gone too, because of the nil results.
    Now the issue is how to deal with the extinction.
    Some believe there is nothing to do (the most), others think there are some remote possibilities for some people to survive (the least).
    There is quite distance between both positions even though, they share some points..
    Both share the common view of the crisis ahead, and our society falling off the cliff, as an inevitable situation.
    Both share the perception that the origin of the crisis will be several, being climate change one of them.
    Both share the perception that the events will happen more sooner than later, ranging from 2020 to 2050.

    The understanding of both positions has been so far quite a conflict.
    A conflict that will last until probably those that believe in the remote possibility of some people to survive stop posting. As they are always under severe attack by the others and are a minority.
    Add to that some trolls, that post stupid comments. They are always around.
    The environment for moments gets quite suffocating.
    The ego collision is quite an interesting issue about our “modern” human nature, because it depicts the conflicts that still our society has been unable to handle. And the child that lies inside most of us. That goes the same for male and female. Younger generation (in the 50´s) and older (in the 70´s).

    What you see here is rather an interesting reality show dealing with the early perception that humanity is going extinct (altogether with biosphere), within a few decades.

    Enjoy the ride

  • Thanks Infanttyrone and Robin for your thoughts. It’s just me – I don’t get the point of this life, especially the way it’s set up and supposedly “works” and then get all effed up in the head when crap like this lands in my lap. Most people wouldn’t give it a second thought. I can’t get over it. Very little of it makes any sense to me and I have no answers – it all seems pointless and whimsical, mysterious and sad. I need a new worldview.

  • Lidia Says: ‘Wow, what a tedious and tendentious semi-faux-apology by the passive-aggressive aggressive Chia. I’m not sure what the point is of his drive-by blasts at “wackos” who (strangely?) take the blog owner’s propositions seriously. Damned if we do, damned if we don’t. As wildwoman points out, more pointless testosterone sprayed in our general direction.’

    Constance Albrecht Says: ‘I am getting very bored reading the comments on NBL pieces, where I used to find many of them understandable and others enlightening. Now it seems that male egos have taken over many of the threads, and with each column it seems there’s more competitive mud-slinging.’

    ladies, as a man who feels at times dogmatically condemned by some feminists simply for being a man, i protest! i’ve been kind of offended by chia’s recent ‘wacko’ posts, as well as many other posts, but i just don’t get the testosterone connection. as if women can’t be jerks. are u suggesting that high testosterone levels tend to enhance and/or bring out offensive behavior? (after brief period thinking it over): i’ll grant that, but don’t u think masculinity has it’s good sides as well? how would u like if every time a woman said/did something stupid/offensive, several men chimed in with the opinion that estrogen and/or gender are at fault?

    godofredo said:
    ‘There are no rights in nature.
    Humans are not part of nature.’
    ‘Anthropocentrism is what is destroying us.’

    agree with the first. the second is dogmatic bs. godo, do u not see the hypocritical absurdity in decrying our species self centeredness (the 3rd quote), while maintaining the superlatively self centered notion that we’re, like ‘god’ (supposedly), special/supernatural?

    kevin moore made a long list of some of the many things he’s done to try to raise awareness/sanity/intelligence, then concluded:

    ‘Over a period of 15 years that combination had close to zero impact. Nothing has changed (other than the values of the negative factors, which have predominantly risen substantially). Everything is still being driven off the cliff, locally, nationally and globally.

    So as far as I am concerned there is no ‘workable solution’… there is almost nothing left to do except keep oneself sane and safe.’

    i agree, for precisely the same reason. sigh. among the things left to do besides that is thinking about, and perhaps at some point committing, suicide. which brings to mind another thing to do if u can, for as long as possible: enjoy life!

    more from kevin: ‘I now have no illusions. The empire is too strong and the people are too weak, and too weak-willed.’

    u left out weak minded, as in stupid/crazy. one can’t properly act upon rational factual info if one has a mind more given to dogmas/irrationality, as seems to be the case more or less with the vast majority of sheeple, imho (in my HARSH opinion).

    one more notable kevin quote:

    ‘By the way, I witnessed am most peculiar spectacle this afternoon: a young woman was bawling her eye out and sobbing profusely as she marched along the street clutching a cell phone, presumably having been shopping for consumer items, judging by the bags she was carrying. I heard her from a distance of about 80 metres, and he kept up the performance, mostly at top volume, for at least 800 metres. As I followed a path away from her route I continued to hear the bawling, coming from a distance of at least 150 metres away. Whether she had been dumped by her boyfriend or had been told that no one was going to drive to town to pick her up, I had no idea. A comparison that came to mind was of a woman of similar age in Syria, or Iraq, or Afghanistan, with no cell phone, perhaps no house to live in, perhaps several members of her family, or all of them, killed as a result of hostilities.’

    provocative comparison, illustrative of how relative all perception is, depending on circumstances/culture. i have to remind myself often that, miserable as often am, i’m very fortunate in some ways. in a world of few and often cold comforts, enjoy and appreciate whatever u can.

  • Tom Says:
    June 29th, 2014 at 6:27 pm

    Thanks Infanttyrone and Robin for your thoughts. It’s just me – I don’t get the point of this life, especially the way it’s set up and supposedly “works” and then get all effed up in the head when crap like this lands in my lap. Most people wouldn’t give it a second thought. I can’t get over it. Very little of it makes any sense to me and I have no answers – it all seems pointless and whimsical, mysterious and sad. I need a new worldview.

    (sigh) i feel exactly the same way. i too tend to get very upset over ‘minor’ things, including inflicting ‘accidental’ harm to other beings i mean no harm to. this brings to mind the quote cited previously:

    “Life is a comedy to those who think, a tragedy to those who feel.” – Jean Racine

    a new (improved) worldview sure would be welcome, but i’m skeptical there’s one to be had for as long as one maintains awareness, reason, and feeling. in other words, what’s needed isn’t a new worldview; it’s a new world.

  • To Virgin Terry.

    I said that we are as humans we are not part of nature.
    That is because we have instinct so limited, that we have to develop the self controlling mechanisms.
    Animals perfectly match the concept of meat robot. Humans are not robots, as we can think and create..
    What I have said does no imply we are superior. You are putting those words in my hand.
    What I said it implies something more profound.
    We have to learn how to live in peace and equilibrium with nature.
    We have to make the effort. We.
    Nature is already a fully working system, that without us, works pretty well.
    If we want to thrive, we need to find the way to live in equilibrium with nature, as we need it.

    Regarding your last comment about God. As a matter of fact, I believe we can potentially become Gods, but certainly not a supernatural one.. Going a little bit farther, I do not believe in a supernatural God, I do not believe in God, but in a Creator, that is far from supernatural, just more advanced than us.
    For the time being, we have to accept and learn to handle our capacities in a wiser way. We are still at very primitive level of knowledge and ethics.

    What Kevin says can be seen in many ways, the one that makes sense to me is that, clearly there is no way to change the process regarding changing our current lifestyle, mostly the one from developed world Ergo, sit and wait, or if you believe that there is a remote possibility of salvation, do something, starting now.. Do not wait for a possible change that will not come. Kevin´s efforts are most clear proof.
    Forget about awareness?.
    We can keep on, but the possibility of success is almost nil, based on evidence available.

    Life makes sense once you are able to leave the individual-centrism, and understand that we are part of a system, so there are limits to our actions. And also a role to be played. To me, to become wise creators.
    Will that be possible? Time will tell.

    Regards

  • I’m responding to Virgin Terry’s comments on my statement about males dominating the discussion here. I was making an observation based on the predominance of male monikers, as well as what I perceived as the growing competition in mud-slinging. In no way did I extend this to ALL males or to other situations. Let’s try for some balance and male/female plus recognition of paradox. I liked your quote from Racine: “Life is a comedy to those who think, a tragedy to those who feel.” The same person can manifest both.

    Those of us who recognize climate change are a minority, and those who discussing extinction of humankind are an even smaller minority. It’s interesting that no one specifically commented on my mention of “horizontal violence” as a problem that I think plagues minority groups of all types. It’s often masked as differences in personal styles, ideologies and strategies. in discussions such as these. Is this a foreign concept?

    Thank you for your response, Godofredo Aravena. BTW, I have given up hope there will be solutions or even much mitigation of the extinction path. Often people and events do seem to be a rigged reality show. I AM enjoying the ride of the remaining years that I may have. I’m making it a priority to visit and to love my friends and family. I just left what little home I had to find a place where I can literally breathe better. And while I grieve for the earth and mankind, I’m trying to detach and to realize we’re a speck in geologic time. This is my odyssey after decades of political activism.

  • constance said: ‘Those of us who recognize climate change are a minority, and those who discussing extinction of humankind are an even smaller minority. It’s interesting that no one specifically commented on my mention of “horizontal violence” as a problem that I think plagues minority groups of all types. It’s often masked as differences in personal styles, ideologies and strategies. in discussions such as these. Is this a foreign concept? ‘

    certainly not. it’s been troubling me for a long time, this observation that instead of uniting, it seems there always remains much division, disagreement that sometimes degenerates into dislike, name calling, etc., in just about any anarchic (as opposed to hierarchical) group. it’s very discouraging, kind of like the final nail in the coffin in which the last of my idealism must be interred. i thought of commenting on this earlier, but one can’t comment on everything… still, about the only thing i hope for anymore is to find a few individuals, maybe even just one other, with whom to share a positive relationship based on commonalities that are stronger than relatively petty disagreements.

  • ulvfugl,

    I’m always happy to apologize for misrepresenting someone’s information and am always happy to admit that I was wrong about something, when I am shown to be wrong.

    As for Shakhova, I think you’re referring to some other interview that Shakhova gave (or perhaps some quotes from her in an article on Arctic Methane). My recollection of that article was that she said that there was no data before 1999 of ESAS methane emissions. I’m trying to find that article again to confirm but I’m pretty sure that is what she said. However, I was referring to part one of the video with Nick Breeze, where she said, “‘I won’t say “increased”, I should tell the greater fluxes from the East Siberian Arctic Shelf. What I actually mean here is that not always we can talk about increasing fluxes because to report dynamics in methane fluxes we need to repeat it the same areas in [inaudible] in subsequent years, which we don’t always do because we are still expanding the area of investigation. This means that we are going from the near shore area to the mid shelf and to the outer shelf. And what we’ve learned from these experiences is that methan fluxes vary significantly from area to area; this depends on a few defining factors. In some areas we can say confidently that we observe increased fluxes.” Though she’s confident that there is an increase in some areas, there wasn’t quantification. However, I haven’t seen the whole interview yet (bandwidth and time constraints), so she may have provided more details about the research into those areas that she’s confident of increases.

    In an interview in 2012, following the much heralded 2011 research trip, Shakhova had this to say about revisits:

    SkS: Your 2011 field season is reported to have located kilometre-diameter plumes of outgassing methane. Are these located in areas visited in previous seasons?

    NS: These were new sites from that part of the ESAS that was investigated very sparsely before. In our previous investigations we mainly focused on the shallower part of the ESAS, which composes about 70% of the total area and provides a very short conduit for methane to escape to the atmosphere.

    SkS: The recent reports of substantial releases of methane on the ESAS prompt us to ask how these observed emissions could detectably change global atmospheric methane concentrations and in what timeframe?

    NS: To date, we have only taken the very first steps down the long path of learning enough to answer this question. We officially reported only 8 Tg of methane was being released from the ESAS per year. This reported amount is <2% of the total annual global methane release and would not detectably change global atmospheric methane concentrations. However, we did not incorporate a few emission components – probably the most important ones – because of some uncertainties still remaining concerning their constraints. … We undoubtedly need to learn much more than we currently know. We call for the involvement of serious funding organizations to give this study the level of support that is consistent with the importance of this topic.

    From that first comment, it’s clear that the supposed growth of methane plumes to a kilometre wide was not necessarily growth at all, since they were reported in new research areas. From the second comment, it would seem like there is still a lot of uncertainty and that more research is needed.

  • @ Weddle

    I’m always happy to apologize for misrepresenting someone’s information and am always happy to admit that I was wrong about something, when I am shown to be wrong.

    I have had some experience of you on this blog, and it is because you make such dishonest and insincere remarks that I have such a low opinion of you, but I’ll let that pass for the moment, and ask, when are you going to respond to the points that Bud Nye put to you earlier ? I’d be most interested to read your reply to him. You are always complaining that you don’t receive answers from people like Sam Carana. Perhaps you’d like to give an answer to Bud ?

    As for what Dr. Shakhova says, I have my own ears to go by. Here once again, for convenience, are her three most recent interviews. Anyone interested can listen, and then see if your initial comment matches what she says. Or not.

    There is only one thing that we needed to know, from her, that matters.

    That is, that the core samples that she has taken, since last time, from the sea bed, show that the permafrost is at around zero. It’s warming. It’s no longer a frozen solid seal that will contain the methane.

    It will continue warming and that methane will come out. It’s just a matter of time, and the rate that it comes out.

    It seems to me, from the way she explains her calculations, that she estimates everything on the most conservative and ‘optimistic’ end of what is possible. She is not emphasising the doom scenario or exaggerating to create alarm.

    We know from Carana’s Methane Tracker images, that there are huge quantities of methane coming from the Laptev Sea area and the ESAS.
    We also know that N. Siberia is warming as fast or faster than anywhere else. And, as I understand it, methane has a local warming effect.
    We also know that the permafrost on land is melting and producing prodigious quantities of methane, and that the great rivers, Lena and Ob are much warmer than they used to be.

    All these factors, along with the changed albedo, due to loss of sea ice, so the exposed water warms and is churned by storms, etc, means that whole area is subject to a positive feedback which, as I understand it, can give us 3 deg C additional warming in short order.

    You and your ‘climate scientist’ buddies try to minimise all this, and discredit Dr Shakhova and her husband, who are the world experts, by a long way, on this subject, and favour Archer and Schmidt, who have never even been there.

    Professor Wadhams, who is far more highly qualified than either Archer or Schmidt, supports Shakhova and Semiletov and explains why they are correct.

    This has all been explained to you repeatedly, by myself, and by Guy, and by others. You persist in pursuing feigned ignorance as if you need to have it explained all over again, because you want to undermine Mcpherson’s position by introducing doubt whenever you can. That’s what you do here.

  • @Bud Nye:

    I’ll confess that ‘Suicidal Biosphere Hypothesis’ was a revelation that came to me a few years ago, out of nowhere, or, more accurately, out of constantly asking myself stupid questions and getting no satisfactory answers. I would kind of like someone to shoot it down, because to me, something which seems to answer so many “why would humans…..?” questions is inherently suspicious, and probably just means I’m not thinking straight..

    You mention “..the biosphere that produced us and, surprisingly, still supports us..”

    Indeed, why does it still support us? We’re so shockingly demanding and incompetent at fitting in- why haven’t we been booted out the door to oblivion…. quite… yet.. ?

    To me, it just doesn’t make sense that a biosphere with continuation as a goal would produce, and continue to tolerate, an apparent aberration like human industrial civilisation. If that biosphere were, otoh, deliberately engineering it’s own termination, then tolerating and nurturing that ‘aberration’ would make abundant sense.

    Some people will accuse me of projecting human traits, fears, desires and abstractions onto the biosphere- anthropomorphism, but how can ‘I’ have them and yet the biosphere lack them? That is anthropocentrism, and seems to lead straight back to the idea of the planet as nothing more than a collection of plunderable resources, or the biosphere as some sort of clueless balancing act, which humans have somehow miraculously become simultaneously both stupid enough and clever enough to upset.

    Yes- with the proviso that abuse of power is likely anterior to it’s unequal division between genders, humans- especially Male ones- are fucking nuts… But why? If you look for the root you must end up at the biosphere level. If you contend that a warped version and/or gender of an otherwise ‘sustainable’ species have been ‘allowed’ to dominate, then how did that happen? A mother who neglects to provide her children with winter coats can hardly complain when they proceed to slaughter the megafauna and cut down all the trees to try and keep safe and warm. The rest was fairly predictable… with human hindsight, of course..

    ..if otoh you contend that the human species was always a disaster waiting to happen with no warpage necessary, what does that say about the biosphere?

    If a creature with survival instincts becomes maladapted to it’s environment, it must either adapt itself, adapt it’s environment, or die. I don’t think it’s reasonable to expect a sense of responsibility from the human components of a biosphere which patently lacks that sense- If the biosphere did have that sense, then why are humans so maladapted- to the point which leads to biocide- in the first place?…..unless…..?

    fwiw I think I’ve been fairly diligent with Occam’s Razor- no gods or aliens- just a biosphere that’s surely capable of orders of magnitude more craziness than any one of it’s component species.

    This hypothesis turns everything on it’s head- Who’s fulfilling biospherical aims now? All the heroes and villains swapped roles and then became indistinguishable. WTF? all the chess pieces have gone grey! Who am I going to fight when I can’t even tell which side I’m on?

    This is not an attempt to disenchant anyone, divert them from their path, or demoralise participants in a struggle against Leviathan.. just calling it the way I see it..

  • For many, NTHE is the final justice, but the “have nots” failed to realize that Death is the great equalizer and Death comes to us all. Why lament the good fortune of those who rape and pillage for their own benefit? They will soon be ashes… and so shall we.

    Plant no crops, build no cities. Kill nothing. Eat only that which falls from the trees. Sleep on the ground, bathe in the river.

    Just sittin’ on this runaway train, staring out the window, with a cat on my lap.

    The Voluntary Extinction Movement
    Thou shalt not procreate.

    The Church of Euthanasia
    Save the planet, kill yourself.

  • 18000days

    So how do you deal with a hairless mammal that is ill adapted to the natural setting (although this creature managed pretty well for nearly all its existence up till now) and has a brain that is the most complicated thing in the universe? Or how should such a creature, seeing what evil that big brain (not disciplined) can produce–how should it proceed?

    Very, very carefully, IMO.

  • To Virgin Terry

    Regarding my last post.
    Fe de erratas (Corrigenda)
    It Says: I said that we are as humans we are not part of nature.
    Should say: I said we as humans are not part of nature.
    My apologies.

    To 18000days

    Unfortunately most people don´t realize that questions like yours are important, and by no means stupid. Probably most people think that making that kind of questions is stupid because they are not easy to answer, and it is easier to think that are “stupid” questions. And avoid the effort. Or the failure to find the answers.

    I have made questions like yours for years, with no acceptable answer.
    Until some things began to make sense.
    First, nature as perfect as it is, follows some kind of logic of balance.
    Then, we as biology are quite perfect to essentially keep our brain safe, and able to operate. By using our brain, we can solve our needs. All it is required is the brain.
    Even some of our emotions and feelings are quite well thought too (like hunger, sexual attraction, fear, thirst, etc..)..
    Everything around us perfectly set up. Including our body, and mind.
    Then, concluded that so much perfection cannot be explained as the result of hazard.
    So I developed a creationist concept to be able to explain the situation. Nature and humans are the result of a carefully thought process.
    With that concept in mind, most of what we see around makes a logical sense. And for those events or facts that cannot be easily explained, there must have a logic behind, like all the rest. A logic explanation that have to be found.
    It does not make sense something non logic, among pure logic for the rest.
    No creator develops something to fail, to self destruct. Specially the complex ones, like biosphere (bombs by the way are not logic, as war is not logic).
    No creation has no purpose. Everything created has a purpose, a function. Just take a look into any machine.
    With that logic in mind, we can understand nature perfectly well. If we study nature in depth, you just confirm the issue that everything has a purpose.
    With the same logic we can also understand the existence of ancient extinct species.
    Then comes the most relevant question.
    Following the same logic, why humans were created?
    What had in mind the creator when we were created?
    To destroy all the rest of his creation? That could´t have been the intention, because otherwise, the previous extinction level events would have been enough. And humans wouldn’t be needed. It is much easier to create a few germs, than can kill all living species in a much shorter time, living the area totally available for another try. Why such a complicated way like first creating humans, and through them destroy the rest?. It si not logical, as I said, a few germs would be more effective to achieve even better results.
    It is more logic to think that like any other creator (as ourselves), the creator wanted to go one step further, after mammals of all types, by creating a being able to create, and for that, intelligence was an obligated requirement. And then we were created after a long effort of 600 million years (after the first creatures left the ocean). That can give you an idea that we are quite a complex being.
    Probably, intelligence, like any other gift, requires a learning process. In this case, on how to use it wisely. Because is an extremely powerful gift. It seems that intelligence to properly develop requires freedom, and learning from the mistakes. Probably there is no other way.
    And so, here we are, just in the process of learning, by making mistakes.
    Only that this time, the mistake may be too big. But anyway, we are learning, maybe late, but we are learning. When the crisis becomes global, those that have not learnt yet, probably will, during that period. One of the lessons surely is that we have to limit our population. There are many others certainly.

    As you probably already know, things may seem quite different depending on your point of view. I have used logic as a filter, and came up with my very personal concept of creation, that suits me to explain most things in a rational and logical way.
    You have to find your own explanations, but seems to me that as nature is pure and absolute logic, logic may be a right way to filter. If you look around, will find that everything we see it is wrong, it is not logic.
    Finally, if we are species seem to be non logic, that is because in your analysis you have not found a logic reason to first explain why we are here. Without that explanation, the rest will not make sense.
    I have mine, look out for yours.

    Do males have any superiority above women?.
    Well, a careful analysis of our bodies, mind, nature, and applying logic, I would say no. Both are at the same level, but they are not equal. Both have different roles. They are physically different and have a different mind setting. They are complementary. At all levels. We have not been able to fine tune this facts. Then we have a mess about the relation between them. Probably part of our problems as society can be explained by our incapacity to assume properly our roles. Pretending to be what we are not meant to be.

    Most of what we do and think today in our IC is wrong. It does not make any sense.
    It is hard for me to understand that fact. So many minds able to think, and we keep on doing things wrong, over and over, but as we are more powerful with every turn, the destruction is worse, and so the damage to ourselves, and the biosphere.

    By the way, blaming others by your (our) faults is the easy way to learn nothing out of experience.
    Making our own path is always a lonely way, and hard to keep, as the rest pulls you in another direction. Making you feel like you are wrong.

  • ulvfugl,

    I don’t think I’ve missed any of Bud’s comments, under this article, that were addressed to me. Do you mean this one? I responded to that (albeit briefly) here.

    Would you like a longer response? I’ll give it a go.

    Again, Bud admitted that there was a chance of avoiding NTHE, with NTNHE, though he thought it was a very small chance, in his opinion. OK, that’s fine, everyone can have an opinion. Bud feels that it is a waste of time arguing about it but I disagree. After all, isn’t Guy trying to spread exactly the message of NTHE by pointing to the science? Bud seems to be saying that arguing about the science is pointless. Well I disagree. I think Guy has claimed that he’d like to be proven wrong and that would take argument. ud thinks that a 95% die-off means is the same as extinction, which is wrong. Extinction is 100%. Of course, if Bud believes that himself and everyone he cares about won’t get through, then it does amount to the same thing, from his point of view, but then a 5% die off would also mean extinction to Bud, if he and his cared-for ones die. Lastly, Bud thinks that a living planet is the moral standard he would accept, not human survival. I’m not sure what that means to him, but a living planet, presumably, is a planet with life and (by implication) a planet that can continue to support life. Well, this is exactly the point in question but human life is important too as then the morality of what we bequeath can be judged – morality being a human invention. For me, the survival of humans implies that some humans I care about might survive to live a life ended only by natural causes and so have a chance to live that life well.

    By the way, ulvfugl, there is no dishonesty. As I’ve said, if I’m shown to be wrong about something, I’m happy to admit that.

    As for what I posted about what Shakhova said, I hope others surely will check my transcript of what she said right at the start of video one and in the other interview I linked to. Despite what Carana believes, the methane measuring stations don’t seem to be picking up significantly increased methane concentrations. Although I’ve communicated with some climate scientists, I don’t have ‘”climate scientist” buddies’ Perhaps the fact that you used quotes around that profession, suggests that you don’t trust climate science to give you information that can be trusted. If this is so, just what information do you use to make your judgements?

    Sabine,

    If you think points I make are wrong, then please explain rather than just calling me a troll.

  • @ Weddle

    I don’t think I’ve missed any of Bud’s comments, under this article, that were addressed to me. Do you mean this one? I responded to that (albeit briefly) here.

    No, I mean this :

    Bud Nye Says:
    June 28th, 2014 at 10:30 am
    @ Tony Weddle
    If you and others wish to believe that you can meaningfully predict NTHE vs. NTNHE, and that that discrimination matters in some important, practical way to us today regarding the chaotically complex, rapidly changing biosphere, then by all means have at it and continue your passionate argumentation! Meanwhile, all of the wishful thinking notwithstanding, only artificially and temporarily CLOSED systems possess the characteristic of reversibility, while all natural systems remain open and irreversible.

    By the way, ulvfugl, there is no dishonesty. As I’ve said, if I’m shown to be wrong about something, I’m happy to admit that.

    It took a long time, of rather intense engagement with you on the Climate Summary comments, and since, before I discovered what you are like, and I suspect that other readers, not as familiar with you as I am, will have trouble discerning what I am talking about. But most can tell when someone speaks directly and sincerely from the heart. And when they don’t. And time will tell. Because what you have said is on the record.

    As for what I posted about what Shakhova said, I hope others surely will check my transcript of what she said right at the start of video one and in the other interview I linked to. Despite what Carana believes, the methane measuring stations don’t seem to be picking up significantly increased methane concentrations. Although I’ve communicated with some climate scientists, I don’t have ‘”climate scientist” buddies’ Perhaps the fact that you used quotes around that profession, suggests that you don’t trust climate science to give you information that can be trusted. If this is so, just what information do you use to make your judgements?

    I use my overall knowledge of everything, the sciences, philosophy, human nature, and how the world works.

    I put quotes around ‘climate scientist’ because, to grasp NTE it is no good depending upon what climate scientists say.

    Sabine,

    If you think points I make are wrong, then please explain rather than just calling me a troll.

    Perhaps Sabine has noticed, as have several other readers, as you yourself have stated, that you don’t accept Guy’s feedbacks, that you think that it would be better for everyone if he changed his views, etc. whilst at the same time constantly saying how much you admire him and agree with him and blahblahblah, trying to avoid any criticism of yourself, and over time, this perceptible pattern of undermining Guy’s position by implying doubt, which you cannot support or justify, has become rather striking.

  • I was wondering why some of the podcasts do not appear to have mp3 download links. Is there a way to download this podcast? Thanks

  • ulvfugl,

    I missed that comment by Bud. The only thoughts I have on that is that the difference between NTHE and NTNHE does matter to me, even if it doesn’t matter to Bud, so I accept his invitation to continue criticising those arguments that I understand to be invalid. However, I can’t predict whether NTHE or NTNHE will happen, just as no-one else can. I’m not sure what he means by “irreversible”. In nature, change happens. I don’t see natural processes as having a target, so irreversible is meaningless. For processes that are affected by human activity, however, then those processes will, by definition, be affected by human activity (or the removal of activity).

    Your comment about grasping NTE presupposes the thing one is trying to grasp. I’m not trying to grasp near term extinction, I’m trying to determine whether that supposed destination is unavoidable (i.e. certain). I haven’t seen a rational argument that says it is.

    You misrepresent my position, yet again, with your final paragraph. I accept that some of the feedbacks listed by Guy represent real danger for us. But I think he has misrepresented others whilst also overlapping some to give the appearance of more feedbacks, which kind of reinforces my feeling that the main argument here seems to be the sheer number of feedbacks, regardless of how those feedbacks are likely to act out in the real world, especially as societies start to crumble. Some feedbacks I don’t think are right to list as feedbacks (the most recently added 37 and 38, for example, are not processes resulting from warming but from industrialisation and development).

    You again claim (by inference) that I want Guy to change his views regardless of the evidence, which is simply not true. I’ve corrected you several times on this, yet you still want to attribute your own meaning to my words. Your talk of sincerity, integrity and respect appear to be just words, when you continually misrepresent people. You also seem to think that you speak for many others here when lambasting me. You shouldn’t be so presumptious and haughty.

  • @ Weddle

    So I conclude from your response that you are far out of your depth and really have no idea what Bud was talking about.

    And this is why you don’t get NTE, and Guy’s case on the CS page, your whole conception of what science is and how the world works is fundamentally flawed and naive. You think in crude simplistic linear reductionist terms, ticking boxes, dotting i’s and crossing t’s.

    I mean, how is it even possible to have a serious, intelligent exchange with someone who comes up with ‘In nature, change happens.’

    The answer to that is, it isn’t.

  • Get off your high horse, ulvfugl. I answered Bud’s points. If you don’t agree then explain, rather than pretending that there is some deep meaning there that someone other than the special few can’t understand.

    I don’t conclude NTE, if that’s what you mean by “get”. That’s unhelpful language. What I’ve been writing about here is about how the science does or does not lead inevitably to the conclusion that near term human extinction is assured. Extinction doesn’t have some deep philosophical meaning unless you, personally, want it to. It has a scientific meaning, though, and that is clear enough. NTNHE isn’t NTHE, even if some choose to believe that it is.

    Bud implied (by using the word irreversible) that natural processes have some linear path and target outcome. They don’t. In nature, change happens. You find that ridiculous for some reason, without explaining. That’s why you can’t have an intelligent exchange with people you think don’t “get” what you do. If you have some special insight into why the science doesn’t really matter and that humans are destined for near term extinction for some ethereal reasons, then have at it.

    As I’ve indicated before, if you haven’t got anything to say other than to insult or denigrate someone, then you should just refrain from posting.

  • @ Weddle

    ..then explain..

    Tried that. Wasted weeks of my life and thousands of words here on you. Didn’t work. That’s how I discovered you are not sincere and bona fide.

    It’s not my responsibility to educate you. It’s your responsibility to educate yourself.

    Your grasp of what science is, is lamentable. It’s the same problem Bud has with Scott Johnson. Basically, you and Johnson are philosophically illiterate.

    Try reading some Serres.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Serres